Optics on AR?

[10mmLife]

I have a Vortex Strikefire with the Vortex VMX-3T magnifier on mine. Not the most expensive or best set up, but it serves it's purpose and keeps it's zero. No complaints at all here.
Got a Holosun 510c for my XDM Elite, but haven't put it on yet.

That's a big sight for a handgun!

Should give you really quick target acquisition though it will make the pistol tough to daily carry.

The 2 MOA dot is better suited for longer distance shooting but the 65 MOA circle reticle should assist greatly up close especially using the dot and reticle at the same time.

 

[Bassbob]

I have a Vortex Strikefire with the Vortex VMX-3T magnifier on mine. Not the most expensive or best set up, but it serves it's purpose and keeps it's zero. No complaints at all here.
Got a Holosun 510c for my XDM Elite, but haven't put it on yet.

You sure you don't mean the 507C ?

 

[Bassbob]

The 2 MOA dot is better suited for longer distance shooting but the 65 MOA circle reticle should assist greatly up close especially using the dot and reticle at the same time.

It's especially nice for a shotgun.

 

[10mmLife]

You sure you don't mean the 507C ?

That makes a ton more sense.

 

[straydoglogic]

You sure you don't mean the 507C ?

I wasn't but I am now lol. Thank you for the correction, that's exactly what I meant.

 

[straydoglogic]

That's a big sight for a handgun!

Should give you really quick target acquisition though it will make the pistol tough to daily carry.

The 2 MOA dot is better suited for longer distance shooting but the 65 MOA circle reticle should assist greatly up close especially using the dot and reticle at the same time.

@Bassbob fixed me. I meant the 507C. Muh bad haha.

 

[ghosttwofive]

A true holographic sight should come in clearer than a regular red dot sight. The Starburst effect is inevitable with either one if you have a stigmatism but most people with a stigmatism report that the starburst effect is greatly reduced when using a holographic over the typical red dot sights.

Maybe it's the Sig that's holographic and the Eotech uses some other type of projection? Not sure to be honest. the Sig Optics reticle is as clear and crisp as I've ever seen on a sight while the Eotech, I had two different ones, both were fuzzy looking.

 

[Bassbob]

Eotech is a holo sight. I'm pretty sure none of the Sigs are.

 

[KillerFord1977]

Depending on where the OP lives, or anyone for that matter, it would be advisable to go hold them up side by side at a big retailer. I know most folks dont have that option, so its online purchases, but that’s the only real way to decide

Edit: i like certain models but not the whole line up. 1-2 vortex and 1 aimpoint. Didnt like the other Vortex or Aimpoint models ..

 

[10mmLife]

Maybe it's the Sig that's holographic and the Eotech uses some other type of projection? Not sure to be honest. the Sig Optics reticle is as clear and crisp as I've ever seen on a sight while the Eotech, I had two different ones, both were fuzzy looking.

Typically the EOtech sights that I'm aware of use a holographic reticle though the holographic reticles can appear more grainy than red dots with an almost digital look to them. I have an astigmatism in my dominant eye which give a slight starburst effect in red dot sights that gets worse as the brightness is increased. Everyones eyes are different and the visual experiences we have with sights will most likely be different even if we have similar impairments like an astigmatism.

Etched glass prism sights are the best for people with a astigmatism though they are usually larger and heavier than traditional red dots

 

[TSiWRX]

@SaltyMonkey252 - sorry, a bit of a diversion yesterday when I was replying, so I didn't get in all the thoughts that I had with my previous reply ( https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/optics-on-ar.10157/#post-134235 ) Here's a bit more.


----


You replied in the affirmative to @HansGruber 's question about whether you shoot the RDS with both-eyes-open; but I have a follow-up to that....

Do you use target-focus? or are you visually focusing instead on the dot/reticle?

The reason I ask is because shooters who complain about a restricted field-of-view with the RDS typically feels that way because they're focusing on the dot/reticle. In this manner, no matter how large the clear aperture, you'll still feel "captured" by whatever the physical framework is of the sight, which seems to be what you'd written in your OP, which I heavily edited below, in order to facilitate discussion......

[1]...aimpoint micro T-2.... I felt like I was looking down a slide tube (guitar reference).....[2] aim point patrol optic, I returned it because...again like I was looking down into a bottle . [3] Then there was the Eotech XPS3. ... it felt like I had a 1980s box television on top of my rifle. <snip>

-----


In terms of your question regarding POA/POI discrepancies, yes, it does happen. While what the manufacturer states in their manuals is the typical "CYA" catch-all, it still does happen to modern RDSs - and as with seen on the Trijicon MRO (I'm not just trolling this one, I actually own one of these, on a very nifty Scalarworks mount, which my daughter either uses on her AR and which I remove to take with me as a backup optic for training classes), when the shooter isn't allowing the dot/reticle to center within the optic's clear aperture, there's a possibility for significantly more parallax to be induced.

^ "Doc" Spears speaks in this Surefire video with regard to the "anywhere in the window" misconception.

While that may be a bit academic, here's a great video by Green Eye Tactical, with an excellent "behind the tube" empirical demo of this effect -

Which itself is a part of this rather amazing and thorough white-paper on the subject:

Comparative Study of Red Dot Sight Parallax | Green Eye Tactical

I'd like to thank you for viewing this report. It took a considerable amount of time to finish. I would like to apologize that parts of it may not appear formatted properly in your browser. Depending on what browser you are using- some of the images may not be visible due to the .tiff format.

www.greeneyetactical.com

In-reality, I really believe that what POA/POI discrepancy we see (no pun intended ) on our end as the "typical" shooter (a shooter who resides within the meat of the bell-curve of capability, not one who is either at the low or high end of the dev) is much more in-relation to (1) the mis-alignment/deviation of our eyes from the optical axis and (2) our unique visual differences from each other (as individual people - see the "11 March 17 Test Results, Overall Results: Testing Accuracy section of the paper). I believe that environmental issues such as heat/humidity plays considerably lesser roles, versus our errors of input and individual and unique objective biological differences and subjective perceptions.

(*Note that Green Eye Tactical's disallowed optic in their TRF class is the Aimpoint T-1, not the Trijicon MRO.)

 

[ghosttwofive]

Typically the EOtech sights that I'm aware of use a holographic reticle though the holographic reticles can appear more grainy than red dots with an almost digital look to them. I have a stigmatism in my dominant eye which give a slight starburst effect in red dot sights that gets worse as the brightness is increased. Everyones eyes are different and the visual experiences we have with sights will most likely be different even if we have similar impairments like a stigmatism.

Etched glass prism sights are the best for people with a stigmatism though they are usually larger and heavier than traditional red dots

I 100% agree on the prism sights. I was looking at a Burris prism sight at my LGS when I bought my Glock and it was crystal clear, very high quality glass and the reticle was VERY clear.

 

[TSiWRX]

Typically the EOtech sights that I'm aware of use a holographic reticle though the holographic reticles can appear more grainy than red dots with an almost digital look to them. I have a stigmatism in my dominant eye which give a slight starburst effect in red dot sights that gets worse as the brightness is increased. Everyones eyes are different and the visual experiences we have with sights will most likely be different even if we have similar impairments like a stigmatism.

Etched glass prism sights are the best for people with a stigmatism though they are usually larger and heavier than traditional red dots

^ This is an excellent and succinct summary of the basic "visible" differences in reticle/dot types, as-related to both astigmatism as well as, possibly even more importantly, our unique objective biological differences as well as differences in subjective perception, as individual shooters.

[ Aside/Addition - It's also worth remembering that directly co-witnessing BUIS is not possible with prismatic optics. ]

And towards @10mmLife 's excellent parsing of the finer aspects, how can a shooter get a better feel for what's available?

Depending on where the OP lives, or anyone for that matter, it would be advisable to go hold them up side by side at a big retailer. I know most folks dont have that option, so its online purchases, but that’s the only real way to decide

^ I think this is very important to do, for those who are seeking that "first-time-purchase" Goldilocks moment.

Being able to look through the optic is great - even better would be to hold them at your "typical" viewing length, to see what the effect may be. Some stores even have blue-guns or other specialty displays that will have mounting of a specific optic or allow variable mounting of different optics, and that's even better.

Even better above that would be the ability to actually have the optic in front of your eyes, in your typical shooting environment. At a retail setting, this is understandably hard (and often next to impossible), but if you're ever in a training class or sharing the range with another shooter, my heartfelt advice would be to not be afraid to ask to get in behind the optic. Most times, your fellow shooters will be more than eager to "show you what they've got," particularly if it's a fancy new piece of gear.

 

[Bassbob]

The entire point of an unmagnified/dot optic is to shoot with both eyes open.

 

[TSiWRX]

^ Can be done with a modern true/near-true 1x LPVO, too - but with training and practice, it can even be done with fixed/higher-magnification optics like the ACOG.

But it's more than just "both eyes open" - particularly for the modern RDS, the real trick is to maintain threat/target-focus as much as possible.

The ability to simply focus on the threat means that the time it takes for our brain to process target acquisition is considerably lessened, and in real-life dire threat scenarios, it also allows the tool to work with our biology, instead of against it (i.e. the need to draw back to sight-focus). Tracking a moving target is also made simpler.

Target/threat-focus when using RDS also helps -to varying degrees- those of us with astigmatism with the visual aberrations seen of the projected reticle/dot.

 

[TEXASforLIFE]

Maybe it's the Sig that's holographic and the Eotech uses some other type of projection? Not sure to be honest. the Sig Optics reticle is as clear and crisp as I've ever seen on a sight while the Eotech, I had two different ones, both were fuzzy looking.

Get's me wondering if the glass has some part of the "starburst" affect/effect? Lowering the brightness can reduce the issue.

 

[TEXASforLIFE]

^ Can be done with a modern true/near-true 1x LPVO, too - but with training and practice, it can even be done with fixed/higher-magnification optics like the ACOG.

But it's more than just "both eyes open" - particularly for the modern RDS, the real trick is to maintain threat/target-focus as much as possible.

The ability to simply focus on the threat means that the time it takes for our brain to process target acquisition is considerably lessened, and in real-life dire threat scenarios, it also allows the tool to work with our biology, instead of against it (i.e. the need to draw back to sight-focus). Tracking a moving target is also made simpler.

Target/threat-focus when using RDS also helps -to varying degrees- those of us with astigmatism with the visual aberrations seen of the projected reticle/dot.

Many thing can be done with training for example helo gunships with 1 eye to target and using the other for observation. How many train with off/weak handed shooting? Being ambidextrous has given me a good advantage, but with a bad left navicular wrist bone I can't even shoot a 22lr without pain even supported! long guns with a buttstock I can handle recoil up to (so far) with 338lm and 45-70.

 

[TSiWRX]

^ Yeah, training/practice really is where it's at - as Larry Vickers says, training obviates awkwardness.

But as you noted, there's also things that no amount of practice/training can overcome, such as injury/disease or even just aging (although one could argue that the fallout of such can be compensated-for and in some cases overcome by training/practice ).

To an extent, astigmatism is like that.


-----

Get's me wondering if the glass has some part of the "starburst" affect/effect? Lowering the brightness can reduce the issue.

^ Optical aberrations and artifacts due to the shape and coating of the various components is definitely possible, although it's typically more problematic with lower-end/"budget" optics.

That said, higher-tier stuff isn't exempt. The first-generation Trijicon MRO, for example, was known for "fisheye" to varying degrees by individual, unique examples. This aberration was compounded for some shooters, who perceived the fisheye effect more than others: i.e. situations presented where a shooter who is more perceptive of such distortions was paired with a unique unit that was also at the higher end of that scale.

 

[Bassbob]

One thing I learned yesterday when zero'ing a $70 Primary Arms scope on my .223 Wylde, a very important lesson too. If you can't see it, you can't hit it. So next up is the Bushnell Elite 4500 4-16X50. Big objective lens with side focus Parallax adjustment.

 

[SaltyMonkey]

@SaltyMonkey252 - sorry, a bit of a diversion yesterday when I was replying, so I didn't get in all the thoughts that I had with my previous reply ( https://www.thearmorylife.com/forum/threads/optics-on-ar.10157/#post-134235 ) Here's a bit more.


----


You replied in the affirmative to @HansGruber 's question about whether you shoot the RDS with both-eyes-open; but I have a follow-up to that....

Do you use target-focus? or are you visually focusing instead on the dot/reticle?

The reason I ask is because shooters who complain about a restricted field-of-view with the RDS typically feels that way because they're focusing on the dot/reticle. In this manner, no matter how large the clear aperture, you'll still feel "captured" by whatever the physical framework is of the sight, which seems to be what you'd written in your OP, which I heavily edited below, in order to facilitate discussion......




-----


In terms of your question regarding POA/POI discrepancies, yes, it does happen. While what the manufacturer states in their manuals is the typical "CYA" catch-all, it still does happen to modern RDSs - and as with seen on the Trijicon MRO (I'm not just trolling this one, I actually own one of these, on a very nifty Scalarworks mount, which my daughter either uses on her AR and which I remove to take with me as a backup optic for training classes), when the shooter isn't allowing the dot/reticle to center within the optic's clear aperture, there's a possibility for significantly more parallax to be induced.

^ "Doc" Spears speaks in this Surefire video with regard to the "anywhere in the window" misconception.

While that may be a bit academic, here's a great video by Green Eye Tactical, with an excellent "behind the tube" empirical demo of this effect -

Which itself is a part of this rather amazing and thorough white-paper on the subject:

Comparative Study of Red Dot Sight Parallax | Green Eye Tactical

I'd like to thank you for viewing this report. It took a considerable amount of time to finish. I would like to apologize that parts of it may not appear formatted properly in your browser. Depending on what browser you are using- some of the images may not be visible due to the .tiff format.

www.greeneyetactical.com

In-reality, I really believe that what POA/POI discrepancy we see (no pun intended ) on our end as the "typical" shooter (a shooter who resides within the meat of the bell-curve of capability, not one who is either at the low or high end of the dev) is much more in-relation to (1) the mis-alignment/deviation of our eyes from the optical axis and (2) our unique visual differences from each other (as individual people - see the "11 March 17 Test Results, Overall Results: Testing Accuracy section of the paper). I believe that environmental issues such as heat/humidity plays considerably lesser roles, versus our errors of input and individual and unique objective biological differences and subjective perceptions.

(*Note that Green Eye Tactical's disallowed optic in their TRF class is the Aimpoint T-1, not the Trijicon MRO.)

Thank you for the insightful post.
I’ll need a little more time to digest it, currently cooking for the fam. Quickly though, I focus on target but a pretty old school guy. The files of view on Romeo, and Wotech are on point for me , the wotech is just too clunky. I want to like the aimpoint but when i present and attempt to acquire target I end up getting caught up trying to get that lil red dot in place , then it’s as if I am staring through a thimble to place my target. Just more of a distraction that slows me down.