Printable View
I only need glasses for reading and the astigmatism is only noticeable when shooting w/an Eotech/Aimpoint/Trijicon/etc. I don't see the need to pay extra for "shooting-only glasses" when I can get the same benefit by going to a scope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hmac
Tomac
OK, I get it. So, your astigmatism doesn't affect your distance vision? It's 20/20?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomac
Pretty close (had lasik a few years back).Quote:
Originally Posted by Hmac
Tomac
I wish that corrective lenses could make older eyes young again, but it doesn't work that way. It's not only about seeing the dot - I personally do pretty well with a newish Micro - it's also about seeing the target. Even at 200 yards (maybe much closer) things are a lot different than they were four or five years ago. It's especially noticable in poor or harsh light. Even a small amount of magnification, along with the adjustable diopter focus on a variable, makes a huge difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hmac
Side by side testing also proved that I do better, two eyes open, at CQB range with a 1x variable. But that's for me, in daylight, with my own specific eye dominance issue - everyone is different.
My perception is the RD at room distance, with it's cleaner single dot illiminated reticle, retains some advantage *for me* in low light. But even that is mitigated with the use of a weapon light. Of course the ability to leave the RD switched on is a big plus in it's favor.
The Micro remains on my SD carbine for now, but if I could only have one rifle/one optic for everything, a 1-4 would be the clear winner.
I'm thinking the same thing about a single dot (Aimpoint) vs the EOtech reticle. I think a 2 moa blur would still be better than a 65 moa blur. I've just seen some other threads where people with poor vision prefer aimpoints.
I'm not familiar with optics and their nomenclature so the more technical and 1-4x arena is kind of intimidating. I like the idea of variable magnification but some of the scopes suggested are a bit bulky for me. I'd like something more light and compact; seems like an ACOG would suit this purpose but they're completely out my price range.
Burris Tac30 weighs 13oz and costs $300.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric D.
Tomac
The Eotech reticle is a 65 MOA ring around a 1 MOA dot. So it would be a 2 MOA blur compared to a 1 MOA blur. Or, the XPS series which can be had with only the dot, no ring.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric D.
For me, the ring blurs into the dot without glasses, so its basically a 65 moa splotch. Good info on the xps though, i didn't know they had the dot only.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hmac
The dot (or cross-hairs) in a magnified optic are not affected by astigmatism - no blur. But you should check that for yourself.
My normal glasses (no line bi-focal) are corrected for astigmatism, but my shooting glass are not and have distance vision lenses only. The shooting glass work better for me.
The 2 MOA on my ML3 dot requires too high a power setting to pick up on a black background was actually a step in the wrong direction. It works great for young eyes per my sons' comments, however.
I've been fighting this stuff for awhile. The PST 1-4 is my first magnified optic with true 1x, (but not my first scope by a long shot). If they ever offer the same reticle in the high end Razor HD line (along with some tweaks on the low light settings), I'm all over it.
Have you attempted to move the positioning of the EOTech back and forth on the rail to see if it gives you a clearer picture? Maybe placing it more far forward?
For close range use it does not seem to matter and you may not need magnification, I would still go with an EOTech. Although I do not have the eye problem, I find the EOTech ring easier to locate under stress than a simple dot on the Aimpoints. So that governs my selection. For close range, under stress, I would not feel the need for magnification.
The problem with EOTech, was that some of their rings were canted it what appeared to be a factory defect. The Hash marks at 12, 3, 6 and 9 o'clock were not level. Although not related to the eye problem issue, I would also check into that possible defect with canting. I changed a lot of rails before seeing others had the same issue. So it was a nuisance trying to get perfection. Hope that problem is resolved now.
On a low budget, I stay away from Trijicon since the years go past very fast and I worry about having to send them back and the long wait to get it back, the expense, compared to a quick battery change.