User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 2:58:14 PM EDT
I borrowed a ditigal camera and some of my friends ACOGS and here ya go.
If newarguy would let me have his TA31 then I'd take a pic thru it.  (upper was removed from rifle to take pics for safety and neighbor relations) I like the red better but thats just my preference. TA44R-4    If the photo server is still down go herephotos.yahoo.com/bc/frodawwg/lst?.dir=/Trijicon+reticles++ACOG&.src=ph&.view=t |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 2:59:13 PM EDT
[#1]
This is Forest's TA50-2
(sight not mounted on weapon)  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 3:00:50 PM EDT
[#2]
Ralf's TA01 4X32 (not NSN)
note lack of BAC This sights usefullness really is more apparent at dusk or dawn. (sight not mounted on weapon) 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 3:59:28 PM EDT
[#3]
Damn. Now those have to be the single best pics of the view through the ACOG I have seen.
None of the other picture attempts posted here have show the clarity of the sight picture before. Not to be too much of a PITA, I hope, but do you have a flattop available to show the front sight shadow as visible through a low-mounted 50-2? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 4:18:11 PM EDT
[#4]
GunSlingAR
Caught me just before the camera left. TA50-2 on 19S on flattop 14.5"   
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 4:26:19 PM EDT
[#5]
Great pics! Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 4:30:40 PM EDT
[#6]
awesome, thanks!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 4:57:13 PM EDT
[#7]
Sweet, thanks for the pics!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 8:27:25 PM EDT
[#8]
Great pics Fro. I'm thinking about buying a TA 44R-2 acog or a TA 45-2 acog for a shorty AR. I'm wanting a sight for CQB and shots to 200 yards. Would this work ok or should I look at some other model....maybe the TA 24 series. Any suggestions please.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 8:33:41 PM EDT
[#9]
HI,
FRO, you out did yourself those are fantastic pitures. I notice in one of them you almost got the cross hairs on your dog, Thanks for the PICs. Kev |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 8:34:12 PM EDT
[#10]
HI,
FRO, you out did yourself those are fantastic pitures. I notice in one of them you almost got the cross hairs on your dog, Thanks for the PICs. Kev |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 9:32:03 PM EDT
[#11]
Beautifull,
Thank you very much. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 9:40:33 PM EDT
[#12]
Thats really great man! I'd send you my TA31 if you could get a picture that good out of it! Did you eventually sell both yours? If not let me know which you have left. I really want a Comp ACOG, I just dont know which.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 10:24:30 PM EDT
[#13]
Those pics sweet. I don't suppose you ranged the distances in the pictures? I'm still debating which magnification ACOG to (back)order.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/3/2003 10:29:01 PM EDT
[#14]
Very nice pictures. Thank you for posting them. Watch-Six
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 7:48:57 AM EDT
[#15]
Here is a view thru my TA31. The Donut is actually Red, but it looks orange in the picture.
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 8:22:34 AM EDT
[#16]
oufree
There are more knowledgable people on this board for advise than me but I feel that the TA44 series needs magnification. I think a 2X sight would be just right for a 16" AR. That being said my wife prefers the TA44R-4 on a sporter lightweight. Its personal preference. new-arguy Yup they're spoken for, sorry. PowershipMC Cool pic, I like it[:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 10:22:01 AM EDT
[#17]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 11:41:12 AM EDT
[#18]
Thanks Duffy,
Is that a TA31 or a TA11? Does anyone have a pic of a TA31 with the chevron? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 12:20:25 PM EDT
[#19]
FRO, those are incredible! Those TA31 pics look exactly like the actual sight picture, so I'm sure the others are just as accurate.
Time for Trijicon to cough up a free hat! |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 1:26:29 PM EDT
[#20]
FRO it's a TA11, a TA31 sight picture looks the same except it's 3.5x, versus 4x of TA31
 Surprisingly it's easier to take sight picture images of the TA01NSN than the TA11.  Though the TA01NSN is 4X, in the pics you can make out the blue house (in the cross hair of the TA01NSN) in the TA11 pic, they really don't look all that different in size. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 1:32:52 PM EDT
[#21]
GOD I NEED ONE NOW (hysterical)
I'm gonna get one even though I don't have any rifles to put it on. [:D] Oh yes, and I really appreciate it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 2:21:47 PM EDT
[#22]
Man, I dont know how you guys did that. Thats friggin great! I have spent so much time trying to take a good picture of the reticle, but never ever with any success. I guess if I had a better camera or the skill to use it would be halpful. Hahaha! Anyhow, excellent job and you all can bet we'll be using these pics for the FAQ... eventually!
PMC, when did you get your TA31 and from where! Your rifle must kick butt now. Did you sell the Aimpoint? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 2:23:21 PM EDT
[#23]
Those pics are just too damn cool
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 2:39:54 PM EDT
[#24]
Wow, the view through the TA-50 looks awesome. How come we don't hear more about Compact ACOG's? How does the TA-50 compare to the TA-31?
Thanks, |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 2:44:00 PM EDT
[#25]
new arguy, a capable camera is key to taking these pics. I retired my crappy old Olympus and got a new Canon yesterday, just in time to take these sight pics [:d]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 2:54:41 PM EDT
[#26]
Stop now.
Im up to THREE ACOGs I seriously want. OUTSTANDING pictures. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 3:09:16 PM EDT
[#27]
FRO, you are the man! There go my absolute last doubts about ordering the TA50 ACOG...... I've saved up about half the cost, currently. Barring an emergency, I'll be able to backorder mine about July or so. Heres to FINALLY having an ACOG by Christmas!! Edited to say: Seriously, though. It was really cool of you to take those pics. Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 3:30:16 PM EDT
[#28]
anyone have a sight picture through a Trijicon Reflex I or II........
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 4:12:45 PM EDT
[#29]
Why, yes
We see the problem of Reflex dot (in this case, a triangle) getting a bit washed out by a bright background...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 4:16:18 PM EDT
[#30]
new-arguy,
I got my TA31 last month from SWFA. I think I got one of the last ones they had. I placed my order online and it arrived 3 days later. I have not decided on selling my Aimpoint but I think I will put it up on Ebay later this week. The TA31 is just so awesome! And the Aimpoint is just obsolete for my needs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 5:07:14 PM EDT
[#31]
It sounded interesting before, but now i'm all hot and bothered for BAC. [:I]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 5:18:26 PM EDT
[#32]
These pics might of just pushed me over the edge, thanks guy's, these pics are really helpful.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 5:46:44 PM EDT
[#33]
Somebody emailed me offline and asked what is the difference between a reflex and an ACOG besides magnification.
Wouldnt they both fade out the same when shooting from a dark place where the fiber optics couldnt gather light into a bright area? Is the tritium brighter? The difference is that, lets say you're shooting from cover(a cave,room or thick forest, etc.) into a brightly lit area like a field or something. With a reflex you will lose your triangle because the fiber optics wont have enough light to supplement the tritium and then you will have no aiming point. The tritium is only bright enough for night or dusk. (better have a backup) With an ACOG with BAC the same thing happens except the triangle (or other reticle)will be black instead of dissapearing altogether. You will always have an aiming point. If you're sighting into a very bright area a black reticle shows up pretty well. At night or dusk the tritium will take over. I hope I explained that well. Its probably been talked about before. Thanks for the added pics everybody. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 6:49:24 PM EDT
[#34]
Just so everyone knows, this is a minor technical point. While not commonly reffered to as an ACOG the Reflex is also part of the ACOG line of optics.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 8:51:45 PM EDT
[#35]
FRO, you kick ass.Man you gus's never cease to amaze me.this thread is costom made.There's only one store in the intire orl, area that has one acog,(only one)it;s a tao1nsn and these pic,s are like the real thing.I mean HOLY SH**.made a beliver out of me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 10:19:15 PM EDT
[#36]
Awesome pics FRO.
Moderators, please organize and tack these pics to a locked topic on top of the optics page. I think these photos are a valuable resource to all in the shooting community. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/4/2003 11:21:03 PM EDT
[#37]
Outstanding, excellent photos!!!
I tried to take a photo of the NSN at night with its center yellow ret, hopefully someone with a standard TA01 can take one of their full red ret for comparison since they are almost the same pattern. CAMERA QUESTION: How did you guys get the ret AND the background focused clearly? I can focus on the ret, but then the background is blurry. And vice/versa. What settings did you use, what's the secret to taking good photos like yours? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 5:57:05 AM EDT
[#38]
FRO - Great pictures! Either you or Powership MC will need to email me and let me know how you did that as I have spent about 90 minutes and at least a roll of high dollar film trying to get a similar pic with no luck.
Somebody emailed me offline and asked what is the difference between a reflex and an ACOG besides magnification. Wouldnt they both fade out the same when shooting from a dark place where the fiber optics couldnt gather light into a bright area? Is the tritium brighter? One other difference is that because the ACOGs are in a tube (unlike the Reflex), they can use a roof prism to generate the reticle instead of relying on the reflective lens system used by the Reflex II. I don't have anything but personal observation to back it up so far; but it seems like the roof prism is much less susceptible to washout to begin with. I'd even take a WAG that the change from a HUD style optic to a tube for the Tripower has some relation to this. I second the vote for a tack. People are always asking about ACOG reticles and these are some of the best pics yet (although the shadow of the front sight post isn't anywhere near that pronounced in the higher mag/full size ACOGs). |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 6:58:46 AM EDT
[#39]
I wish I could impart some mystical knowledge about how to take these pics but its just pure luck.
I borrowwed a ditigal camera to take a few pics for an ad. I took a picture looking thru a TA44-2 to show that a spot in the back lens did not affect the sight picture in any way and it came out good. In fact I got more email about the reticle pic than I did offers to buy the sight.[:\] I got the camera back again this weekend and played around with it some and these are the pics. I have it here now but I dont have the charger and the battery is dead. Its a good camera but its not a top of the line I dont think. It doesnt take inside shots at all. At least not well enough and with enough detail to sell something on the internet. So I have to take pics on a sunny day. Its a SONY MAVICA 10X (MVC-FD75)it uses the floppys and I just put that into my computer. If you're wondering why some of them are askew. I have to turn the camera to get the lens in the right place.
You're right. the amout of "shadowing" of the front sight changes with the magnification of the optic used and the distance from the FSB. So If I'd took a pic of a TA44(1X) on a flattop 16" the fsb would be very clear and destracting. If I'd taken the same flattop and put a TA50(3X) you would see just what is in the pic. If we put a 4X32 TA01 on there you would hardly see the FSB at all. If we changed to a 20" flattop you would see the fsb more in all three but the 4X32 would be the best. All that is assuming that its low mounted, like an ARMS19S. If the optic is higher it will clear the fsb more and its not an issue. When I'm able too again I'll post pics of all these to show what I mean. I dont type well and I've probably just confused the heck out of someone. I'm no expert or "operator". These are just my observations as a consumer looking for "a better mouse trap". |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 7:10:52 AM EDT
[#40]
Great post and pics [b]FRO[/b]!!! Just the visual aid I've been looking for to make my decisions. Thanks for making it easier!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 7:28:05 AM EDT
[#41]
Shoot... I'm more confused than ever. If you go by Duffy's pics, you can't even read the numbers on the reticle. I THOUGHT I had my mind made up... now I am not so sure.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 7:48:44 AM EDT
[#42]
This needs to be tacked so people can reference it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 8:11:39 AM EDT
[#43]
Shoot... I'm more confused than ever. If you go by Duffy's pics, you can't even read the numbers on the reticle. I THOUGHT I had my mind made up... now I am not so sure. In actual use you can read the numbers on the reticle OK - although the numbers (and reticle) are a little smaller on the TA11 (due to the scale and 3.5x mag) than on the TA31. Look at the pics Powership MC took of the TA31 reticle. Except for the yellow donut it is a better representation of the reticle. A TA11 reticle will be just like that; but the markings will be just a bit smaller because the TA11 is 0.5x less magnification and since the ladder markings indicate 19" at the given ranges, they have to shrink too as magnification decreases. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 8:23:46 AM EDT
[#44]
Markbo, don't let Duffys pic discourage you on your choice. What you see in Duffys pic of the TA31 is really common when you take a picture of it without resizing it or using little magnification. My pic shows what you are more likely to see through the TA31 when you look through it using your eyes!
I will try tonight to get a clearer, more focused pic tonight when I get home. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 4:49:26 PM EDT
[#45]
Hey now...[;)] I tried to post the full size pic, but with imagestation I can't, so all you see are much smaller than the originals. I'm gonna find another pic hosting service, then you'll see a lot better.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 4:52:25 PM EDT
[#46]
Here is two more pics of the TA31 reticle, this time with the red donut as it actually is. I still was not able to get a overall focused picture. The target was set around 30 yards. Maybe putting the taget out further, 50-75 yards will produce a better pic.
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 4:55:49 PM EDT
[#47]
Anyone got a Chevron reticule please? [:D]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 5:50:02 PM EDT
[#48]
Duffy, I did not mean to disrespect your pics, sorry. My pics are actually 2272x1704. I had to re-crop them and resize them to around 450x409, image station will resize them anyway.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 6:06:53 PM EDT
[#49]
Powership I didn't think you were dissing them [:)] but I supersized them anyway, they're much better in original sizes (too big I think lol)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/5/2003 9:27:25 PM EDT
[#50]
Wow, this is great suff. This is getting tacked! Incredible pics guys! Excellent work!
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
