I have heard, and read for years about people having an issue, or using field of view as a basis for purchasing a red dot sight with 1x magnification.  It just seems odd to me that it would be a concern because I've never used a red dot optic with one eye.  With both eyes open on a 1x, the field of view is whatever your peripheral vision ability is.  Am I missing something?  I've just never had an issue.   I'm not saying that I'm right, and I've never said anything about it until now.  Why would it be important to know FOV on a 1x?

It isn't, but some folks just don't know or can't shoot without closing an eye.  Both eyes open and the tube basically disappears, red dots or etched reticle.

Some people only have one eye, or have had surgeries such that the BAC isn't feasible. I'm an example of that. So I prefer a very wide field of view because it's the only view I have of the surroundings.

I have an LCO on my HD gun and it's as small a window as I'm comfortable with.

Granted, I'd think I'm the minority here. But just giving a real world example.

Field of view is irrelevant for a red dot. People who complain about red dot field of view are people who are not using the red dot properly. You’re supposed to shoot with both eyes open placing the optic in front of your face. You’re not supposed to look through the red dot. You look past the red dot at your target. The optic itself will the become blurry yet the red dot Will appear to just Hover in the air.

Yep.  I've used red dots with big windows (EOTech XPS2) and a bunch with small tubes (Aimpoint H1, PA Micro) and a bunch in between.  While I appreciate the large window and parallax-free view through the EOTechs, the micro red dots don't give up any functionality to the bigger optics.  
Focus on target, align dot, fire.
I find myself preferring the smaller optics these days to save a few ounces.

Exactly what I didn't expect, but no doubt, real world example to the nth degree.  Thanks for your reply.

The nice thing about a red dot is you can move it back and forth to change FOV.
Closer gives you a wider FOV through the optic at the cost of some peripheral loss.

Because people aren't smart sometimes.

If it's of no importance whatsoever, then why not make red dots that are 1/4 the size of anything currently available with 2 moa dots and 8 moa windows?

Larger window does have some benefits if you're in a position where you don't have a good cheek weld. It's not huge, but if you're doing ports on a barricade or similar, it's not nothing.

It’s not necessarily “field of view”, however a smaller window will slow you down when you’re shooting on the move, running something fast and/or in awkward positions.

It also becomes more important when you’re shooting under NODS.

If you look at what competitive shooters are running, we want the largest window possible for that reason.

Now the difference may be found on the tenth of a second level, or it may be more significant under conditions which are admittedly outliers. That’s why you’ll see a large number of SRO’s and Holosun 510’s on race guns and close to zero AimPoint T1’s. On the flip side you also have a trade off in terms of durability - more so with the SRO, less so the 510 - which is why you see T1’s on real world guns.

It’s not irrelevant.

I could run you over a fast COF with two different optics and show you the difference.

That being said, window size is only one variable and doesn’t exist in a vacuum so there are other concerns to be mindful of.

That's all I'm saying.  It's not irrelevant, or nothing.  If it were, we'd still be using occluded dot sights.  45-Seventy hits the main points why.

Obsessed and 45-70 are correct in that it totally depends on the person, eyesight, dynamics & such.
You just can't say a micro tube is the best solution for anything except perhaps as a secondary sighting solution.

I am one of those rare folks that has superb results with BAC and ACOGs.
Doing actually timed performance drills with various Aimpoints I performed better with full size RDS with AR SBRs from 10.5 to 14.5".
Strangely enough, the difference was magnified when suppressors were mounted.
This is perhaps due to the greater forward biased weight distribution, than reduction of recoil.
When (rapidly) shifting between targets with the M3/M4/M4S, I had less "fear" of loosing the dot than with the T1/T2.
Especially when changing shooting positions, or firing on the move.  Some other "operators" had completely opposite results.
Perhaps I grasp my weapon slightly less rigidly than some others, allowing it to "float" a little more.  It works for me.
Not ex-mil, but professional/gov weapons training and contractor/security experience.
No one I trained with ever doubted my ability to "hold my own" in a gunfight.

The unusual/somewhat unexpected result was with the M-92 "Krinkov" the T1 was clearly better than a M3.
It wasn't even close.  For me, with the M-92, the T1 was "magic."

Came here to stay this.  I have difficulty closing my other eye now that I have grown accustomed to shooting both eyes open even with high magnification optics.  I may from time to time squint my non-dominate eye to force my other eye to focus the way I want but once you get used to it that is all you need to do and boom huge FOV.

FOV considerations:

1. Visibility around the dot - less obscure is better
2. Visibility through the ocular lens - helps with awkward shooting positions or slope cheek weld

Mounting closer to your eye or further will impact both variables.  Find your sweet spot and enjoy shooting...with both eyes open

This.

And I honestly have to admit that medical reasons never even crossed my mind (too used to red dots only being a problem for astigmatism at most), learned something today.

I keep my red dot mounted at the very back of the receiver and collapse my stock all the way so that I can insert my eyeball directly into the back lens of my optic.

So field of view is a very big deal to me.

This was roughly what I was going to say. FOV in the traditional sense of the term, is irrelevant with a RDS. The size of the optical window, however, can be fairly important depending on use.

Years ago my buddy had an AK with a gas tube mount and a micro red dot. You could force exit pupil loss of the red dot pretty easy without breaking your cheek weld.

But we shoot AR's because we're smarter than he is, and you'd have to mount it on the handguard to cause a field of view issue with a red dot.

The Barska on the left very much has a terrible field of view compared to the RMR on the right.  It doesn't matter how close or far the eye is, or if both eyes are open.  

I want to say that a year or so ago you and I were saying there actually needed to be a totally different term for this because it comes up so often.

It was Swampfox_Mike's thread about the relation of "FOV" vs dot size. If the archive wasn't screwy I'd look for it.

ETA: