What's the difference between a holographic and a red dot?

>>33468023
>What's the difference between a holographic and a red dot?
cost

>>33468023
>>33468023
It's mostly about projection.

Standard red dots use lower power draw LEDs projected and collimated on a curved mirror and then onto a lens. This approximates the required parallax compensation required for a change in viewing angle.

Holographic sights use a laser that is projected through a holographic grating and then redirected towards the shooter's eye. The holographic grating allows the viewer to observe depth as well as three dimensions if the hologram is designed for it. A hologram essentially will project light not on a lens but towards the shooter In the case of an EOTech, the hologram is a 2 dimensional reticle that is projected and perceived at about 100 yards. The sight's parallax due to eye movement is the size of the optical window at close range and diminishes to zero at the set distance, which, in the case of the EOTech is 100 yards.

Another fun technical detail about holographic sights,

>To compensate for any change in the laser wavelength, the EOTech sight employs a holography grating that disperses the laser light by an equal amount but in the opposite direction as the hologram forming the aiming reticle. The result is a reticle that is stable with the change in temperature.

Bottom line: eotech a shit and aimpoint is master race

>>33468772
Top tier info nigga

>>33468806
Some other interesting facts.

Because a red dot projects light onto a lens, the lens will display the LED's light from the front and the rear of the sight. I've never bothered to test for myself other than holding a red dot in my hand, but it would be interesting to see how far away this can be noticed with the naked eye or night vision in low light conditions.

The holographic sight, to break it down to it's most basic idea, is essentially projecting the light not onto a lens but it emulates the light transmission from an object from a certain distance (in the EOTechs case, a 2 dimensional reticle at 100 yards). Basically, viewing through the sight's window, what you are seeing is functionally the same as seeing an illuminated 60 MOA circle LED strip and dot in the form of a reticle at 100 yards away from the sight. This means that there is no light projected forward in the daytime visible or night time IR mode.

>>33468772
Kek the ironing

>>33468894
>there is no light projected forward in the daytime visible or night time IR mode

Literally none or just a small amount? Because for all of the holographic sights that I see mounted backwards I feel like people must be seeing something.

Then again I guess that those people might be too dumb to figure out that the sight isn't working right.

>Put the bad guy in the square
>Pull trigger
>Oops I shot his neighbor's dog

>>33468990
>Literally none
Yes. Most of the people that have those issues just use irons because they do not give a shit during training and do not know how to use anything. Or the time comes and they're issued their rifle and now it's too late to try to fix the fact that they do not have their rifle sighted in and ready coupled with the previous fact that they still do not know how to use it.

>>33468894
I have attempted this a few times at work.

Back at the gun counter, red dots are displayed against west wall, archery against east wall. Probably about 30 yards between.

Set red dot inventory to max brightness

>Aimpoint ACO/PRO/CompM4/CompM4s

>Vortex Strikefire/Sparc/Razor/Etc.

Various others

The only ones I could detect this on were reflex style like vortex Razor, where I could stand at such an angle and just see the emitter from the front. But once I moved far enough back where this angle was no longer possible I couldn't see anything on the objective lens.

At any distance I was unable to detect light from the front of a tube style.


I would be curious to try in lower light than flourescent bulbs either in the shop after hours or outdoors in the evening, night, or with NOD as well

>>33468772
>a reticle that is stable with the change in temperature.
This is what EOTech actually believes.

File: 1414641228893.jpg (9KB, 317x233px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 317x233px

>>33468772
>The result is a reticle that is stable with the change in temperature

Holographs don't even exist.

>>33469477

How can holographs be real if ours eyes aren't real?

>>33469010
To be pedantic, the plastic used in the "window" reflects a certain percentage of light, I don't know the material so it could be from 5% to 0.05%

File: 7097456.jpg (42KB, 611x720px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 611x720px

>>33468772
>The result is a reticle that is stable with the change in temperature.

File: SM26008_IMG_main_500.jpg (129KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 500x500px

poorfag here, does anyone know if sightmark makes decent sights? I never heard anything bad but they're cheap so I'm a bit skeptical

File: 1490669885215.jpg (79KB, 702x960px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 702x960px

>be me, like 8 or something
>first gun i ever shot was a 12ga
>aims into the woods around my house, nothing but trees for miles
>didn't hold it against my shoulder
>almost blackout
>thought it was because i had safety on and instead of shooting, it just told me not to touch it anymore

>>33468772
Damn nigga. I felt like I was on reddit for a sec there

>>33469969
Did i really just post in the wrong thread

Ignore me, im retarded

>>33469911
no.

Quality glass, not in any particular order:

eotech
aimpoint
leupould
trijicon
elcan
kahles
nightforce
steiner
swarovski
Schmidt & Bender

quality budget glass:
PSA
Vortex

sightmark is junk made for toys and people who buy from cheaper than dirt.


At the very least get bushnell. its still questionable, but its better than sightmark

>>33470028
Thanks man, I'll check them out

File: Trijicon-Thermal-Drift.png (210KB, 697x977px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 697x977px

>>33468960
>>33468990
>>33469029
>>33469285
>>33469334
>>33469635
To be fair, any other red dot has the same amount or more of thermal drift than a current production EOTech. Secondly this was also about the reticle keeping its image and not distorting.

In fact, the only publicly available data regarding aimpoints shows that it has even worse thermal drift than both the MRO and EOTech as well as a chinese red dot. In aimpoint's defense it was a lousy test. However, the fact that it is the only public test conducted on the Aimpoint, coupled with the fact that thermal drift was never even a search term on google before the SOCOM lawsuit indicates that Aimpoint could very well be suffering from this issue and many users might not know just like the EOTechs and MROs.

>>33470957
Woops, here's the video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKlJX5wCwL4