Carothers and Guns

[Blues]

I'd post the video, but want to keep it family friendly. The recent police shooting in Bristol, CT had a video where the officer (wounded in the leg) took down the suspect armed with an AR-15 with a single shot from his RMR equipped pistol. Not saying he couldn't have done it with his iron sights, but it was a really impressive shot.

It was. We've discussed the situation at length on another forum I'm active on. That officer did a magnificent job. He should never have to buy a drink again.

 

[JJ_Colt45]

Well, I did pretty well on my qualifications, (day and night), with the sheriff's office on Wednesday, so I guess I can still get by with just the Trijicon HD or AmeriGlo "Bold" night sights on my Glocks, (at least for now).

(I don't wear glasses outdoors, but I do use 1.25x reading glasses both at the computer and while reading indoors.)

I can get by with irons still, but I am starting to appreciate what the reflex sights offer. I'm more worried about shooting my rifles with scopes if my eyes need much more in the way or reading glasses in coming years it may start affecting the crispness through a scope.

 

[bluemax_1]

I can get by with irons still, but I am starting to appreciate what the reflex sights offer. I'm more worried about shooting my rifles with scopes if my eyes need much more in the way or reading glasses in coming years it may start affecting the crispness through a scope.

Reading glasses correct presbyopia (the hardening of the lens that compromises the ability for near focus). As long as your distance vision is fine, the view through a scope will be fine.

Learn to count clicks though, 'cuz you probably won't be able to read the dials on the scope without the glasses.

 

[JJ_Colt45]

Reading glasses correct presbyopia (the hardening of the lens that compromises the ability for near focus). As long as your distance vision is fine, the view through a scope will be fine.

Learn to count clicks though, 'cuz you probably won't be able to read the dials on the scope without the glasses.

I don't know the science, but I noticed the reticles in my scopes was not as crisp and happened to have reading glasses with me for adjusting things and looked through it with them on and it did make it nice and crisp again. I didn't figure it would be that way and until I experienced it I wouldn't have thought it myself.

I wear contacts to correct nearsightedness. Just started needing low power reading glasses recently. Never had any issue with iron sights or scopes until this fall.

 

[jlauffer]

I don't know the science, but I noticed the reticles in my scopes was not as crisp and happened to have reading glasses with me for adjusting things and looked through it with them on and it did make it nice and crisp again. I didn't figure it would be that way and until I experienced it I wouldn't have thought it myself.

I wear contacts to correct nearsightedness. Just started needing low power reading glasses recently. Never had any issue with iron sights or scopes until this fall.

Same here...been wearing contacts for 35+ years (-12 in right eye and -11 in left), and started needing reading glasses a few years ago.

 

[cpirtle]

Same here...been wearing contacts for 35+ years (-12 in right eye and -11 in left), and started needing reading glasses a few years ago.

I feel you guys.. Have been wearing contacts since I was 14 and the last couple of years needed readers. Finally got to the point where I was putting in daily disposable contacts and then wearing readers all day..

Recently switched to progressive glasses (with transition tint) and while I hate having to wear glasses all of the time I am in love with the technology. I also bought progressive sunglasses for the cars so I have all my angles covered

The part of it you don't realize until you get progressives is the "mid view" you get back. Readers cover close up but the progressives also cover the stuff just past arms reach until the point where your regular prescription kicks in.

 

[jlauffer]

I feel you guys.. Have been wearing contacts since I was 14 and the last couple of years needed readers. Finally got to the point where I was putting in daily disposable contacts and then wearing readers all day..

Recently switched to progressive glasses (with transition tint) and while I hate having to wear glasses all of the time I am in love with the technology. I also bought progressive sunglasses for the cars so I have all my angles covered

The part of it you don't realize until you get progressives is the "mid view" you get back. Readers cover close up but the progressives also cover the stuff just past arms reach until the point where your regular prescription kicks in.

No way I can go back to glasses...they are way too thick. Keep a pair for emergencies and when I put them on it's so disorienting. So far I use the narrow readers that I can look over when I need to see further and been working fine. Hoping I don't get any sort of condition that causes my hands to shake so I can still put contacts in when I'm old. Or technology advances and they can fix extreme nearsightedness (my eyes are too bad for lasik).

 

[cpirtle]

That stinks..

What's your contact strength? I am a +5.5 and was always told I was pretty bad, but the new high index lenses in my Ray Bans is only .165 thick on the edge, a little thicker on the eye that needs astigmatism correction. If it's been a while new lenses are getting thinner all the time.

 

[bluemax_1]

I don't know the science, but I noticed the reticles in my scopes was not as crisp and happened to have reading glasses with me for adjusting things and looked through it with them on and it did make it nice and crisp again. I didn't figure it would be that way and until I experienced it I wouldn't have thought it myself.

I wear contacts to correct nearsightedness. Just started needing low power reading glasses recently. Never had any issue with iron sights or scopes until this fall.

Adjust the diopter on the eyepiece while looking at a bright white wall or blue sky to get the reticle sharp.

Test by looking at something in the distance (not through the scope), then quickly glancing at the sky through the scope. Reticle should be sharp. If it isn't (or it takes a second before it becomes sharp), it's still not adjusted properly.

 

[bluemax_1]

No way I can go back to glasses...they are way too thick. Keep a pair for emergencies and when I put them on it's so disorienting. So far I use the narrow readers that I can look over when I need to see further and been working fine. Hoping I don't get any sort of condition that causes my hands to shake so I can still put contacts in when I'm old. Or technology advances and they can fix extreme nearsightedness (my eyes are too bad for lasik).

For a prescription that high Phakic IOL is about the only viable option.

 

[JJ_Colt45]

Adjust the diopter on the eyepiece while looking at a bright white wall or blue sky to get the reticle sharp.

Test by looking at something in the distance (not through the scope), then quickly glancing at the sky through the scope. Reticle should be sharp. If it isn't (or it takes a second before it becomes sharp), it's still not adjusted properly.

I'll mess with it again this weekend, but tried that trick and tried two rifles. Both cleared up with the readers which seemed strange. but I only recent have the need for them so it's new to me.

 

[jlauffer]

That stinks..

What's your contact strength? I am a +5.5 and was always told I was pretty bad, but the new high index lenses in my Ray Bans is only .165 thick on the edge, a little thicker on the eye that needs astigmatism correction. If it's been a while new lenses are getting thinner all the time.

I'm -12 in my right eye and -11 in the left for contacts, which would be around -13 and -12 for glasses, since they are farther away from your eyes.

For a prescription that high Phakic IOL is about the only viable option.

Yeah, I just missed out on a clinical trial for that several years ago.

 

[unwisefool]

I got Lasik 20 years ago and it was one of the best decisions I ever made. I'm extra pretty without glasses.

 

[bluemax_1]

I'm -12 in my right eye and -11 in the left for contacts, which would be around -13 and -12 for glasses, since they are farther away from your eyes.


Yeah, I just missed out on a clinical trial for that several years ago.

Yeah, the out of pocket for IOL surgery is pretty steep, and I think it's considered an 'elective procedure' so it's generally not covered in most insurance policies.

 

[bluemax_1]

I'll mess with it again this weekend, but tried that trick and tried two rifles. Both cleared up with the readers which seemed strange. but I only recent have the need for them so it's new to me.

Interested in the update.

The reticle is supposed to be sharp when your eyes are focused for distance. Readers shouldn't affect the sharpness of the reticle.

I can't read the small numbers on the dials without readers, but the reticle is sharp.

 

[JJ_Colt45]

Interested in the update.

The reticle is supposed to be sharp when your eyes are focused for distance. Readers shouldn't affect the sharpness of the reticle.

I can't read the small numbers on the dials without readers, but the reticle is sharp.

I'll post after I get out again this weekend.

 

[JJ_Colt45]

Interested in the update.

The reticle is supposed to be sharp when your eyes are focused for distance. Readers shouldn't affect the sharpness of the reticle.

I can't read the small numbers on the dials without readers, but the reticle is sharp.

I got outside this morning and took 3 rifles and two unmounted scopes to see if I could get the issue figured out. After awhile still having the issue a thought hit me ... I shot early in the summer and it was not an issue. So I went inside I had a handful of my old contacts left and switched from my new prescription to my last prescription (just got the new about a week ago).

And back out the the bench ... magic ... it was crisp ... both the reticle and target in one of the unmounted scopes. So I had to readjust the diopter on all three of the mounted scopes because I had tried everything to get it corrected.

So I am going to have to go talk to my optometrist Monday and see if they got something wrong in this new prescription. I have no idea what it could be though. I can see great except to read and I can use the same low strength reading glasses with the new contacts.

But thank you B bluemax_1 for the imput. I thought I was maybe losing it when I couldn't adjust it or that maybe that was just an issue with needing readers.

Now I can go hunting!

 

[mb>]

This little Sig holds 17+1!

That capacity is just unreal for the size! If I had waited a week (had I known) I probably would have chosen the Macro.

So yesterday I saw they are selling the 17 round mag with adapters now. I ordered one to try. That’ll give my 365X the option for 12 +1 compactness or 17+1 Uber capacity. May save me a new purchase! Lol

Curious to hear how she shoots for you Phill50 .

 

[bluemax_1]

I got outside this morning and took 3 rifles and two unmounted scopes to see if I could get the issue figured out. After awhile still having the issue a thought hit me ... I shot early in the summer and it was not an issue. So I went inside I had a handful of my old contacts left and switched from my new prescription to my last prescription (just got the new about a week ago).

And back out the the bench ... magic ... it was crisp ... both the reticle and target in one of the unmounted scopes. So I had to readjust the diopter on all three of the mounted scopes because I had tried everything to get it corrected.

So I am going to have to go talk to my optometrist Monday and see if they got something wrong in this new prescription. I have no idea what it could be though. I can see great except to read and I can use the same low strength reading glasses with the new contacts.

But thank you B bluemax_1 for the imput. I thought I was maybe losing it when I couldn't adjust it or that maybe that was just an issue with needing readers.

Now I can go hunting!

Glad you got it figured out. One last thing to check:

It's possible for folks to compensate for sub-par vision in one eye without noticing it.

Check the crispness/sharpness of each eye separately with the new prescription vs the old (simply by looking at things like street/highway signs at a distance with one eye covered vs the other). It's entirely possible that your old prescription may be better for distance vision in your dominant/scope eye.

The eye doc will tell you that better compensation for distance can negatively impact near vision. Some of them will actually provide a better distance prescription for one eye and a prescription that's a little better for near vision in the other eye.

Our brains switch smoothly to whichever eye is sharpest, so it works well for most, as the difference in acuity is small (i.e. the prescription that's better for near vision isn't going to really be 'blurry' for distance, except if you need maximum/fine sharpness/acuity).

If you do find that your dominant/scope eye is sharper for distance vision with the old prescription vs the new, you can let your eye doc know, and/or for future appointments, make sure they know that you want that eye to have optimized acuity for distance vision.

P.S.

*** Some folks don't like mentioning firearms/scopes to anyone they don't want to. In that case, say that the dominant eye is what you aim with for archery.

 

[Uncle Slayton]

thumper