Reply to Thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Josh-L" data-source="post: 772702" data-attributes="member: 219">CAR makes a point I think you are missing.&nbsp; It is technically by definition less FOV only when looking through the optic. But it really isn&#039;t.&nbsp; Stick with me...&nbsp; If the optic is zero magnification and is being used with both eyes open then it doesn&#039;t make sense that it would have a &quot;better&quot; FOV either way.&nbsp; At distance will you see less of the target inside the tube with it mounted further out?&nbsp; Yes and I guess that is technically FOV but really it&#039;s not because the size of the object hasn&#039;t changed it&#039;s just being blocked by the tube and controls on the outside of the optic.&nbsp; Make sense?&nbsp; Now to the comment about being faster....&nbsp; The further out you have it the faster the dot will appear in the tube and on target.&nbsp; Try it out if you don&#039;t believe me.&nbsp; So even if I sacrifice a tiny bit of so called FOV I&#039;d rather be on target and scoring hits faster.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Josh-L, post: 772702, member: 219"] CAR makes a point I think you are missing. It is technically by definition less FOV only when looking through the optic. But it really isn't. Stick with me... If the optic is zero magnification and is being used with both eyes open then it doesn't make sense that it would have a "better" FOV either way. At distance will you see less of the target inside the tube with it mounted further out? Yes and I guess that is technically FOV but really it's not because the size of the object hasn't changed it's just being blocked by the tube and controls on the outside of the optic. Make sense? Now to the comment about being faster.... The further out you have it the faster the dot will appear in the tube and on target. Try it out if you don't believe me. So even if I sacrifice a tiny bit of so called FOV I'd rather be on target and scoring hits faster. [/QUOTE]

Verification