Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Senior Member Doug_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    12,479

    Is your optic really parallax free?

    I've been doing a lot of reading trying to decide what optic to get. Probably going to buy used, perhaps new, and have it narrowed down to Aimpoint Pro, Eotech XPS2-0, or Trijicon MRO. The purpose is to replace irons on an AR for <100 shooting. I have a Leupold 3x9 on a QD mount for shooting groups. I've read lots of pro/cons for each one and am not looking to open up that can of worms here. Instead, I came across an extensive test of parallax that has disproven manufacturer claims of their optics being parallax free. Of course I would think most people take such a claim with a grain of salt, but as you will see below, perhaps those claims should have been taken with an entire salt shaker!

    The test is extensive and as such cannot be posted here in its entirety so I recommend going to the link and at least skimming through it https://www.greeneyetactical.com/201...ight-parallax/


    MANUFACTURER’S CLAIMS
    One of the most significant aspects of the test is the comparison of the observed results, compared to the specific manufacturer’s claims as to the parallax characteristics of the optics. It should be noted that it is not made clear what aspect of parallax the manufacturer refers to in their product data. As parallax is defined as the apparent change of position of an object, viewed upon two different angles– it could refer to (in the case of this test) as to red dot movement or the actual target (viewing area) movement:

    Aimpoint claims that the T-1 is a “1X (non-magnifying) parallax free optic” (Aimpoint, 2017), while the overall results showed an average deviation of 9.678492518 MOA from all distances and tests.

    Aimpoint claims that the T-2 is a “1X (non-magnifying) parallax free optic” (Aimpoint, 2017), however, the average deviation observed across all distances and tests was 4.5 MOA.

    Aimpoint claims that the Comp M2 is “Absence of parallax – No centering required” (Aimpoint, 2017), however, the average deviation observed across all distances and tests was 6.289849283 MOA.

    Aimpoint lists no parallax claims on their website, that could be found at the time of publication, about the Comp M4 or the PRO.

    Vortex claims that the StrikeFire II is “Parallax Free” (Vortex Optics, 2017), however, the average deviation observed across all distances and tests was 7.702254543 MOA.

    Vortex claims that the Razor is “Parallax free” (Vortex Optics, 2017), however, the average deviation observed across all distances and tests was 15.59702284 MOA.

    Trijicon claims the SRS is “PARALLAX-FREE” (Trijicon, 2017), however, the average deviation observed across all distances and tests was 16.26182102 MOA.

    Trijicon claims the MRO is “PARALLAX-FREE” (Trijicon, 2017), however, the average deviation observed across all distances and tests was 13.37388861 MOA.

    Leopold claims “The Leupold Carbine Optic (LCO) is parallax free” in an answer to the product questions (Service, 2017), however the average deviation observed across all distances and tests was 12.86041119 MOA.

    EOTech claims that their optic is subject to parallax error of up to 14 MOA (EoTech, 2017). This claim is made generally on their FAQ page, without being model specific, however, the averages of the models tested across all distances and tests were: 1.658588792 MOA for the EXPS 3.2, 1.723615393 MOA for the EXPS 3.0, and 3.400581317 for the 516.

    Burris claims that the Fast Fire 3 is “parallax free” (Burris Optics, 2017), however, users noted an average of 4.024137943 MOA of movement.
    At the time of this testing, we could find no public claims by Primary Arms as to the parallax characteristics of the optic tested.

    As we can see, there is a wide variance in what is claimed by the manufacturers and what is observed. All but Eotech, who over estimated error, failed to produce results that match the claims.
    Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times [#uc# you CCP!]

  2. The Following 2 Users Like This Post By Doug_M

    Swampdonkey (04-09-2018), VooDoo (04-09-2018)

  3. #2
    Canadian ForcesMember 6MT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    2,881
    Wow....that's a lot of effort to shoot under 100 yards. For me on my AR, I chose a 1-4x24 optic. A high quality one....a NF NXS. If there were parallax error on this optic (highly unlikely), then I guess my point of impact will have shifted a whole 1/4" at 100 yards. Not really much to concern oneself with (at 100 or less yards). YMMV.

    Good luck in your search.

  4. #3
    Senior Member Steve MKII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Victoria
    Posts
    621
    Yeah "parallax free" still has some parallax, no matter the optic. I have two MRO's and I would say they are a great optic. RDSC has them without a mount for $620. If you get the MRO make sure you get one with a serial number above 89000, as they changed the glass supplier and the new glass is much better. the older ones had had a little bit of fish eye and slight magnification. The new ones are much better. I just sold one of my MRO's with 39xxx serial number and bought a new one with a serial number above 89000. Even some just before 89000 might be ok as my other one is 83xxx and it has better glass. ADM QD makes a nice mount for them as well if you go with an MRO.

  5. #4
    Senior Member Steve MKII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Victoria
    Posts
    621
    Quote Originally Posted by 6MT View Post
    Wow....that's a lot of effort to shoot under 100 yards. For me on my AR, I chose a 1-4x24 optic. A high quality one....a NF NXS. If there were parallax error on this optic (highly unlikely), then I guess my point of impact will have shifted a whole 1/4" at 100 yards. Not really much to concern oneself with (at 100 or less yards). YMMV.

    Good luck in your search.
    LPV's have caught my attention lately. If the ATRS Modern Sporter gets NR status, Ill buy a set and try an LPV. heard great things about the steiner 1-4x and the meopta 1-4x. both under $1000. an LPV might be something to consider as well Doug

  6. #5
    Senior Member Doug_M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    12,479
    I’ve settled on an Eotech XPS2-0 (maybe the EXPS2-0). The primary purpose of the sight is for my son to learn shooting (really an introduction and hope to foster an interest). If he doesn’t get the best cheek weld behind the Eotech then he’ll still be on target. With all the others he’d off by quite a bit. Not an issue for most people except perhaps those in 3-gun shooting in weird positions. Myself I prefer shooting tight groups and will eventually put my 3-9x back on. But I’ve always wanted an Aimpoint or Eotech (just because) and I think the XPS will be easiest for my son to learn on. The 68 moa circle reticle is also a bonus. “Okay son, now put the circle over the pop bottle...”


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times [#uc# you CCP!]

Similar Threads

  1. Walther PPQ Q5 With or Without Optic?
    By mlj in forum Handguns
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-19-2017, 06:19 PM
  2. Parallax Tactical Now Available for Import into Canada
    By Marshall in forum Aztech Armory
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-27-2015, 05:19 PM
  3. 3 Gun rifle optic
    By Weekend Gunslingers in forum The Competitive Sports
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-30-2015, 05:07 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-25-2012, 04:18 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •