Optics conversation: Magnifiers for red dots; I think they're

What are some good optics that work for astigmatism?
I bought a red dot for my AR and its a blurry mess cause of my fucked up eyes it seems.

>>34554043

Hm...That's a great question. Honestly, mind giving me details on what astigmatism limits in terms of your vision? I can better offer some options if I know that.

>>34554271
Havent gotten them really checked yet but I have no problems with hunting scopes, cross hairs show up fine.
The issue comes to red dots as instead of a crisp dot in the middle, it is a raggy off center shape. Both eyes show different shapes so cant even switch eyes.
Normal vision is fine, small print far away is blurry but otherwise I have no problems.

>>34554043
Prism scopes, I know vortex and Burris make some, and I'm sure theres a few others

>>34554343
Well that sounds like a good starting place, thanks

>>34554043
>>34554928

Holosun has a prism "red dot" (1x) that has the ACSS reticle. It's pretty good astigmatism-wise but the reticle is kind of small at 1x.

It's also becoming more trendy for ARs to use 1-4x/1-6x and bypass red dot/magnifier entirely, since target acquisition is just as good.

The vortex prism scopes are supposed to be pretty good but a bit heavy, and they're at a fixed magnification. The wolf elcan clone is also supposed to be great for the price as well. Then again, you can just get the ACOG or Elcan if you're spendy.

For reference, I have pretty bad astigmatism: primary arms mds, aimpoint t1, and trijicon rmr all look like ass. I also bought an ACOG and it's wonderful in terms of quality/clarity/durability, but in terms of utility a variable low-power scope is better.

If you co-witness ironsights it can mitigate a lot of the distortion caused by astigmatism, so you can either use a flip sight with absolute cowitness for the ability to switch between blurry, fast acquisition and crisper, slower acquisition, or use a 1/3 lower cowitness to do this by just moving your cheekweld.

So I have an Aimpoint PRO for my AR, and I love it. I bought an RDB, and needed an optic, so I got an EOTech 512. Did I fuck up or are EOTechs alright? I just didn't see the point in having 2 Aimpoints. Maybe I was wrong...

>>34555497
eotechs are shit

>>34555531
Can you give me a little more to go on?

>>34555615
Bulky, heavy, their circle reticule is actually composed of dozens of dots forming the circle and it totally shows, has thermal drift like every other red dot despite being advertised as not having any.

>well then why are they so expensive and popular?
Because they're issued for the military. The military doesn't care about quality per se, they want the lowest bidder that fulfills their checklist of requirements and it's hard as fuck to ditch contracts.

A fucking holousun hs510c does what eotech does and the reticule looks better too.

>>34555648

But if I bought one NIB for $320, it's really not all that bad, right? Because last I checked the Holosun Holographic sight was about $299, and for only $20 bucks more I got an EOTech.

>>34555681
whatever it's your money, you didn't say how much it cost in the original post
if you can get an aimpoint for the same price, get the aimpoint

>>34555735

I already have an Aimpoint. I just wanted to know what other people's experiences are with EOTechs.

File: WP_20170318_017[1].jpg (2MB, 3072x1728px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3072x1728px

>>34555750
>I already have an Aimpoint
Then you don't want an Eotech.

>>34555125
That all sounds like really useful info.
I'll definitely look at getting a 1-6x as that seems the most useful on my AR. I'm keeping the red dot to throw on my Sten build if I ever get it done. Figured it doesnt matter if that sight is a bit blurry.

>>34555497
I also bought that 240 dollar 512. For that price, it's all right.

File: 1497564797923.jpg (44KB, 600x776px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 600x776px

Red dot for SBRs and lightweight builds
Variable scopes for general purpose

>>34555750
Could have got a micro Aimpoint.

>>34555648
>their circle reticule is actually composed of dozens of dots forming the circle and it totally shows
Whoa, what? You're an idiot. That's an effect of the laser light. Have you never seen a laser, before?

>>34555681
>>34555750
If it makes you feel any better I used an EOtech on my service rifle and I loved it. Personally I like the aiming reticule better than my aim point dot.

>>34556921
Wrong.

>>34556926
The EoTech reticle is probably the best CQB reticle today. Put the reticle in an Aimpoint micro and it's cash money baby.

>>34556921
While eotech's outer ring isn't made of little dots like the other guy said, it does look like ass and I would see how someone would think that.

File: sub_spf_1x_drt_moa-t.jpg (123KB, 700x827px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 700x827px

>>34556952
that's fucking wrong though you little faggot

File: 1499783119971.png (307KB, 410x371px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 410x371px

>>34556980
You sure showed me my man.

>>34555648
You talk a lot for a person who can't tell a reticule from a reticle.

>>34556909
Wooh what $240 dollar eotech?

>>34556931
Yea, no. Look up "speckle pattern"

>>34553924
What the fuck are you even talking about? Red dots don't have parallax by definition.

>>34554043
Aimpoint micros or the Sig Romeo series are your best bet.

>>34557036
On Jet.com there's a coupon code for 40 dollars off the 360 dollar 512, then the EOTech 75 dollar rebate, then you can use eBates to get another ~20 dollars off. You will have to pay tax if your state requires it, though, so it might not come out to the same price. Could be lower, could be higher.

>>34557161
>512
Why would you get the shittiest version?

>>34557173
Because it's 240 dollars.

>>34557173
Retro operator build?

>>34557086
But they do have parallax

http://www.breachbangclear.com/parallax-free-isnt/

>>34555497
Eotech is fine for what you'll be doing

>>34557173
the EOTech 512 is the best $400 CQB optic on the market, hands down.

>>34555125
I looked through a vortex prism scope at a gun show today and the reticule was so small that I could barely see it. Would not be good for somebody who has a hard time with a dot already. I also struggle with aimpoints and the Trijicon triangle reticule looks like a red cotton ball to me.

>>34557020
ret·i·cule
ˈredəˌkyo͞ol/
noun
noun: reticule; plural noun: reticules

1.
historical
a woman's small handbag, originally netted and typically having a drawstring and decorated with embroidery or beading.
2.
variant spelling of reticle.

>>34557523
>>34553924
Oh look another $400 red dot, but it has a shitload longer battery life and no battery compartment issues.

>>34557709
The battery compartment issue has been fixed since like...2009.

>>34557173
How is it shittiest?

>>34556980
>his 'cqb' scope has an eye box

>>34556980
Fuck is this?

>>34557978
because it hogs rail space, and doesn't have nv capability. if that matters at all to you, you are probably having your equipment issued to you and shouldn't gaf anyway.

>>34558098
I don't own any NVDs, yet, and what else am I going to put on my monolithic rail, anyway?

>>34557020
You are a dumb nigger

My astigmatism comes and goes but usually it makes a triangle of red dots lol. I just pretend its a triangle reticle and shoot for the middle. Don't be in my triangle....

Aimpoint pro with a cheap Burris 3x magnifier w/flip mount, does the job. No Chris Kyle aspirations.

File: 00U0U_K4AdNeR74z_600x450.jpg (34KB, 337x450px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 337x450px

Hey boners is a Trijicon ACOG TA45-4 going off at $400 bucks locally worth it. It seems bizarrely low for a none-knock-off-ACOG. I'm a little suspicious.
Pick related. Asked if it was liberated from Uncle Sam or if there is any catch, etc. Asked for the serial. Thoughts? Get it? Pass?

>>34558773
Disregard. Sold.

>>34558773
Never tell /k/ about a great deal you found until after you have bought it yourself. We are massive bastards that will ruin it for everyone.

>>34558676
Mine looks kinda like a B. When I tried to sight in my red dot, I was getting POI shift of over 3" depending if I shot the top target or bottom one on the same stand.

>>34556919

I don't really like little optics. I want my sight to be big and beefy with a wide field of view. Something that fills out that rail space nicely. Unlike a lot of people, I enjoy my firearms for their aesthetic value rather than practical. If something doesn't look good to me, I don't really want it.

>>34557161
Ok but is jet legit to deal with? Idk if I should pull the trigger, so to speak... God damn puns

>>34556921
They don't care. /k/ is an extension of aimpoint's marketing department.

>>34559817
Sorry, man, the deal expired.

>>34554043
Nothing that reflects light to your eyes my man. It sucks but just wear your glasses or get lasik

>>34557699
>variant spelling of reticle.
it's actually the french way to say reticle, same thing with vehicle being "vehicule"

File: 20170714_202241.jpg (2MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 5312x2988px

Just picked up this used trijicon 1x24 for a song ($175). I'm trying to date it the serial number is 057xxx. It had all thethe legit markings but the tritium appears depleted. What are the chances of sending it back in for new tritium at no charge? At cost, how much?

File: 20170714_202140.jpg (3MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5312x2988px

>>34563082

Hard to make out the markings in the pic but it has trijicon (R) ACOG (R), the nsn number, model number and 2 corinthians bible verse. The housing is a little beat up but only cosmetic.

File: 20170714_202327.jpg (3MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5312x2988px

>>34563106

>>34563082
It cant hurt to call up the company and ask those questions.
I'd hesitate to just send it in though, as often companies dont return things they can't fix.

File: dot.jpg (16KB, 236x242px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 236x242px

>>34560313
>My fav optic is consistently proven to be inferior to Aimpoint and is treated as such, therefore this entire board is just a haven for AImpoint shills
You're pathetic, and however the dot-cluster is shit is brought about it's still there.

>>34563335
You realize that new Vortex holographic sight also does the same, right? It's inherent to the light source.

>>34563350
And how does that impact my argument in any way, shape, or form? Did you see me saying Eotech is only guilty of it? Did you see me say the Vortex holo is great because it doesn't have the visual effect? What is the point of your post?

>>34563117

I work on those regularly, does the fiber optic filament still work fine?

You are probably stuck with an optic that only works in high lighted situations, which sucks if you are in a dark room looking out into light

https://www.trijicon.com/na_en/support/return_authorization.php

you can request refill on some of their products, I have never tried it, and dont know what the cost would be. It may not be worth it depending on how much it costs, but ou go tit cheap, so it might be

File: muh AR.jpg (44KB, 960x588px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 960x588px

>>34553924
What do y'all think of self powered optics? I just get a meprolight 21 and really enjoyed it shooting with it yesterday for the first time.

File: WP_20170319_004[2].jpg (2MB, 3072x1728px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3072x1728px

>>34560313
>/k/ is an extension of aimpoint's marketing department.
Or maybe Eotech is just shit in comparison. :^

>>34563364
The point of my post is that it's not EOTech's fault.

>>34563399
Oh look, it's irrelevant.

>>34563387
I want to like them, but the shooting out into bright light from darker areas thing can be annoying.

File: washout.jpg (52KB, 708x720px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 708x720px

>>34563411
Yeah, it is kind of annoying. From there though irons will show up fairly well. Even then though, the washout isn't terrible.

>>34563378

Thanks for replying. Yes the fiber still works, if I point it into heavy light or us a flashlight the reticle gets brighter. It actually seems to work better in low light indoor situations. Outside in heavy brightness is near imperceptible. So you're saying trijicon doesn't lifetime warranty it? I got it cheap enough that I can resell it or just larp and take pics with it and not feel remorse. Can you comment on dating them via serial number? Some here say puts mine around 2004 manufacture, which makes sense considering tritium half life.

>>34563390
God you are such a worthless angry faggot

All you do is post passive aggressive bullshit and act like owning things gives you a valid opinion on them when you're nothing more than some angry lonely stain on humanity that pollutes this board on a daily basis

No one likes you or cares what you think, sow hy don't you just go away and leave us in peace from your impotent lashing out

File: WP_20170710_024[1].jpg (2MB, 3072x1728px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3072x1728px

>>34563470
Oh shit son hit me with another one of those bb.

i have to use an aimpoint at work, its all right and the battery lasts forever but ive got an issue with the dot/my eyes. its only a perfect circle at the lowest brightness i can see in the current light condition. i.e. i set it up inside and go outside it gets washed out, i turn it up then go inside its fuzzy. im working on lasik but is there a better way to deal with it then to keep adjusting? i know if im inside the blur isnt a huge deal because the targets are closer/bigger but it still irks me.

Are Eotech not shit now? Because my eyes suck for Aimpoint, I can only see the reddot properly when wearing glasses.

>>34563542
There is no reason you won't have that same experience with an Eotech.

File: crack.png (2MB, 1439x830px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1439x830px

>>34563441

no problem, they warranty some of their products, but the tritium is only 12 years lighted. a lot of those older sights are on the used market for 200- prices, because the tritium is depleted (half-life'd) it looks like your optic also had a dented hood, make sure its not cracked through on the bottom

They are nice budget optics, but Im not a big fan of the blue tint that makes it hard to see.

File: WP_20170413_005[1].jpg (2MB, 1728x2342px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1728x2342px

>>34563441
That tint's actually worse than my PK-A's.

>>34563550
I've seen eotech at a store. It seems to prism less than my cheap Vortex and the Aimpoint I saw at the store.

>>34563542

I have used 5 or six different types of eotech at work. I never thought they were all that good.

The aimpoints had nice battery life, but they seemed like pretty average optics, not sure why the price was always so high.

Trijocons had some neat concepts going for them, but the glass quality and the price make some of them seem like they were not really worth it.

>>34554043
Use a rear BUIS with a wide aperture and look through that to the dot. Will help with the astigmatism. The wider the aperture, the easier to align, but the less it lessens the starburst

>>34563600
My problem is it prism where you see like small lines coming out of them. I guess I have astigmatism. The green Eotech does not do this.

File: eotech rainbow.png (895KB, 1266x940px) Image search: [Google]

895KB, 1266x940px

>>34563648

why don't you get the rainbow reticle on eotech

File: fieldstrip.png (3MB, 1837x1341px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1837x1341px

anybody ever fieldstrip your optics?

>>34563551

You're responding to a different person. I'm the one with the used trijicon. You're correct, the top of the hood is slightly dented. Yes I figured the tritium was depleted but i can still see the reticle in low light conditions due to fiber optic so I'll just hold onto it. I personally like the blue tint. Im going to order a polarizing lense cap because I've heard those make a noticeable difference.

File: polarizing filter.jpg (38KB, 1024x413px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 1024x413px

>>34563875

it depends

>>34559817
Deal expired but you can still get them pretty cheap. They have XPS2s for around $300 if you've never ordered there before, pay debit, and waive free returns.

>>34563951
Where?

>>34563976
Jet.com, the website mentioned in the reply chain.

File: IMG_20170716_102644_605.jpg (3MB, 2711x2084px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2711x2084px

Aimpoint is best.

>>34563983
I don't see any 300 dollar XPS2s.

File: Lucid_HD7_Red_Dot_Sight_RDS_Windage_and_Elevation_Connection_Screws_Jeff_Gurwitch_DefenseReview.com_DR_11-1024x768.jpg (186KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 1024x768px

Are there any sights that will adjust their brightness in relation to ambient light?

I remember watching a video review of one, and they said the sight did just that, but unlike most that adjust for light around the optic, the one they were using would look at light at your target and adjust accordingly. So if say you're shooting from a dark room out into bright sunlight, your reticle wouldn't dim way down making it hard to get on target. The opposite would happen if say you're out in the bright sun entering a building that's dark, the sight would lower its brightness for you so you don't just get a distracting bright glow washing out your sight picture.

>>34563976

cabelas has RMRs for 350$

>>34564058

trijicon did an experimental one with a light sensor, I don't know if its still for sale. I use holosun for exactly that reason

>>34564058
>Are there any sights that will adjust their brightness in relation to ambient light?
Plenty.
>the one they were using would look at light at your target and adjust accordingly.
That would be the Browe Combat Optic.

>>34557445

Do the fiber optic trijicon acogs have parallax?

>>34564103
Since the reticle is etched, probably not.

File: 0420-0906-2918-2631_camouflaged_soldier_laying_in_a_field_giving_the_thumbs_up_sign_m.jpg (272KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 640x427px

>>34564095
>Browe Combat Optic
That's the one, I thought I'd remember that shit because of the name but obviously not.

Thanks browe

>>34564066
That isn't an XPS.

>>34554325
I have the same problem. Prism scopes are fine, also normal scopes with crosshairs.

Any long term EOTech 512 owners want to chime in about their experience with that sight?

>>34563390
>>34563503

>It's bad
>I know this solely because other people tell me so from /ARG/ circlejerks and I learn about optics from John Wick films
>Or maybe Eotech is just shit in comparison. :^

Maybe you should just stop the charades, put a signature/post count in all of your posts, and solely reply with inane, unsubstantial comments, and head over to arfcom.

>>34565495
>I know this solely because other people tell me so from /ARG/ circlejerks
Looks to me like he owns one and can say it from experience?

>>34566671
MSD literally does not shoot his guns.

>>34566671
>and can say it
He can barely formulate a thought beyond a simple X is Y statement with an ironic shitpost flavor thrown on top. When he can actually contribute to a discussion he is unable to articulate anything beyond what he learned from the SOCOM lawsuit and what /arg/ already told him, though.
>from experience?
He just bought one a few months ago for autism clone purposes. He didn't buy it because he wanted to try it out. His """experience""" with it will only confirm the most basic of details about the sight. For instance he will say "shit battery life" (something he would only be able to learn from someone else or a product manual) and yet I'd be willing to put good money that he hasn't even been able to test a single battery to exhaustion yet.

>inb4 ad homs from MSD

File: WP_20170716_001[1].jpg (1MB, 3072x1728px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3072x1728px

It appears some people are upset at others mentioning a certain brand of dot optics is heavy, bulky, has the battery lifespan of a fruit fly, and is all around inferior to Aimpoint. Oh well. :^
>>34566671
He unironically owns a Zenitco'd AK with an Eotech and a magnifier. At best he's a contrarian, at worst there's mental issues. But his unwavering hate-boner for me has instilled me with a deep sense of affection for him regardless.
>>34565495
Love u bb. <3

>>34567108
>and is all around inferior to Aimpoint.
Aimpoints have inferior parallax compensation, larger dots, are worse for magnifying, and are worse for passive aiming with NV. The EOTech's reticle having the 65 MOA ring is really useful for 25 yards and under shooting for a quick offset. I've used it to great effect in matches, where everyone else in my squad was unable to hit a headshot only foam ball target within 1-2 rounds, where all I had to do was use the bottom of the ring for an easy offset with my 50 yard zero.

Aimpoints have more battery life, lighter, and some models are smaller. Those are very important factors in the aimpoint's favor, however there are use cases where the EOTech is better. It's about what the user values instead of one being better than the other in any case, both have their own emphasis on different tasks.

>>34564103
All optics have parallax to some degree. Magnified optics more than unmagnified. Holographics seem to have the least.

Eotechs are a huge no for me for the sheer fact I have to turn the fucking thing on everytime, and that's NOT something I want for my HD weapon. I like the reticle but I can even get that somewhere else too, and it doesn't require me to turn on every time I want to use it.

>>34567414
Do you also leave the safety off, because that's also a switch you have to flip?

>>34567468
>Do you also leave the safety off
Yes? It's my HD gun, I'd think that'd be pretty apparent.
>because that's also a switch you have to flip?
Even if I did leave my safety on my carbine on, an Eotech still makes me do one more step I'd rather not do when I need my rifle ready right then and now. For that matter, I can flick a safety far more readily and quickly than clicking the recessed power activation for an Eotech.

All I did was say why I wouldn't want an Eotech for my HD weapon, there's no need to get shitty with me.

>>34567507
Why don't you just press the button before you go to sleep?

>>34567623
Because that's one more thing I have to remember to do with the weapon I'm relying on to protect me here in my Augusta apartment that's already been broken into twice? If I have a Holosun, I don't have to do anything save for replace the battery sometime in the next four years or so. This really isn't hard to understand. I have an HD weapon that I know will be ready to go at a moment's notice, no matter what. No auto-shutoff to fret about. No safety to flick. No turning it on period. An Eotech does not give me what I want. So I opt not to get it.

File: 1490606511541.gif (899KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

899KB, 600x600px

>>34567108
>At best he's a contrarian, at worst there's mental issues.
>someone who owns a certain gun with certain things on it and disagrees with you is either a contrarian or has mental issues

>>34567108
Nice pic mind if I save?

>>34567687
I'm not saying you have to like the sight, but there are ways around having to turn it on when you wake up in the middle of the night.

>>34567823
Okay, but you still aren't providing a case as to why an Eotech would fit my needs. So far the Eotech still needs to be babysat more than my Holosun.

Has anyone got experience with russian optics? How do kobras compare to the American designs?

>>34567863
I was never trying to convince you an EOTech was fit for you. Just that your complaint could be worked around. I would prefer it if they just let it have a continuous on function, but eh.

>>34567896
>your complaint could be worked around.
It really isn't, I still have to be mindful of my optic's status and I still have to undergo a ritual that I don't have to do with my Holosun.

I have absolutely no experience with scopes in general, or optics besides iron sights. What would be a decent low-power variable for my 16" AR that would be good enough for me, but wouldn't mean dropping $2000 on glass? I had my eyes on a 1-4x AccuPower, since I hate the AccuPoint's reticle.

>>34567922
How much do you want to spend? Does it have to be 1-4x or are other 1x-Xx scopes acceptable?

>>34567958
From what I've read, anywhere from 1-4x to 1-8x would work for me, range shooting out to 250m and SHTF shooting out to 500m at the most. I'd like to spend less than $1000 before mount.

What's the trick to dealing with parallax? I bought a vortex red dot for my AR when I first purchased the rifle, and it worked fine for a while since I had a front sight post to help with aiming. The sight was part of the gas system, and when I changed handguards I had to cut the sight off. I had absolutely no idea how to work with the red dot after that because my head position was slightly different every time, and my groupings at 100 yards were at like 6 or 7 inches wide because of it.

I ended up throwing an actually telescopic sight on the gun because I was doing some hunting with it, but I might go back to a red dot if I can.

>>34567896
Unless that dumbfuck auto shutoff is removed there's literally no way. It should be a deal breaker for home defense setups in general because being forced to remember to wake up your dot before going to bed when you're tired and forgetful or even worse trying to fumble about with those tinyass buttons when Tyrone smashes his way into the living room is utter cancer

>>34568006
unfortunately when your battery life is all of 500 hrs you have to take some ""measures"" to ensure you don't have users get tired of swapping out CR123s every three weeks

>>34567922
Accupower is a good choice for you.

>>34567980
>What's the trick to dealing with parallax?
Keep the dot centered....

>>34568158
That's what I was starting to think. Any opinions on the reticle options? I find myself drawn to the segmented circle one, it seems like a good balance between close range effectiveness and usefulness at a distance.

>>34568138
Well I guess my measure is to own an aimpoint. That sure was easy

>>34564710
I've owned one since 2009. They're fine.

File: Ejoy-Capitalism-Vintage.jpg (66KB, 640x341px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 640x341px

>>34568212
yuo, capitalism sure is great

>>34568163
but even the minutest of movements of my head, even with the dot still centered from my perspective, would throw my aim off by a few inches at 100 yards

>>34568263
You have plenty of reasons to tell L3 to fuck off to begin with, capitalism or no

>>34568375
Such as?

>>34568353
Your RDS might be shit.

>>34568414
discontinuing the Insight line for starters, along with noticably lowering QC after buying out Eotech

File: MRDS-black.png (2MB, 2550x2550px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2550x2550px

>>34568507
They're really fucking good at just discontinuing shit

Well I just won an auction for a Vortex Spitfire 3x prism so hopefully I like it when it gets here.

>>34568582
Isn't this just a Leupold?

>>34568582
>Insight M3X
Quality, top tier flashlight
Discontinued

>Insight MRDS
Discontinued around the same time L3 lost all its holographic sights due to massive lawsuit - like holy fuck you'd have a back up
Also discontinued around the same time they released a 1-6 short dot on eotech side, which a nice top mounted or offset red dot would compliment it

>Eotech 552 laser battery cap
Discontinued, but ultimately a fucking horrible idea. everyone just wanted a commercial grade L3 laser without the Pew illuminator. If it was a standalone box it'd have outsold Steiner

>PVS-31 BNVD
LEO / MIL only
They have a version that uses PVS-14 glass that would be saleable without violating contracts, they don't bother
Meanwhile the DTNVG and BNVD continue to dominate the flip up goggle world, not including

L3 on the whole makes horrible decisions. If it wasn't for half decent night vision / thermal tech and laser modulars they would have nothing to offer the military or civilian markets anymore

>>34569817
Oh don't get me wrong, I was saying "shit" as products in general, not that the products themselves were shit and L3 was making great decisions shitcanning them (although the 552 Lazor Edition was retarded enough that it's yet another reason to hate L3).
>L3 on the whole makes horrible decisions.
Pretty much exactly what I'm saying, the Eotech line would probably be a lot better off now if it weren't for them. At least I think so.

File: 6r3o86.jpg (455KB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

455KB, 1200x1600px

>>34569894
>(although the 552 Lazor Edition was retarded enough that it's yet another reason to hate L3).
What I love is that for fucking YEARS people had been asking for an L3 laser box, that LDI was dominating the market with the DBAL

Then L3 announces the CIVL, got a good prototype, looks sexy - demand is at PEAK

Then they wait a year and just release a civi peq-15

Okay so, first off, they could have easily released both (there is demand for a lower priced box without an IR illuminator) - secondly, even if they just released it under the Eotech line it'd be fine. Thirdly, if they just made that unslaved double laser battery cap a standalone unit sold under eotech name it'd sell like gangbustered

But no, they are selling a full priced PEQ-15 that is getting dominated by the DBAL A3 and soon to be released A4. And for serious business, the MAWL is going to take em to the cleaners once it has a price drop.

Imagine if they just released a slaved Red and IR laser + flashlight in a body housing similar to that of the WL1-AA or whatever - it'd have won the entire firearms community instantly.

>the Eotech line would probably be a lot better off now if it weren't for them

I think one thing Eotech does badly is focus too heavily on the meme markets inside the firearms community. How many of those zombie hunter sights do you see on ebay?

Their holographic reticle is ripe for making tons of custom set ups - their crossbow sight is crazy cool. They could easily be making numerous EXPS-3 style sights for different calibers with variable settings, newer styles of bodies, and various other things but don't do any of this.

And, yeah, they need a red dot if for no other reason than to compliment their 1-6 scopes. I can't exactly 45 a EXPS 3 now can I?

>>34570011
I'd honestly say L3 is the Colt of the firearm accessories market. You see them produce some great ideas that could take the market by storm, but they just sit on them. They produce nice alternatives to competitor products, like the MRDS to Trijicon's RMR, and then they just say 'fuck it' and send them to the shadow realm, never to be seen again. They refuse to innovate and just rely on the same tired product that's either been matched or utterly surpassed by others (and let's face it, this is the Eotech optic line in this scenario)...and then you just have sheer, incompetent management. If they changed their logo to a bucking mustang it'd be perfect.

File: streamlight_surefire.jpg (271KB, 1300x1189px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 1300x1189px

>>34570057
Meanwhile you have the exact opposite end of the autism spectrum - Streamlight

>Makes Surefire X300 Competitor
>Can use Military (Insight, LDI, etc) Pressure Switch so you can use after market dual switches for your lights and lasers

>Makes Surefire M300 Competitors
>Uses Surefire mounting profile to use all after market mounting accessories
>Uses a proprietary pressure switch that has to be screwed on like some shit tier china Fenix light
>No option to use any type of industry pressure switch

>Makes functional lasers that are known to be good for the money and hold zero
>In no way develops these products into aesthetically pleasing PEQ style format so you have light and laser mounted at 12 without obstructing your shit

Or even fucking Lasermax

>Makes Pistol and Rifle laser system
>has proprietary pressure switch but given size profile this is acceptable
>Allows you to mount a light on top of it as it has a built in 1913 pic rail
>Or even another laser if you want LOL
>Body continues to be made out of POLYMER so better hope you don't fuck up and smash your gun into a wall
^and bonus round
>Discontinues all other types of rifle based laser systems, like foregrip laser solutions
>Continues to make 500 different custom molded mounting brackets for sub pistols

The firearm community as a whole has fucking autism and I hate it. There is a ripe middle ground between these cheapo plastic Lasermax units and 1200 dollar Steiner boxes but nobody is getting in there.

>>34570196
Best you can do is speak with your wallet. L3, Troy, Colt and Springfield Armory aren't getting a cent from me for one reason or another, and the best thing I can do is stand by that commitment until they unfuck their shit

>>34570277
Well I have to buy shit that is somewhat good. Surefire I can't blame them too much for not evolving (Why change if you are already perfect?) but I refuse to buy the L3 ATPIAL-C. I'll just run a DBAL.

Streamlight TLR-1 is currently in use protecting Trump right now so I think it's something I can for person use without fucking myself over too hard I guess?

File: perst3.jpg (411KB, 1280x824px) Image search: [Google]

411KB, 1280x824px

>>34570196
>The firearm community as a whole has fucking autism and I hate it. There is a ripe middle ground between these cheapo plastic Lasermax units and 1200 dollar Steiner boxes but nobody is getting in there.

Zenitco has full powered lasers that are even better than the actual PEQ-15 in some aspects and they have a 4mW slaved IR/Red laser that's 400 dollars, too.
>but muh slavshit sucks

>>34570565
FDA rules make it illegal to import or sell this in the USA so it's not really something you can have as a reliable source.

>>34570737
I found it on the ground. Nobody sold me nothing :^)

>>34570787
Point me to the ground where these pop out of.

>>34559589
>I enjoy my firearms for their aesthetic value rather than practical.
Either bait or an idiot.

>>34570737
That's wrong. You can buy them just fine. The only thing illegal about them is if you point them at air planes or some shit.

>>34557675
congrats you have astigmatism

With a 20" AR with irons and a 1:7 twist, should I get a scope or red dot?

>>34576875
scope 1-4x or 1-6x, if shooting over 300y/m

File: 1475522787095.jpg (273KB, 1280x886px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 1280x886px

>>34577311
fug pic

>>34576875
porque no los dos, anon?

>>34577414
Fucking spic

>>34563951
Y'al know optics better than I- but do not ever buy stuff with a debit card unless you use it as a credit card (no PIN). Oopsies on any merchant's part can be very expensive.

>>34577311
>shooting over 300y/m
>5.56
no thanks

I need help picking a new optic. Currently have a TRS-25 for my AR.

I am looking at the Vortex Sparc AR and Aimpoint PRO. I love the reputation and everything else about the pro but the price...

Is the PRO worth the price for a range rifle or is the Vortex good enough?

>>34578529
Get the PRO, if you shop right you can get it for $350

>>34578573
Damn! I have never seen it that low but ok now I know what to look for I guess. Really that much better?

>>34578626
Yes, there is really that much of a difference between the Aimpoint PRO and the Vortex SPARC. Get the PRO.

>>34578529
I quite like my PRO, I want to get a magnifier some day

File: 1455587238138.png (38KB, 499x338px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 499x338px

Do people unironically use eotech?
I can understand if they're being issued to you, but if you're actually paying money for them just lol.

File: 1499896429214.jpg (500KB, 1448x2300px) Image search: [Google]

500KB, 1448x2300px

>>34553924
Are sig romeo 4a any good? I like the aesthetics of it

>>34555615
unreliable, changes zero, worse than chink tier competition, poor business ethics, possibly killed american soldiers.

what possible reason could you have to justify spending any amount of money on that garbage?

>>34557523
>the EOTech 512 is the best $400 CQB optic on the market, hands down.

best at CQB because your 8 MOA zero fluctuations wont matter since you are point shooting with your barrel anyway?

>>34563082
they tell you on their own website. its like $75 to get it recharged last time i checked

>>34563441
the blue tint makes target acquisition at range impossible

>>34563875
i have the polarizing cap. i always have it off, because it makes the entire optic worse. you cant see shit with it on, its way too dark. the only benefit is making it completely black, which means you can actually see the dot over the target when you use 2 eyes for aiming so you impose the dot/black background over the target your left eye is watching

its really a shitty optic all around. for CQB its alright i guess, if you are outside where the light makes the dot really bright. anything over 50yrds away that is camo or next to trees or objects will be impossible to see through the site

>>34555648
>their circle reticule is actually composed of dozens of dots forming the circle and it totally shows
How many times do you have to be called an idiot?

Steiner P4xi vs Trijicon AccuPower 1-4x vs ???

>>34578888
These problems have been fixed in the new smaller eotech exps3 sights

>>34574809
This is 100% factually false. There are no non-Class 1 IR laser pointers available for sale to civilians. You are not legally allowed to import it or to sell them. To buy them (read, for the seller to be able to sell you one) they require an FDA Variance, which is only granted to military and police. Said variances also state you are not allowed to sell this unit to anyone else.

You are legally allowed to purchase them if you somehow were able to buy them, but that sale itself is illegal. There have been various discussions on this topic and my understanding to date is only one person survived the DHS crackdown on PEQ-15's awhile back. All others got seized since there was no legal way to acquire one.

Optic noob here, would a TRS25 be good enough for a VZ58 or a FAL?

>>34581775
Spend more money.

>>34554043
If you have the money, get a 1.5x mini acog. You can use it just like a red dot, basically. But the slight magnification compensates for the astigmatism, and the clarity is top notch. Other than that, a strike eagle or PA ACSS would be good and much cheaper.

>>34554043
That Korean prism dot looks good. FC1, I think is the model name.

>>34582649
i'd rather buy more guns and ammo with that money.

>>34584003
Then don't bother with optics.

>>34581742
You can buy then right now off of Russian Thunder. Multiple people on this board own them.

>PEQ 15 crack down
That's because they're all stolen gov property.

>>34555125
Is the Wolf elcan clone even available? I haven't seen it for sale anywhere

>>34584112
What Wolf Elcan copy?

>>34581742
Why is the Food and Drug Administration getting involved with lasers? This makes your entire point kind of suspect, my man.

>>34585537
You're actually a moron. The FDA regulates lasers because they already regulate them for medical equipment.

>>34585546
Holy shit, you're right. Man, that is wild. Well, I don't know enough about lasers to speak any further, but that was elucidating, so thanks, I guess.

Newbie here. Have a basic bitch ar15 and i wanna slap a red dot on it. On a budget and im looking at a romeo5, how is it? Any other recommendations? Trying to keep budget at $250 max

>>34585959
Just buy a Holosun instead of a Holosun with SIG branding on it.

>>34578529
Check out the Sig Romeo 5 red dot saw one and it looked pretty good for the price(around $150). I have an Aimpoint and like it but it is more money.

>>34564710

hmm, 6 years or so?

had to clean the battery terminals after previous owner had a leak(?), once done it worked fine.

i didn't have any noticeable poi shift issues personally.

sold it and bought a 1x4 and am much happier.

>>34567971
add in
steiner px4i
leupold vx6
supposedly sig's new variables are pretty good, but i haven't used one

I don't know what optic to put on my vz 58

I feel like making an infographic.
What is the best AR red dot for:
$50-100
$100-150
$150-200
$200-300
$300-400
$400-500
$500-700
$700-1k
also, are these price ranges even reasonable?

>>34587027
Didn't they stop selling VX-6 commercially?

>>34570737
>>34574809

they can be "industrial/ scientific" or "medical" laser and be fine, the law only pertains to laser POINTERS because of fagits who bought class 4 lasers with 2mw output off amazon and shone them in peoples eyes for shits and giggles (this blinds the victim)

also using class 3b can be considered deadly force if you shine it too long on someones eyes

https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emittingproducts/radiationemittingproductsandprocedures/homebusinessandentertainment/laserproductsandinstruments/default.htm

t. laser safety tech

>>34587252
don't think so optics planet has em

File: Screenshot_2016-12-29-22-34-37-1-1-1.png (140KB, 349x347px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 349x347px

best optic for a broke nigga AR build NOW

>>34587236
Too much overlap. You could narrow that down to 3 or 4 price points.

>>34587256
Thanks for clearing that up.

I'm building a recce AR, so lightweight. At 16"(Fuck Commiefornia) I'm wondering what the best optic is.

I'm about 40 mins from DTLA, but my engagement distances would probably be around 200-400m max.

I'm torn between a Vortex Strike Eagle(Or Viper, spending on if I wanna shell out more shekels) or an old Ainpiint Comp M3 or something.

Thoughts?

>>34587271
Which price points are you thinking?
Like, I doubt there are many, if any, red dots over $700 right?
How about
0-100
100-200
200-350
350-500

>>34587340
0-200
2-400
4-600

The people buying dots more expensive than that don't need your help.

>>34587270
pa micro dot done

>>34587283
>>34587340

you need to be careful with certain price ranges, usually the purity of the laser comes with price (unless its L3 and their overpriced meme items) usually cheap lasers have some bleed over from different spectrums, which means the high powered ones can be eye-not-safe

>>34578476
it's fun you should try it sometime.

>>34587380
wait, there are red dots that can harm your eyes?
wtf is the point of that?

>>34587380

to clarify, if the laser is rated 532nm it may or may not be reaaaaly 532nm +/- and have some IR radiation. you pay more for purer beams usually

Are Primary Arms scopes actually good or is it all viral marketting and bullshit?

>>34587402

not red dots, but aiming lasers. you can buy cheap high power asian laser for 70$ that is comperable to the power output of a peq15/ perst3 but there is likely little quality control for how pure the beam is and how much power is really being output

>>34587402
He's confused. The only red dots on the market using laser emitters are EOTechs and the new Vortex thing and they only have Class 2 lasers that are not visible through the viewing windows at any angle. He thinks we are talking about laser pointers.

At least I hope he is.

File: 400px-EotechFunctionDiagram2.png (52KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 400x300px

laser tech here, you have a safe eye distance from any given laser, and also the glass and coatings make the laser diffused enough to be safe and like >>34587451
said, the laser is a low power

>>34587507
This diagram should explain why the arrow is pointing up on the warning label for the laser on EOTechs.

File: compare.png (65KB, 485x229px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 485x229px

also here is a comparison of eotech optics (with laser) vs led type optics (think like a shaped light pattern)

File: see all.png (4MB, 1828x1672px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1828x1672px

does anybody have experience with these? when they hit the market, they were as low as 20$, I have seen them with tritium and other configurations now, but I dont know if its workth the added 50-60$

the idea is you line up the fiber optic block and line, and it makes a natural aim like a pistol

>>34587735
Occluded eye gunsights are not new and kind of suck.

>>34587735
How is a 2" sight radius supposed to help?

>>34587922
Sight radius is overrated. It's what the sight radius can do for the inexperienced shooter than makes people think it's important.

>>34570277
What did troy do, or are they just generally bad quality?

>>34589271
>http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/08/daniel-zimmerman/what-the-hells-the-problem-with-troy-industries/

>>34587409

They're functional, and good for the money. Have two. They don't last forever, though, as one of my microdots shit the bed and now is about 50MOA to the left and won't return. But it's an old model without turrets, just the fucking allen screws.

The conventional tube-style red dots are pretty solid, but don't expect to be able to toss them around like you would an Aimpoint. They're just not built to the same standards.

Are the 300 dollar aimpoint compm4 on ebay legit? The reviews seem pretty good.

>>34587735

This honestly seems more distracting than helpful. Maybe I'm just looking at the picture wrong.

>>34589439
Totally legit. Definitely possible to get an 800 dollar sight for 300 dollars.

>>34589462
You don't know how used goods work, do you?
>>34589439
The comp m2s are legit, the only damage is cosmetic

>>34589439
No, but you can get a used CompM2 for that price.

>>34589439
usually the cheaper they are, the more beat they are. i got an m4 sometime last year and the lens was so swirled up, the whole lens would be red when you turned up the brightness.
it was functioning and legit though.

>>34589576
Is it still running fine and dandy?

>>34589306
Thanks for that. Never bought troy before and now never will

File: 1464560815995.jpg (36KB, 500x469px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x469px

>>34564013
This gun is so fucking sexy. What's street price for one of those?

>>34589609
the lens thing bugged me to no end so i resold it on ebay. broke even after fees and such.
i did also get an used m2 around the same time, from the same seller "sheepdog gear" (which i see is the seller of the item youre asking about). the m2 lens were pretty clean, that was definitely worth it. m2 is still going strong.
its a crap shoot. hopefully yours is good

>>34589439
i see it sold for $306 at the last 2 seconds, did you snipe or get sniped? or did you pass?

>>34589648
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ptr-32

>>34578759
Most have come to terms that they're pretty sub-optimal in most cases compared to aimpoints but you'll still see a few fanatical supporters who have emotional attachments for whatever reason. It's these people and those who just don't know any better that still buy them. And clone autists.

>>34581775
I have one. It's ok out to 100 yards, but thats the distance I do most of my shooting so it works for me.

>>34589520
>You don't know how used goods work, do you?
He didn't say they are supposed to be used and finding a legitimate used Comp M4 for 300 dollars is definitely uncommon. Possibly something that never happened.

>>34584107
>You can buy then right now off of Russian Thunder.
I can call up someone right now and buy weed. Doesn't make it legal just because I can. Just because the lasers slip through customs doesn't mean it's legal. Check any laser forum, they get fucked all the time trying to order stuff from overseas.

And you have to really ask yourself if it was truly legal to sell high power IR beams to the public why didn't LDI do it years ago, and specifically had to get the FDA to verify Class 1 IR is permitted for civilian sale? and again with diffused illuminators?

File: 1497071074202.jpg (382KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 1280x720px

>>34553924
dont tell me what to do your not the boss of me

>>34564103
I have one (TA11H-308) that I bought because my eyes are shit, and it's extremely mild to nonexistant.

In basic I didn't know what parallaxing was, and I could barely zero with an M68 (Aimpont comp M2) because I had these dime-sized groups at a random places all over the target. I just thought I was a terrible shot.

Then a guy told me about parallaxing and I got my hands on an ACOG and all the groups went right where I was pointing. I'm not saying the M68 was bad, but if you've got astigmatism, you're going to have a hell of a time shooting straight.

>>34560313
First and only optic i have bought is a a Aimpoint pro 5 years ago and its still working great on the same battery

>>34591862
pleb, not having your removable carry handle in the front