TargetTalk

I was watching the latest World Cup air pistol event last night on the ISSF You Tube channel. I noticed that several shooters, rather than using Varga or similar frames, were using a regular pair of glasses with a flip up (or down) blinder over their non-dominant eye. I'm assuming that the dominant eye lens was prescription with the focal point on the front sight.

I had my eyes examined a month ago and will have my focal length to front sight prescription on Monday. At Walmart, I can have this prescription put into a basic plastic frame costing <$20. The lens, Nikon with scratch resistant coating will cost <$50 for my dominant eye. The non-dominant eye will have a plain plastic lens costing nothing. A flip blinder runs maybe $25 with shipping. Total cost is <$95.

The least expensive shooting dedicated frames I can find online run $125. Add to that the cost of a prescription lens and maybe a blinder-------the price is close to double+ compared to the Walmart approach.

Question: Am I missing something here of major importance? I understand that shooting specific frames will allow for lens adjustments that can't be done with regular frames. However, for my non-Olympic, aging eyes and body, it seems the Walmart approach is likely decent and cost effective. Thoughts?

Thanks in advance.

I don't think you're missing a thing. Heck, use a slice of Scotch Tape and forget the flip-up blinder, save the $25.

. . . or save a few more pennies and use DUCT TAPE - right on your eye!

Seriously, I just "upgraded" from $6 drugstore glasses to Olympic Champion. Findings:
1. The sport-specific glasses will allow to perfectly align your lens orthogonal to your target. Regular glasses you are looking slant-wise thru the lens, not lens-flat-to-target.
2. The lens on Olympic frames is further from the eye than with readers (thus, changing focal length; thus, altering necessary prescription)
3. Blinder on sport-specific less intrusive to peripheral vision (my opinion)
4. However - downside with sport-specific: Expense of lenses. (I'm waiting on a +3.25 lens, for the "old blind guy w/ bad attitude" division)

Depending on budget and commitment to sport, I'd HIGHLY recommend sport-specific frames. Basically: Spending $200+ on an optical device made in Switzerland (to go with your $2,000 gun); or go with duct-tape and drug store glasses for that retro-look & results.

Results will vary by shooter and by opinion.

Also, Champion frames are FINALLY available again at Champion's Choice:
http://www.champchoice.com/store/Main.a ... em=5020125

I got my glasses from shooting sight.com
Basic black square $60.00
As for flip up blinder
Check champions choice
They're about $10

-TT- wrote:I don't think you're missing a thing. Heck, use a slice of Scotch Tape and forget the flip-up blinder, save the $25.

A year or so ago there was a male shooter at a world cup final in 10 meter air pistol who did not have glasses of any kind, BUT, he did have an blinder over his non-shooting eye made of cardboard hung on a piece of masking tape from his forehead. It seemed to work ok for him.

atomicgale wrote:. . . or save a few more pennies and use DUCT TAPE - right on your eye!

Seriously, I just "upgraded" from $6 drugstore glasses to Olympic Champion. Findings:
1. The sport-specific glasses will allow to perfectly align your lens orthogonal to your target. Regular glasses you are looking slant-wise thru the lens, not lens-flat-to-target.
2. The lens on Olympic frames is further from the eye than with readers (thus, changing focal length; thus, altering necessary prescription)
3. Blinder on sport-specific less intrusive to peripheral vision (my opinion)
4. However - downside with sport-specific: Expense of lenses. (I'm waiting on a +3.25 lens, for the "old blind guy w/ bad attitude" division)

Depending on budget and commitment to sport, I'd HIGHLY recommend sport-specific frames. Basically: Spending $200+ on an optical device made in Switzerland (to go with your $2,000 gun); or go with duct-tape and drug store glasses for that retro-look & results.

Results will vary by shooter and by opinion.

Also, Champion frames are FINALLY available again at Champion's Choice:
http://www.champchoice.com/store/Main.a ... em=5020125

Well........I suspect that the slant is likely caused by head position. In my case, I still have the strength and flexibility in my neck to get good alignment. It's my aging lower back and past bicycle racing injuries (fractured pelvis being the worst of them) that cause residual pain problems.

Whether the lens is where a regular lens sits or a bit off from that toward the front sight, the focal point for each lens will have to be specific to that focal distance.

By drug store glasses I assume you're referring to reading glasses at some power. The problem with glasses such as those is that the focal length runs out to a max of only about 16 inches, IIRC. My length from eye to front sight is about 40 1/4 inches.

My Benelli Kite and Baikel didn't cost me near $2K compbined. I doubt that a Styer or Morini would improve my scores. At my advanced age, 68, I don't think I have much of a shooting career to consider. Still I'd like to see improvement. My personal best from four years ago was 551. I'd be thrilled to break 560 in this lifetime.

I'll let you all know how the less expensive option works. That said, my fun expenditure this summer will likely be a Boyds stock for my 300 meter .223 Rem rifle. Good shooting to you and everyone. :-)

I had the same decision to make, so I got a prescription for "computer" progressive glasses that will focus from about 1 1/2' to infinity. Had 'em made at Wally-World and they work great. Also, while you are there, buy some of their $8 clip-on, flip-up sunshade lenses, and experiment with different sized holes cut into the dominant eye, take the the dominant eye lens off, and/or just tape over the non dominant eye for a blinder.

To begin with, and befgore you waste $50 on a lens you will scrap, you DO NOT want to focus on the front sight. I know shooters say 'focus on the front sight', but they do not mean it literally, they mean 'concentrate' on the front sight. If you run the optical math and calculate the perfect lens to see the front sight, which is what the doctor will do, you will find the target to be so impossibly blurry that you cannot use it.

What you really want is to focus at a point photographers refer to as the hyperfocal distance of the sight, a point 2x as far away as the sight. This will take your eye's natural depth of field, and center it between the sight and the target, so you can focus on both at the same time. For rifles, this works out to +0.5 diopter added to any distance vision correction needs you have, for pistol (where I run the math based on the rear sight distance), it works to +0.75 added for iron sights.

For blinders, clear tape is or a piece of a plastic milk jug is best - you want translucense. Your two eyes will dilate sympathetically, so if your blinded eye has an opaque blinder, the darkness will cause both eyes to dilate, which will rob you of depth of field.

What about masking tape?

Nothing opaque. You want the same amount of light going into each eye. A piece of frosted tape works great. To make it easy to remove, fold over a 5 mm bit on one end to form a handle. You only need a piece big enough to block the double image of the sight & target. 15mm square is plenty once you find the right spot for it. This also allows you to look below the tape to see what you are doing (like loading) on the bench.

You do NOT want to cover the whole lens. You balance relies somewhat on peripheral vision. I had one beginning shooter who ignored my advice about keeping the tape to a minimum. He covered the lens on his wrap around safety glasses, and it made him dizzy. As soon as he started covering a much smaller area, he was fine.

What about trying these ?

https://www.eyejusters.com/

Leon wrote:What about trying these ?

https://www.eyejusters.com/

Load of rubbish - don’t be conned (I’ve taken one for the team!)

I tried a different brand of adjustable glasses, and wasn't impressed. Because my head isn't looking squarely at the target, I end up looking through the lenses at an angle, and I couldn't get a clear focus with a comfortable head position. The region of clear vision is pretty small compared to a regular pair of glasses.

top end wrote:

Leon wrote:What about trying these ?

https://www.eyejusters.com/

Load of rubbish - don’t be conned (I’ve taken one for the team!)

Oh - I was an early adopter and purchased a set when they first came out. I use them occasionally.

Why was your experience of them negative? Just curious...

The field of view where focus is good is limited.

Besides, you don't really need adjustability. Since we understand the math to specify a correct lens - do that. Once the lens is correct, you don't need adjustability, as all targets are at optical infinity.

For what it's worth.... Bob Jones Sights in AZ, makes EXCELLENT shooting glasses and lenses at a very respectable price. I highly recommend him. web site is www.bjonessights.com Go take a look !! He is a shooter, understands the issues associated with shooting, and is a very good source of information.

Agreed. BJones glasses can be had - with two custom lenses - for under $100.

A year or so ago there was a male shooter at a world cup final in 10 meter air pistol who did not have glasses of any kind, BUT, he did have an blinder over his non-shooting eye made of cardboard hung on a piece of masking tape from his forehead. It seemed to work ok for him.

Now I’ve heard everything !

I've seen LOTS of good shooters over the years that do things "wrong". If you study some of the pictures in the MEC book, you can find a few examples. A lot of the stuff people fuss over may make it easier to shoot well, but with natural talent and lots of practice, it is not required.

As an example, most shooters agree that adjusting their feet for a "natural point of aim" (NPOA) is important. With many aspects of shooting, nobody can tell you just HOW important it is. My NPOA is with my body about 45 degrees from the line to the target. I've experimented and shot at both 0 and 90 degrees. They both felt really weird, but as best I could tell, my scores were unaffected. It took more concentration to shoot away from my NPOA, but it's not like everything went to hell. I see some shooters spend half their prep time getting their NPOA JUST right, when I suspect they'd be better off getting it "good enough" quickly and doing a bit more dry firing or mental prep.

40xguy wrote:For what it's worth.... Bob Jones Sights in AZ, makes EXCELLENT shooting glasses and lenses at a very respectable price. I highly recommend him. web site is http://www.bjonessights.com Go take a look !! He is a shooter, understands the issues associated with shooting, and is a very good source of information.

His products might be worth the recommendation, but without a recommendation, that website is atrocious and doesn't inspire confidence.