Thread: Tactical High Powered Scope Confusion

The main "issue" with the scope in question is the mismatched reticle and turrets, whilst it used to be common to have a Mil reticle and MOA turrets you won't find it on any new scopes.
Mismatched is certain not unusable by any stretch but being able to measure misses with the reticle and then dial the correction into the scope with no mental gymnastics is a big advantage.

SFP vs FFP is a different argument with pros and cons for each.
Generally speaking for a hunting scope SFP is probably the way to go, for targets/longer range/higher magnification you want FFP.
The advantage of FFP is the reticle subtensions stay the same at all magnification, in your SFP scope the reticle is correct at 12x so if you were around 15-20x you can't use the reticle for holds without some form of mental arithmetic, not impossible to do in the field but with FFP you don't have to think about it.
Biggest issue with FFP is not so much the reticles being too thick at high mag as most reticles are well designed for that but that they are very thin on low magnification.
If your 6-24 was FFP it likely wouldn't be an issue on 6x but my FFP 3-15 has a very fine reticle on 3x. I've done enough shooting with it that it's not really an issue and illumination can help but a big ol SFP duplex reticle would be a better choice if shooting close range deer in the bush were the rifles main purpose.

People used SFP MOA/Mil scopes for decades with great success so it's not like they are worthless but in the last 10 or so years the tactical/precision scope market has changed dramatically for the better.
Basically since Vortex released the Gen1 Viper PST for 1000USD the market in that price range has improved greatly.