looking at new scopes and trying to decide if the extra cost of the reticle on the first focal plane is worth the extra money or if i would use it.. and also if the lighted reticles are worth the extra money.. if it was all an extra $100 i would do it but i think with the ftp and lighted reticle were talking another $400.. looking at the vortex vipers..
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
FFP VS SFP & lighted vs not lighted reticle
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by JP8 View PostWith MOA/MRAD or TMR the illumination does help with the fine lines. Your call on the FFP or SFP. I run all SFP scopes but have been debating on buying a Vortex PST FFP and seeing how I like it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by randal View Postfrom what i have found is i can get a sfp with lighted reticle for $300 cheaper.. think I'm gonna just stick with that..
Comment
-
Originally posted by JP8 View PostKool. I put the Mark 4 on my 6.5 Creedmoor and threw a Zeiss on the the ultra.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ecoboost View PostCan't go wrong with either of those IMO! My Vortex viper PST had some sort of sealeant hanging down on the inside, and the illumination was nasty.... The illumination switch worked about 50% of the time. Your would have to spin it 2-3 full turns before it would start working. The qualty wasn't near what other $900 scopes have. Your milagr may vary, this was my experience.
Good to know.
Comment
Comment