TargetTalk

http://www.skanaker.se/eng/glas/Function.html

Any one used this shooting glasses before?

I think the frame is on a magnetic rail, can be move to as close to eyes or further away. So if I have +0.5 lens, move it away would become +0.75.

It could also be clip up, makes examine score card up close easier.

I've seen them and to be honest I don't think they're a good idea. It's going to be very difficult getting the lenses aligned in exactly the same position all the time. And I fail to see why glasses are problem anyway.

Rob.

Are these designed for prescription or non prescription lenses?

Ragnard showed up two years ago at the SHOT show, I hope he makes it this year. Maybe he'll be promoting his glasses.

I don't see the benefit, and I see a lot of negatives.

1. These are not safety glasses.
2. These do not come with the diopter correction that is critical to shooting.
3. These do not appear to swivel, so you can position the lens to be perpendicular to your line of sight, which can be almost a significant tilt to the side in prone.
4. Cost is not mentioned, but coming from Sweden, and looking expensive.
5. All he is advertising is yellow lenses, well shucks, I can order any lens with a yellow tint for about a $5 premium, so he is not offering anything a regular lens is not.

ShootingSight wrote:I don't see the benefit, and I see a lot of negatives.

1. These are not safety glasses.
2. These do not come with the diopter correction that is critical to shooting.
3. These do not appear to swivel, so you can position the lens to be perpendicular to your line of sight, which can be almost a significant tilt to the side in prone.
4. Cost is not mentioned, but coming from Sweden, and looking expensive.
5. All he is advertising is yellow lenses, well shucks, I can order any lens with a yellow tint for about a $5 premium, so he is not offering anything a regular lens is not.

A diopter is anything but critical in shooting. There's a reason why you see almost no top shooters using them. I don't disagree on the overall concept though, which to me is also pointless.

Rob.

Maybe we are using the term diopter differently, I mean it in the sense of a corrective lens. Most top rifle shooters I know use a corrective lens.

ShootingSight wrote:Maybe we are using the term diopter differently, I mean it in the sense of a corrective lens. Most top rifle shooters I know use a corrective lens.

Ah I thought you meant the variable aperture thing some pistol shooters use.

Rob.

Actually, on the variable aperture, I do not shoot much pistol, but I would love to know why they are not used more.

In rifle, all match rifles use variable iris rear sights, and I have not seen anything in the optical math that suggests why they are not used in pistol.

I'm going on the assumption that better focus is .. better. There is no justification that less focus is a good thing. I will admit that good focus is not the end-all. Constant focus is the end-all. So consistent bad focus you can learn to shoot with. But as long as you have constancy, consistent good is surely better than consistent bad, no?

My first reply got lost so a shorter version. Pistol shooting relies on area aim so absolute precision isn't as critical. Too big a depth of field leads to concentration being on the wrong thing - only the foresight needs to be in sharp focus. Also the iris distorts around the edges and cuts down a large amount of light. So all told, the benefits are outweighed by the downsides.

Rob.

RobStubbs wrote:My first reply got lost so a shorter version. Pistol shooting relies on area aim so absolute precision isn't as critical. Too big a depth of field leads to concentration being on the wrong thing - only the foresight needs to be in sharp focus. Also the iris distorts around the edges and cuts down a large amount of light. So all told, the benefits are outweighed by the downsides.

I totally agree.

One thing an iris is good for is, if you open it to 4-5mm, it tells you that your head is in the same position for each shot.

David Levene wrote:

RobStubbs wrote:My first reply got lost so a shorter version. Pistol shooting relies on area aim so absolute precision isn't as critical. Too big a depth of field leads to concentration being on the wrong thing - only the foresight needs to be in sharp focus. Also the iris distorts around the edges and cuts down a large amount of light. So all told, the benefits are outweighed by the downsides.

I totally agree.

One thing an iris is good for is, if you open it to 4-5mm, it tells you that your head is in the same position for each shot.

My view exactly

David Levene wrote: One thing an iris is good for is, if you open it to 4-5mm, it tells you that your head is in the same position for each shot.

That's one reason to use an iris, but you shouldn't be relying on an iris to tell you if your head position is right or not.

Rob.