I know the following has been covered in part by previous posts but hope you will bear with me.
My principal interest is small-bore prone but I also do some fullbore target and have recently acquired an FWB 90 for internal practice and sheer enjoyment.
I have experimented for the last couple of years with ordinary specs, contact lenses, diopters, eagle eyes, endless permutations of aperture size etc – and still feel that one of my major difficulties is in obtaining a really good sight picture.
I am seriously old with some astigmatism but near sight is fairly good (glasses not needed for reading), far sight has not been good since my teens (cant read a car number plate at 25 yds) but glasses prescription has not changed greatly.
I have been reluctant to try shooting glasses (expense and perceived discomfort) but the approach of Christmas and an e-bay sale has set me looking at what is on the market. It is difficult to judge which are best but for price and flexibility I am tempted by the latest Varga offering.
On the basis that the rifle foresight is 34” from eyeball, pistol has rearsight at 24” and foresight at 38” and realistically I am not likely to be getting into any record books:-
1. Should I just stick with what I have and save the cash or?
2. Go for a set of Varga (or other – I wont go top drawer)
3. If the latter:-
a)will I need two prescriptions – for rifle and for pistol
b)23mm or 37mm lens holders – or both – overkill!
4. With regard to the pistol (least important) – I understand that foresight focus is paramount but, as I can’t clearly focus both would an in-between focal length of 34” (i.e. that for the rifle) suffice?
5. Any special directions i should give to the optician (who is unlikely to be a 'shooting' man?
Any and all comments/advice gratefully received
John
Glasses for sb prone and pistol target practice – help
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
-
Telecomtodd
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:15 pm
- Location: Saint Charles, MO
I use a pair of Jaggi frames from Champion Shooters. The lens is single vision (as you would hope) and I don't have astigmatism or anything else going on. I've had two lenses put in the monocle as my prescription changed this year. My only gripe is that occassionally light oil from my rifle bolt bolt splashes a little dot on the lens right where I want to see, and I have to clean them. They aren't comfortable, but they really help me shoot.
-
Shooting Kiwi
- Posts: 321
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:33 am
- Location: New Zealand
I sympathise - I've been there (and back again...)
The critical problem is that, when shooting prone rifle and pistol, your head position is so different. Although shooting frames can accommodate the radically different required lens positions, setting up the frames each time you change discipline is far too much trouble and prone to error. So you end up with two sets of frames and two lenses, thus twice the considerable expense.
Almost certainly, you'll need a different prescription for each discipline. Your optometrist needs to understand that you need to focus perfectly at each distance you have identified.
Daily-use, disposable contact lenses are so cheap that optometrists have free trial samples. If you can't persuade your optometrist to 'lend' you a selection, change optometrists. OK, contacts may not be ideal if you are very astigmatic, although moderate astigmatism is often corrected by contacts. Also, folk will tell you that contacts can move about on your eye and this is a particular risk in the prone position. This is undoubtedly true, but my (and plenty of others') experience is that it isn't a problem. I guess you need to try it yourself.
So, in conclusion, give contacts a go before taking out a mortgage on two pairs of shooting frames.
The critical problem is that, when shooting prone rifle and pistol, your head position is so different. Although shooting frames can accommodate the radically different required lens positions, setting up the frames each time you change discipline is far too much trouble and prone to error. So you end up with two sets of frames and two lenses, thus twice the considerable expense.
Almost certainly, you'll need a different prescription for each discipline. Your optometrist needs to understand that you need to focus perfectly at each distance you have identified.
Daily-use, disposable contact lenses are so cheap that optometrists have free trial samples. If you can't persuade your optometrist to 'lend' you a selection, change optometrists. OK, contacts may not be ideal if you are very astigmatic, although moderate astigmatism is often corrected by contacts. Also, folk will tell you that contacts can move about on your eye and this is a particular risk in the prone position. This is undoubtedly true, but my (and plenty of others') experience is that it isn't a problem. I guess you need to try it yourself.
So, in conclusion, give contacts a go before taking out a mortgage on two pairs of shooting frames.
You need 2 different sets of frames to do the 2 different events. In which case obviously get the lenses for each. That said in reality it's likely the same lense will work at both distances, they are not that far apart. It's practically impossible to switch the glasses around and get the lenses in the right orientation each time, and you'd end up spending a lot of time each session fiddling with the glasses.
Rob.
Rob.
-
Guest
Az-speed - I cant raise your link!
I think for the present i will persevere with my adjustable rearsight diopter for the rifle but I can get disposable contact lenses fairly cheaply in small quantities and will try experimenting with increased value prescriptions.
As for the pistol i purchased a plus 1.0 pair of cheapo reading glasses to drop over my standard glasses yesterday and the improvement in sight picture was huge. I know this isnt an ideal solution for a number of reasons but it will enable me to run tests without great expense.
Thanks all for your input.
John
I think for the present i will persevere with my adjustable rearsight diopter for the rifle but I can get disposable contact lenses fairly cheaply in small quantities and will try experimenting with increased value prescriptions.
As for the pistol i purchased a plus 1.0 pair of cheapo reading glasses to drop over my standard glasses yesterday and the improvement in sight picture was huge. I know this isnt an ideal solution for a number of reasons but it will enable me to run tests without great expense.
Thanks all for your input.
John
This is probably not what you would like to hear, but:
I'm 63, legally blind for driving purposes without my glasses in most U.S. states, and profoundly astigmatic in my master (shooting) eye. But, I have the Distinguished Rifleman and Distinguished Pistol Shot bages, President's Hundred Tabs with service rifle and pistol, and I shot on two winning National Trophy (Dogs of War) teams.
I use three sets of shooting glasses; all in Junker frames. One set is for pistol, one set for short range rifle, and one set for long range rifle. All are set up to locate the center of the prescription at the location on the lens that I'm looking through when I'm in position. As you pointed out, the length from your eye to the front sight is different with all the arms that you shoot, as is the distance to the target. What you need are lenses which are cut to give you perfect clarity on the front sight for each arm, and reaonable clarity (fuzzy black blob) on the target and number boards. Some distances require compromise, since it does no good to have the perfect front sight picture if you can't read the number boards at 600 or 1,000 yards.
I've used Alan Toler, an eye doctor in Richmond, Virginia, USA, for 15 years. He keeps my old eyes shooting at a high level of performance.
While you probably can't fly over from England for an exam, I would recommend his web sight [ customsightpicture.com ] for some ideas of what can be done with one's eyes with the assistance of a knowledgeable eye doctor. Glasses that are perfectly adequate for driving/reading are not adequate for shooting with older eyes.
Regards,
Don
I'm 63, legally blind for driving purposes without my glasses in most U.S. states, and profoundly astigmatic in my master (shooting) eye. But, I have the Distinguished Rifleman and Distinguished Pistol Shot bages, President's Hundred Tabs with service rifle and pistol, and I shot on two winning National Trophy (Dogs of War) teams.
I use three sets of shooting glasses; all in Junker frames. One set is for pistol, one set for short range rifle, and one set for long range rifle. All are set up to locate the center of the prescription at the location on the lens that I'm looking through when I'm in position. As you pointed out, the length from your eye to the front sight is different with all the arms that you shoot, as is the distance to the target. What you need are lenses which are cut to give you perfect clarity on the front sight for each arm, and reaonable clarity (fuzzy black blob) on the target and number boards. Some distances require compromise, since it does no good to have the perfect front sight picture if you can't read the number boards at 600 or 1,000 yards.
I've used Alan Toler, an eye doctor in Richmond, Virginia, USA, for 15 years. He keeps my old eyes shooting at a high level of performance.
While you probably can't fly over from England for an exam, I would recommend his web sight [ customsightpicture.com ] for some ideas of what can be done with one's eyes with the assistance of a knowledgeable eye doctor. Glasses that are perfectly adequate for driving/reading are not adequate for shooting with older eyes.
Regards,
Don
-
Guest
Thanks Don
I'll happily hear anything that helps me along the way.
A further thought occured whilst having a smoke in the cold and wintery night.
For pistol, as its just for enjoyment, i'll run trial and error as above for a while.
For rifle my problem with contact lens might boil down to the fact that I have been using my normal prescription contacts, which are to improve distance sight. If I get some contacts set for rifle foresight focal length I should still have a moderately clear target view - ?
If this does work it does away with the inconvenience/expense/misting etc of glasses.
A further possibility would be the use of an eagleeye in the foresight - or is this producing a 'scope' - and illegal?
John
I'll happily hear anything that helps me along the way.
A further thought occured whilst having a smoke in the cold and wintery night.
For pistol, as its just for enjoyment, i'll run trial and error as above for a while.
For rifle my problem with contact lens might boil down to the fact that I have been using my normal prescription contacts, which are to improve distance sight. If I get some contacts set for rifle foresight focal length I should still have a moderately clear target view - ?
If this does work it does away with the inconvenience/expense/misting etc of glasses.
A further possibility would be the use of an eagleeye in the foresight - or is this producing a 'scope' - and illegal?
John
John
I'm afraid Rob is right, you can make do with one pair but thats all it would be, a comprimise, and probably not a good one, not very good at either disciplines. Your are best with two pairs and different prescriptions.
For rifle there are various trains of thought but I use an exact long distance prescription having tried the other options (0.25 diopter plus or minus depending on your prescription). I use a Varga 3000 frame with small lens holder. I tried the Varga 3000 prone frame with the offset bridge and holder but found it too fiddly and wobly.
For pistol I use a lens prescription set at the focal length of my foresight when on aim in a Varga 3000 with the bigger lens holder. I could switch holders in one frame, but it is a fiddly job getting the lens and bridge correct for each discipline. A cheaper option for pistol is to get a cheap off the shelf pair of reading glasses which if you are lucky will focus on the fore sight, go try some.
Where are you in the UK? There are various shooting savvy opticians about, we have a good one in Norwich, and there is Sewards at Bisley, and one I don't know the name of in Bristol.
Good Shooting
Robin
I'm afraid Rob is right, you can make do with one pair but thats all it would be, a comprimise, and probably not a good one, not very good at either disciplines. Your are best with two pairs and different prescriptions.
For rifle there are various trains of thought but I use an exact long distance prescription having tried the other options (0.25 diopter plus or minus depending on your prescription). I use a Varga 3000 frame with small lens holder. I tried the Varga 3000 prone frame with the offset bridge and holder but found it too fiddly and wobly.
For pistol I use a lens prescription set at the focal length of my foresight when on aim in a Varga 3000 with the bigger lens holder. I could switch holders in one frame, but it is a fiddly job getting the lens and bridge correct for each discipline. A cheaper option for pistol is to get a cheap off the shelf pair of reading glasses which if you are lucky will focus on the fore sight, go try some.
Where are you in the UK? There are various shooting savvy opticians about, we have a good one in Norwich, and there is Sewards at Bisley, and one I don't know the name of in Bristol.
Good Shooting
Robin
Thanks for latest comments.
As both glasses and contact lens prescriptions were several years old I went to my opticians (Boots in Brighton) and explained the problem, with measurements, to the opthamologist.
The girl was excellent and I ended up with a normal prescription for the spectacles and a contact lens prescription comprising a non-shooting left eye enabling reasonable distance sight (ie the target and range) and a shooting right eye giving a sharp foresight ring focus with a somewhat less clear bull.
I came away with 5day sample lens and the instruction to wear them and see how they coped with trial use.
I suspect I might be fortunate in that my eyes are not greatly defective and initial impressions give me pretty good long sight and reasonable nearsight with a clearest focus at about 36 inches. I have been told (non-expert advice) that the brain does a good job of optimising slightly different pictures from the two eyes. Certainly I am pretty impressed.
Shooting opportunities have been limited but I am getting a much bettter sight picture with the pistol and with a .3 diopter eagle-eye a much better picture with the rifle (albeit only at 25yds so far! - haven't tried it without the eagle-eye!).
I have to go back on Wednesday and report.
Any comments gratefully received.
TIA
John
As both glasses and contact lens prescriptions were several years old I went to my opticians (Boots in Brighton) and explained the problem, with measurements, to the opthamologist.
The girl was excellent and I ended up with a normal prescription for the spectacles and a contact lens prescription comprising a non-shooting left eye enabling reasonable distance sight (ie the target and range) and a shooting right eye giving a sharp foresight ring focus with a somewhat less clear bull.
I came away with 5day sample lens and the instruction to wear them and see how they coped with trial use.
I suspect I might be fortunate in that my eyes are not greatly defective and initial impressions give me pretty good long sight and reasonable nearsight with a clearest focus at about 36 inches. I have been told (non-expert advice) that the brain does a good job of optimising slightly different pictures from the two eyes. Certainly I am pretty impressed.
Shooting opportunities have been limited but I am getting a much bettter sight picture with the pistol and with a .3 diopter eagle-eye a much better picture with the rifle (albeit only at 25yds so far! - haven't tried it without the eagle-eye!).
I have to go back on Wednesday and report.
Any comments gratefully received.
TIA
John
-
Steve H
Shooting & Vision Corrections
To Gnr527 (John):
I am interested to hear how the sample contacts worked out for you on the range. Being a shooter myself, I feel your frustration. It is difficult to deal with aging vision, especially to think I once I had near perfect vision- I didn’t appreciate it back then. I work for a company who commonly deals with shooters and aging vision and thought that you might find this site helpful. http://shoot.superfocus.com/
I am interested to hear how the sample contacts worked out for you on the range. Being a shooter myself, I feel your frustration. It is difficult to deal with aging vision, especially to think I once I had near perfect vision- I didn’t appreciate it back then. I work for a company who commonly deals with shooters and aging vision and thought that you might find this site helpful. http://shoot.superfocus.com/
Steve - I looked a little further into the site you and Az-Speed gave and also dug a bit into presbyopia - interesting - it would seem that contact lens practitioners do, where warranted, fit long and short sighted lens together.
The festivities and lousy weather have restricted shooting opportunities but I will provide an update as soon as i can.
Regards
John
The festivities and lousy weather have restricted shooting opportunities but I will provide an update as soon as i can.
Regards
John
-
enricovolante
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:15 am
- Location: Switzerland
Update
Shot yesterday at 25m and 100m using the latest prescription contact lens (shooting right eye with slight astigmatism prescribed to focus on the foresight - normal distance prescription left eye) and a 0.3 diopter eagle-eye in the foresight.
Initial impressions:-
1. I put the contacts in for the morning and my general (both eyes open) sight experience actually was an improvement over normal glasses in that, whilst distance vision was not quite as good, near vision enabled me to read newsprint (albeit I had to hold the paper at about 24 inches ( i have to remove glasses to read).
2. 25m shooting - foresight in sharp focus, bull and rearsight aperture possibly less clearly defined than i am used to - but much more comfortable, with fewer variables than with previous alternatives.
3. 100m shooting - foresight, bull, both in sharper focus than usual and rear aperture (with a filter) also sharper.
I havnt worn the differing contacts for more than about 4 hours but didnt feel on 'pull' or strain on the eyes. In any event I am unlikely to use them as a general alternative to my normal glasses.
I realise the odd swallow doesnt mean much but my overall impression is that they are well worth further experimentation and might even enable me to move on to addressing other shooting faults.
Regards
John
Shot yesterday at 25m and 100m using the latest prescription contact lens (shooting right eye with slight astigmatism prescribed to focus on the foresight - normal distance prescription left eye) and a 0.3 diopter eagle-eye in the foresight.
Initial impressions:-
1. I put the contacts in for the morning and my general (both eyes open) sight experience actually was an improvement over normal glasses in that, whilst distance vision was not quite as good, near vision enabled me to read newsprint (albeit I had to hold the paper at about 24 inches ( i have to remove glasses to read).
2. 25m shooting - foresight in sharp focus, bull and rearsight aperture possibly less clearly defined than i am used to - but much more comfortable, with fewer variables than with previous alternatives.
3. 100m shooting - foresight, bull, both in sharper focus than usual and rear aperture (with a filter) also sharper.
I havnt worn the differing contacts for more than about 4 hours but didnt feel on 'pull' or strain on the eyes. In any event I am unlikely to use them as a general alternative to my normal glasses.
I realise the odd swallow doesnt mean much but my overall impression is that they are well worth further experimentation and might even enable me to move on to addressing other shooting faults.
Regards
John
-
Kim P
Varga 3000..any good? opticians near suffolk/norfolk?
I have got to the point where both regular glasses and contacts are restricting my shooting and so Im looking in getting some shooting specs for Full Bore. Any good recomendations? I have been suggested Varga.
Also I live in Suffolk, Ive heard there could be an opticians in Norwich that are good but I dont know what they are called.
Help would be amazing!!
Also I live in Suffolk, Ive heard there could be an opticians in Norwich that are good but I dont know what they are called.
Help would be amazing!!
I recently started shooting pistol and thought I still had perfect vision until I was having some sight issues and tried a lens. I looked at several different frames and was willing to pay whatever it cost to help me shoot better. Instead of the $400 frames, I ended up buying the Vargas for approx $115us from ISS. I didnt see any real difference between those or the 175, 300, or $400 frames. The Vargas came with a blinder, lens holder and case for that price. It cost me another $40 for the lens but Champions has them for $20. The in store help was worth the extra $20 and I prefer by support the local shop.
Besides the adjustable rear iris for $70, this was the best investment in shooting gear I have made thus far and some of the least expensive. If you can't see your sights or the target, you will never be able to hit it.
Besides the adjustable rear iris for $70, this was the best investment in shooting gear I have made thus far and some of the least expensive. If you can't see your sights or the target, you will never be able to hit it.
Re: Varga 3000..any good? opticians near suffolk/norfolk?
RobinC is from your neck of the woods so try asking him. Failing that I can ask for you of some of my shooting friends also in Suffolk.Kim P wrote:I have got to the point where both regular glasses and contacts are restricting my shooting and so Im looking in getting some shooting specs for Full Bore. Any good recomendations? I have been suggested Varga.
Also I live in Suffolk, Ive heard there could be an opticians in Norwich that are good but I dont know what they are called.
Help would be amazing!!
Most frames are similar, I suggest you try before you buy as some are more or less comfortable and that's probably the key point. I personally have champions but did have a pair of Gehmans before that.
Rob.