So realistically if you’re shooting past 300 yards it’s the same process regardless of focal plane? And you prefer secondary for the clarity close up? I hunt in places it can get thick so that wouldn’t be a bad idea
Mpbr=max point blank range. This usually is understood to mean zeroing at 200-ish rather than 100, so that the bullet trajectory is never more than a couple inches above or below your point of aim, to allow you to simply aim dead-center out to 250-300 yards. It works well to a point, but the built-in error usually causes some problems if you push it too far. A dialing scope can shortcut some of the issues and accomplish the same thing by zeroing at 100 and walking around dialed to .5mil where appropriate.
You are in a tough spot trying to find one scope to do double duty at very long range as well as short-range in the woods. You really want to be dialing elevation and holding wind in the reticle at 400-700 yards, regardless of whether thats hunting or practicing practical shooting. 2fp makes this nearly impossible at anything other than max magnification—and since you have a gun with a lot of recoil that matters, being forced to have a tiny field of view in order to use the reticle is a disaster. A very few people will argue those points, but those folks are very few and very far between—its fair to say the overwhelming general concensus is that ffp is +\- mandatory for shooting past point blank range effectively. Mandatory= it can be done without, but its clearly less effective in almost any practical situation. 99.9% of dentists consider 2fp a liability past point-blank, increasingly so the higher the magnification and recoil.
Note, Im saying this as an eastern hunter that has struggled with crappy invisible ffp reticles in the past. I agree that MOST ffp reticles suck for a close range hunter in the woods. I own some 2fp scopes by choice, but I would never choose 2fp for a gun I planned to shoot past 300 yards or so—those will always wear a ffp scope. If you are hunting in thick cover and close range as well, then just make certain to get a scope with a reticle thats easily useable at 3x without illumination against a busy background. The swfa’s and the maven 1.2 are both ffp scopes with reticles useable at lowest mag. Theres a few others as well but most of those are out of your stated price range.
On balance, if longer range is a requirement, there is really no question that a carefully chosen ffp scope is the only good option.
Re mils vs moa—unless you already have a lifetime of thinking in moa and cant change out of habit, mils is easier to learn, easier to use on the fly, has some convenient shortcuts for wind that are easier, and the vast majority of the longer-range focused shooters Ive met use mils so you can speak the same language as most others.
