Old eyes and good reticles

[rady]

I am looking for a new scope in the <$4k range that will provide me with better reticle view of the hash marks (mils). Recent eye exam showed no problems, but I'm noticing that it is harder to see those hash marks in a FFP scope.

Would I be better off with a SFP scope and Mil lines or dots. I'm considering the NF ATACR 56mm lines, but am open to all suggestions as to another manufacturers. The scope will be used to max. distance of 1K yards. Other things I should consider?

Thanks

 

[spife7980]

How thick is the reticle and how zoomed in are you?

aka, what actual scopes are you having issues with? My older bushnell elite tacs have a fairly thick reticle but it’s .5 increments vs .2 so it’s a bit coarser and thicker but not so much so that it’s prohibitively thick and coarse. My other target scopes are thinner and below 15x or so I have a harder time seeing them.

Edit: That said you’re going to get a bunch of zcomp recommendations. They don’t have an otherworldly field of view but their eye piece does “blow it up” so that it feels like you can see the whole world bigger.

edit edit: whelp, nvm lol

edit edit edit: wait, “without no problems”. Does that mean you do have problems?

edit edit edit edit: nvm, that’s a different person with an orange square I was confused by.

 

[Moose]

My eyes have a problem with thin reticles also and I now shoot the ZC 4x20 with mpct 1 reticle without no problems.

 

[rady]

How thick is the reticle and how zoomed in are you?

aka, what actual scopes are you having issues with? My older bushnell elite tacs have a fairly thick reticle but it’s .5 increments vs .2 so it’s a bit coarser and thicker but not so much so that it’s prohibitively thick and coarse. My other target scopes are thinner and below 15x or so I have a harder time seeing them.

Edit: That said you’re going to get a bunch of zcomp recommendations. They don’t have an otherworldly field of view but their eye piece does “blow it up” so that it feels like you can see the whole world bigger.

edit edit: whelp, nvm lol

edit edit edit: wait, “without no problems”. Does that mean you do have problems?

I can't find specs on reticle thickness, but I'm zoomed x20. Thanks for your help.

 

[spife7980]

I can't find specs on reticle thickness, but I'm zoomed x20. Thanks for your help.

The milc is .04 mils thick.
The milxt is .043 for the 4-16, and .033 for the 5-25 and 7-35

My illuminated bushnells are .06 mils thick, so you can see there is a fair amount of wiggle room and options to choose from. Too many options really

 

[rady]

Thanks spife. So let me show further ignorance on this subject. Is thicker/thinner better for my case, and would FFP be better than SFP?

 

[ma smith]

ZCO MPTC-3 etc is one of the most visbible and well thought out FFP reticles. It tests very well in higher contrast image overlays vs many other reticles, and having seen it in person, it looks as just good and usable in the flesh (er, glass) as in photos.

 

[DownhillFromHere]

OP, you say your scope(s) will be used to shoot max 1k yards. Some elaboration here would be useful in responding as regards SFP reticles.

Specifically: while an SFP reticle is easier to see at lower magnifications, it will effectively destroy any ability to use holdover at anyhting other than maximum magnification.

If all you want to do is engage targets where you can dial for a specific yardage 100% of the time,SFP may work for you. But if you compete or otherwise shoot in situations where you use holdover/holdunder at anything other than highest magnification, you will regret going with SFP.

I know this from experience. Early on in my rifle journey, I bought an SFP scope to use on a .22 because it was $100 cheaper than its FFP sibling. I used that rig in competition one time. It was the last SFP scope I have ever owned.
---

With all that said, I concur with others that the ZCO reticle is "easy" to see. My only basis for comparison is the Vortex EBR-7C reticle in their Viper PST and Razor offerings; the -7C, with its .5 mil subtensions, is a bit thinner but less "busy" than the MP MPCT-2 with .2 mil subtensions.

 

[deersniper]

ZCO MPTC-3 etc is one of the most visbible and well thought out FFP reticles. It tests very well in higher contrast image overlays vs many other reticles, and having seen it in person, it looks as just good and usable in the flesh (er, glass) as in photos.

This. I have terrible eyes and love the mpct3

whatever you get take the time to set the scope up for youre eyes

 

[rady]

OP, you say your scope(s) will be used to shoot max 1k yards. Some elaboration here would be useful in responding as regards SFP reticles.

Specifically: while an SFP reticle is easier to see at lower magnifications, it will effectively destroy any ability to use holdover at anyhting other than maximum magnification.

If all you want to do is engage targets where you can dial for a specific yardage 100% of the time,SFP may work for you. But if you compete or otherwise shoot in situations where you use holdover/holdunder at anything other than highest magnification, you will regret going with SFP.

I know this from experience. Early on in my rifle journey, I bought an SFP scope to use on a .22 because it was $100 cheaper than its FFP sibling. I used that rig in competition one time. It was the last SFP scope I have ever owned.
---

With all that said, I concur with others that the ZCO reticle is "easy" to see. My only basis for comparison is the Vortex EBR-7C reticle in their Viper PST and Razor offerings; the -7C, with its .5 mil subtensions, is a bit thinner but less "busy" than the MP MPCT-2 with .2 mil subtensions.

I knew there was something that I was forgetting. Thank you for the SFP magnification and holdover refresher. Absolutely forgot about that at max magnification.

 

[jinxx4ever]

I am looking for a new scope in the <$4k range that will provide me with better reticle view of the hash marks (mils). Recent eye exam showed no problems, but I'm noticing that it is harder to see those hash marks in a FFP scope.

Would I be better off with a SFP scope and Mil lines or dots. I'm considering the NF ATACR 56mm lines, but am open to all suggestions as to another manufacturers. The scope will be used to max. distance of 1K yards. Other things I should consider?

Thanks

i noticed the same problems a couple years ago, and while i like the reticle in both my cronus btr and tract, I just have problems with the fine reticle lines, the reticle in my Kahles works much better and overall the NF ATACR mil-xt is my go to now in the 7-35.

 

[rady]

i noticed the same problems a couple years ago, and while i like the reticle in both my cronus btr and tract, I just have problems with the fine reticle lines, the reticle in my Kahles works much better and overall the NF ATACR mil-xt is my go to now in the 7-35.

Thanks for that. A few questions:

1.) How was the dioptic adjustment at max power on the NF @35x>>>>>

2.) At max power was the dark ring a problem? I take it that this is a FFP?

3.) Are you wearing prescription glasses while shooting?