What’s the difference between first focal plane vs second focal plane?
A first focal plane reticle enlarges and shrinks as you adjust the magnification while the second focal plane remains the same size.
Why does that matter and which focal plane scope should you choose?
By the end of this article, you’ll fully understand both types of focal planes so you can choose the best rifle scope for your needs.
Let’s get started!
What is the First Focal Plane?
There are two locations where a reticle can be installed within a rifle scope: the first focal plane (FFP) or the second focal plane (SFP).
With a first focal plane scope, the reticle is physically placed on the “front” of the erector tube assembly and magnification lenses. The first focal plane is furthest from your eye when looking down the sight.
How does that make a difference?
With a First Focal Plane scope, the size of the reticle will appear to grow or shrink as the scope’s magnification is increased or decreased, respectively.
Now that you’ve got the basics, let’s talk about the pros and cons…
First Focal Plane: Pros and Cons
With the first focal plane optics, the reticle size is going to scale up or down with your magnification adjustments.
This means your trajectory markings, or holdover values, are going to remain accurate regardless of what magnification setting you’re on. This is great news if you hate doing math!
But, it comes at a cost…Literally.
The price is often higher by virtue of its more complicated construction. A first focal plane reticle is also typically associated with higher-end scopes.
With first focal plane scopes, the reticle will look small and thin with less power while the reticle will be thicker at higher power.
It can be easy to lose those thin reticle lines, especially against dark backgrounds. Although, some of the best Leupold riflescopes have illuminated reticles for better visibility.
Also, the reticle can cover too much target at the highest setting. If this is a dealbreaker to you, that’s where Second Focal Plane comes into play…
What is the Second Focal Plane?
The most common design is SFP, or a Second Focal Plane scope. It’s also referred to as Rear Focal Plane.
With a second focal plane scope, the reticle is placed behind the magnification lenses on the erector tube assembly.
The second focal plane scope is closer to your eye. Therefore, the reticle stays the same size at any magnification range.
Now, let’s talk about the pros and cons of this…
Second Focal Plane: Pros and Cons
Its lightweight, great resolution, and durability against heavy cartridges make it a popular choice among hunters and law enforcement.
With the second focal plane, your units of measure per each hash mark (MOA or MRAD) represent the same value regardless of your magnification setting.
However, the spacing for holdover in the reticle is only correct at the highest magnification setting. So, it’s not always reliable for variable long-range shooting.
For example:
Let’s look at the Viper HST 4-16×44. This is a second focal plane scope with a magnification range of 4-16x. The Viper HST has hash marks representing 1 MOA but this is only true at its full magnification: 16x.
Of course, you can always do the math in between. But it becomes complicated and confusing and we all know that’s no bueno.
Second focal plane scopes are more commonly seen in the average riflescope and they’re easier to manufacture. That’s why they’re typically less expensive.
First Focal Plane vs. Second Focal Plane for close-range shooting
A second focal plane scope is more suited for close-range hunting and defensive shooting.
Why?
Because you have a strong and easy-to-see reticle even at the lowest magnification. With low-powered optics, like 1-4X optics, this is a highly undervalued feature.
When it comes to a First Focal Plane scope, you can easily lose sight of your marks at low power. This can be a hassle when you need to make adjustments for the wind or distance— especially for older eyes.
Since you’d have to zoom out to get the rest of the marks in the scope’s view, your target shrinks relative to your view. If you’re hunting small game, this can be an inconvenience.
First Focal Plane vs. Second Focal Plane for long-range shooting
First focal plane scopes are best for competitive and long-range precision shooting.
The hash marks represent the same value across all magnification levels. It allows you to use and trust those holdovers at any given point in your magnification.
This is an advantage for spotting impacts and misses for corrections. It’s also very helpful if you need rapid and precise follow-up shots.
Hitting something at longer ranges means getting as much precision as possible. With a second focal plane scope, making those fractional MOA adjustments becomes far more difficult.
Conclusion
The truth is— it’s a matter of preference and intended use. There is no “better” between the two focal planes.
Higher magnification ranges are better in a first focal plane scope. Lower magnification is fine for second focal plane scopes.
If you’re into precision shooting, especially in matches, and you don’t mind the cost: a first focal plane riflescope is great to have.
If you won’t be taking many shots where you need to “hold” for windage or elevation, a second focal plane scope is more than enough. Plus, it won’t necessarily break the bank.
There are other things you need to consider before buying an optic— like choosing the best quick detach scope mounts. At least when it comes to a SFP scope vs a FFP scope, you won’t be scratching your head anymore.
Since we’re on the topic of upgrades, my AR-15 A2 front sight removal guide is up. Go check it out!
I’m shooting a 270 want my optics to be 4-12-44 or 4-16-44 I can shoot out to300-400 yards not sure if I would want 1 focal plane or 2 focal plane. I was looking at diamondback scope with BDC reticle
I just bought a 270. Part of the property I can shoot 300-500. I’m looking at scopes. I’m looking to spend 300-500 hundred. I’m fifty and still have good eyesight. Never knew about 1st and 2nd focal plain
You want only a first focal plane or you will not be able to range in your scope correctly when you want to go in the higher power settings. Unless your a math genius on the fly.
Thank you for the depth of information
Thank you for the straightforward explanation and the pros, cons and which is best in certain situations. Asked a guy at a large sports retail shop today, and really got no answer. Your pictures and explanation are great.
Looks to me first focal plain is overall the best for distance shooting. Am I correct.
ALSO POSTED BELOW:
Here’s a dilemma with FFP scopes:
You have a nice, high-magnification scope with an appropriate drop-compensating reticle for your caliber out to 1000 yards. You want to shoot @ 1000, so you crank up the magnification to maximum. Now you can no longer see the bottom part of the reticle, which contains the longer-range drop markings that you need, leaving you to compensate by cranking the elevation turret. i.e., all those long-range drop and windage markings may only be visible at lower magnification, which may not be sufficient for long-range shooting.
I’ve never owned an FFP scope (and never shot beyond 200 yards), so this may not be the case with ALL of them but certainly seems to be the case with SOME, at least from the info I’ve been able to glean from sample reticle images, etc., as well as what I recall from looking at a few of them.
Now compare this to an SFP scope. Some… but not all of them… have the holdovers come into spec at the HIGHEST magnification. Shooting @ 1000 yards? GREAT! At the highest magnification, your reticle will still be fully-visible, including the long-distance holdovers you NEED!
Note that I have an SFP scope that has 6-24x magnification, but the reticle is in mils which are accurate @ 10x, so I would need to calculate at other magnifications, but 20x is easy, since the mils are 1/2 spec at that setting. I LIKE this scope, because it seems no matter what the quality level of a scope, light transmission and clarity decrease in the higher magnification ranges. This one puts me in a sweet spot @ 10x which gives a good compromise on parameters.
Thus, the tip: When choosing magnification level, pick a scope with a HIGHER max magnification than you plan to use, so that you are not up against that upper limit with all the negative connotations that entails. This would apply with EITHER FFP or SFP.
That’s a great point and great info for someone shopping for a scope.
That would be correct.
Here’s a dilemma with FFP scopes:
You have a nice, high-magnification scope with an appropriate drop-compensating reticle for your caliber out to 1000 yards. You want to shoot @ 1000, so you crank up the magnification to maximum. Now you can no longer see the bottom part of the reticle, which contains the longer-range drop markings that you need, leaving you to compensate by cranking the elevation turret. i.e., all those long-range drop and windage markings may only be visible at lower magnification, which may not be sufficient for long-range shooting.
I’ve never owned an FFP scope (and never shot beyond 200 yards), so this may not be the case with ALL of them but certainly seems to be the case with SOME, at least from the info I’ve been able to glean from sample reticle images, etc., as well as what I recall from looking at a few of them.
Now compare this to an SFP scope. Some… but not all of them… have the holdovers come into spec at the HIGHEST magnification. Shooting @ 1000 yards? GREAT! At the highest magnification, your reticle will still be fully-visible, including the long-distance holdovers you NEED!
Note that I have an SFP scope that has 6-24x magnification, but the reticle is in mils which are accurate @ 10x, so I would need to calculate at other magnifications, but 20x is easy, since the mils are 1/2 spec at that setting. I LIKE this scope, because it seems no matter what the quality level of a scope, light transmission and clarity decrease in the higher magnification ranges. This one puts me in a sweet spot @ 10x which gives a good compromise on parameters.
Thus, the tip: When choosing magnification level, pick a scope with a HIGHER max magnification than you plan to use, so that you are not up against that upper limit with all the negative connotations that entails.
Thank you very much is very helpful
I shoot a .270 Winchester and a .300 WinMag, sometimes at ranges that some would consider obscene. Other times fairly close. (50M or less) That said I’ll never again buy an SFP rifle scope. I have Vortex Viper FFP scopes on both and am considering putting one on my .22-250. Hold-over is a brainless endeavor with the FFP and I have yet to encounter any of the aforementioned downsides.
I’m looking at the leupold vx5-hd 3-18 /44 with the cds sfp.Does the custom dial system compensate for the long range issues?
Hello Roger, I am thinking about buying the same. I might be wrong but after doing all the reading my take is that with the CDS you wont have to worry about the markings up or down, only compensate left or right for the wind. The CDS will compensate for the distance. If you got something else or if if you got a better explanation please let me know.
Great article , explaining the two Focal Planes .
It’s so nice to access this type of stuff “online” compared to methods we had in the “old days” ….
Thanks a Bunch !!