I think it comes down to understanding whether you are using iron sights as an angle measurement device or an angle reference device.
Under ideal circumstances you can do good work either way, with practice. Under less than ideal circumstances (lighting, heart rate, hand fatigue, speed required) you need to know which one to use and when.
For those of you who shoot with a target focus and iron sights, do you look over the sights or through them while relying on the imposition of the sights from your dominant eye onto the target seen by your non-dominant eye? I must be very dominant to one eye because I’m finding it difficult to see the target when my sights are aligned at eye level (same for a dot - it’s hard to see the target and I instead see the window despite not focusing on it). Wondering if anyone else has this problem…
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If I understand your question, the answer is through the sights. My alignment is exactly as for a front-sight focus. Sights aligned, with POA at the top edge of the front sight.Originally Posted by ER_STL
Target focus can take time to get used to. Using a target with some detailed features may help. A blank brown target is harder to focus on at first.
“There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
"You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
For me (and I suspect this is true for most others) nothing changes about sight position or alignment with regard to my dominant eye. It's only what distance my eyes are focused. Nothing else moves.
The only way I can force an experience that sounds anything like you describe is if I:
1) Aim with my non-dominant (left) eye while squinting my dominant (right) eye to force a perceptual change in eye dominance
2) Slowly open my normally dominant (right) eye while concentrating hard to keep my new (left) inverted perceptual dominance.
3) Change my focus from sights to target and back
This can induce some really funky visual phenomena that my brain doesn't process well. I'm not sure if it's the same as you're describing, but it's as close as I can get. I feel like it strains my eyes.
I doubt that will be of any help to you!
One thing you could try: stand in a relatively dark area and aim out into a brighter target area. This may help your vision lock onto target focus while looking through the very dimly illuminated sights. It may take a while before your brain learns to process visual information in a new way.
I realize this thread was last topped over two years ago, but it seems to be the best place to put this observation after my recent eye surgery.
I'm 65, and have been terribly nearsighted all my life. Last fall I was diagnosed with cataracts that were approaching cloudiness, so I opted to have both mine done a few months ago. Due to my situation, I had to go with lenses that give good sharp focus at distance, but I have to wear readers (+2) for reading or close in computer work. I'm fine with computer monitor distance.
The surgery was a success, much more so than I had thought, in that my eyesight is now razor sharp at distance. I mean, it's really good. However, seeing the front sight just isn't an option any more. Yesterday I took my Springfield Garrison 5" .45 ACP and Ruger 22/45 to the range to see how things went. The Garrison has a 10 8 rear and I've modified the stock front to drill out the white paint circle with some more or less orange paint. The Ruger has the stock front, painted with two coats of Testor's enamel white. So, pretty basic iron sights.
I set out targets at 7 and 15 yards, and proceeded to bang out a couple mags each. I focused on the target, which I could see very clearly. The front sight, not so much. I saw a colored blob approximately where the front was, and a bit of the rear window. So basically I was aligning the sight on the target by my index, as well as placing the gun up/down left/right based on seeing the blob kinda sorta in the rear aperture in my peripheral vision. I then tried to do my best trigger press, with a strong support hand grip and decent (ok, for me) trigger control.
The results are below. The Garrison first, at 15 yards, one mag of 8x Federal HST 230 (my SD ammo), and below that, 10 rounds of Armscor standard velocity ammo I was trying out in my 22/45.
I was mildly surprised that despite only seeing a blob for the sights, I was able to put most rounds on paper, albeit with my typical low and away pattern (I am left handed, and have to continually correct myself from doing that).
Obviously by PF standards this isn't great shooting, but I wanted to post this to give context to the question I have:
Would this rule out ever using an optic? It seems to me an optic is, well, target focused. So would I not be able to see the target and the dot focused at infinity if I put a MRDS back on my pistol(s)? That being the case, I'm inclined to go ahead and dip my toe back in the optic world, probably with a Romeo X compact RMSc footprint for my P365X, my primary carry gun. Thoughts?
An reflex-type optic should give you a focused dot while your eyes are focused on the target at any distance.
“There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
"You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
Thanks CF, I was thinking maybe I was missing the obvious, but that’s how I saw it as well.
Ok, off to shop for optics.
An optic would be great, it would just super impose a red circle on targets. Issues with dots are their own thing saved for a different time. With that side a fiber optic front would give you a caveman effect. Growing red or green dot in the blur that you super impose over the target and bang away. I'm currently testing the two and will post my thoughts. A red dot gives you a lot more feed back on whats going on compared to target focused irons. How much that matters, idk. They both work and work well. One draw back for a rds, for me, is loss of concealment. A rds prints when irons won't, on me. So that may mean I don't bother with a rds.I realize this thread was last topped over two years ago, but it seems to be the best place to put this observation after my recent eye surgery.
I'm 65, and have been terribly nearsighted all my life. Last fall I was diagnosed with cataracts that were approaching cloudiness, so I opted to have both mine done a few months ago. Due to my situation, I had to go with lenses that give good sharp focus at distance, but I have to wear readers (+2) for reading or close in computer work. I'm fine with computer monitor distance.
The surgery was a success, much more so than I had thought, in that my eyesight is now razor sharp at distance. I mean, it's really good. However, seeing the front sight just isn't an option any more. Yesterday I took my Springfield Garrison 5" .45 ACP and Ruger 22/45 to the range to see how things went. The Garrison has a 10 8 rear and I've modified the stock front to drill out the white paint circle with some more or less orange paint. The Ruger has the stock front, painted with two coats of Testor's enamel white. So, pretty basic iron sights.
I set out targets at 7 and 15 yards, and proceeded to bang out a couple mags each. I focused on the target, which I could see very clearly. The front sight, not so much. I saw a colored blob approximately where the front was, and a bit of the rear window. So basically I was aligning the sight on the target by my index, as well as placing the gun up/down left/right based on seeing the blob kinda sorta in the rear aperture in my peripheral vision. I then tried to do my best trigger press, with a strong support hand grip and decent (ok, for me) trigger control.
The results are below. The Garrison first, at 15 yards, one mag of 8x Federal HST 230 (my SD ammo), and below that, 10 rounds of Armscor standard velocity ammo I was trying out in my 22/45.
I was mildly surprised that despite only seeing a blob for the sights, I was able to put most rounds on paper, albeit with my typical low and away pattern (I am left handed, and have to continually correct myself from doing that).
Obviously by PF standards this isn't great shooting, but I wanted to post this to give context to the question I have:
Would this rule out ever using an optic? It seems to me an optic is, well, target focused. So would I not be able to see the target and the dot focused at infinity if I put a MRDS back on my pistol(s)? That being the case, I'm inclined to go ahead and dip my toe back in the optic world, probably with a Romeo X compact RMSc footprint for my P365X, my primary carry gun. Thoughts?
Laser beams are kinda magic, aren’t they?Thanks CF, I was thinking maybe I was missing the obvious, but that’s how I saw it as well.
Ok, off to shop for optics.
What gun will you use? Maybe the PF hive mind can steer you towards an easy solution
“There is no growth in the comfort zone.”--Jocko Willink
"You can never have too many knives." --Joe Ambercrombie
Most likely a Romeo X Compact for my P365X or Macro Tacops. After having multiple 507c's, a couple K series and a EPS Carry last year I'm ready to try the Sig offering.
Reply With Quote