Eotech XPS2

[20mm]

A Red Dot is not equal to Holosight. Completely different technologies.

Different methods of achieving the same end. Other than the ability to project a more complex reticle rather than just a single dot, no advantage to holographic projection.

Besides being able to use a holograph with a cracked screen and that holosights have zero parallax. That doesn't work with a red dot.

[Hmac]

Eotech, like Aimpoint, uses a collimated image, so parallax is a negligible issue with either, but neither is parallax-free. With Eotechs, the image is projected at 100 meters, with Aimpoints, 50 meters. So, both have parallax error that is equal to the size of the optical window at zero distance and decreases to zero parallax out at their respective set distances. With either optic, even a crappy cheek weld makes parallax absolutely nothing to worry about.

Yeh. If my optic takes a bullet through the glass I'm gonna have a bad day. That kind of scenario is pretty far down the list of things I worry about.

[20mm]

Eotech, like Aimpoint, uses a collimated image, so parallax is a negligible issue with either, but neither is parallax-free. With Eotechs, the image is projected at 100 meters, with Aimpoints, 50 meters. So, both have parallax error that is equal to the size of the optical window at zero distance and decreases to zero parallax out at their respective set distances. With either optic, even a crappy cheek weld makes parallax absolutely nothing to worry about.

Yeh. If my optic takes a bullet through the glass I'm gonna have a bad day. That kind of scenario is pretty far down the list of things I worry about.

Optically the EoTech is parallax free unlike a reflex sight. Optics can be damaged by shrapnel, and just not bullets.

[Hmac]

Eotech, like Aimpoint, uses a collimated image, so parallax is a negligible issue with either, but neither is parallax-free. With Eotechs, the image is projected at 100 meters, with Aimpoints, 50 meters. So, both have parallax error that is equal to the size of the optical window at zero distance and decreases to zero parallax out at their respective set distances. With either optic, even a crappy cheek weld makes parallax absolutely nothing to worry about.

Yeh. If my optic takes a bullet through the glass I'm gonna have a bad day. That kind of scenario is pretty far down the list of things I worry about.

Optically the EoTech is parallax free unlike a reflex sight. Optics can be damaged by shrapnel, and just not bullets.

Not parallax free.

[grousemaster]

Don't forget the battery life differences....and the a apparent gap in failure rates.

[Hmac]

We could debate Eotech vs Aimpoint all day. I find the much longer battery life of the Aimpoint to be a mere convenience, certainly not a deal breaker in my use. I suspect, based on reports, that the Aimpoints are indeed more durable, however. None of these things have been an issue for me relative to my needs or use. I would have no problem buying another Eotech, except for the fact that its $179-$200 more expensive (OPMOD or EXPS2) than an Aimpoint PRO (not interested in the Eotech inline battery models nor the XPS series). It's good, but it simply isn't good enough to justify that cost differential over the PRO unless one just have to have the Eotech reticle. Otherwise, no difference in performance. In my experience with both.

[grousemaster]

We could debate Eotech vs Aimpoint all day. I find the much longer battery life of the Aimpoint to be a mere convenience, certainly not a deal breaker in my use. I suspect, based on reports, that the Aimpoints are indeed more durable, however. None of these things have been an issue for me relative to my needs or use. I would have no problem buying another Eotech, except for the fact that its $179-$200 more expensive (OPMOD or EXPS2) than an Aimpoint PRO. It's good, but it simply isn't good enough to justify that cost differential over the PRO unless one just have to have the Eotech reticle. Otherwise, no difference in performance. In my experience with both.

Battery life is more than just a "convenience", unless you like having to tun your optic on EVERY TIME YOU USE IT, and then set it to your preferred brightness setting.

[Hmac]

We could debate Eotech vs Aimpoint all day. I find the much longer battery life of the Aimpoint to be a mere convenience, certainly not a deal breaker in my use. I suspect, based on reports, that the Aimpoints are indeed more durable, however. None of these things have been an issue for me relative to my needs or use. I would have no problem buying another Eotech, except for the fact that its $179-$200 more expensive (OPMOD or EXPS2) than an Aimpoint PRO. It's good, but it simply isn't good enough to justify that cost differential over the PRO unless one just have to have the Eotech reticle. Otherwise, no difference in performance. In my experience with both.

Battery life is more than just a "convenience", unless you like having to tun your optic on EVERY TIME YOU USE IT, and then set it to your preferred brightness setting.

No, absolutely a "mere convenience" for me. I have no concern about turning it on every time I use it. YMMV. I might feel differently if there was a chance I'd have to roll out of my rack in my hooch, grab my rifle because the enemy is in the wire.

[20mm]

Not parallax free.

It's parallax free just like the HUD on a fighter aircraft. I'm not going to debate it with you as EoTech states it's a parallax free right on their website. If you think you know it all then debate it with them.
When it's mounted on a AR/M-16 it sits above bore axis, just like any sight. That doesn't mean it has parallax.

[20mm]

Battery life is more than just a "convenience", unless you like having to tun your optic on EVERY TIME YOU USE IT, and then set it to your preferred brightness setting.

Most modern sights power off and return to the preset brightness you had them adjusted for. Perhaps Aimpoint makes a more rugged sight, but it uses an older technology to project the aiming reticule.

[Hmac]

Not parallax free.

It's parallax free just like the HUD on a fighter aircraft. I'm not going to debate it with you as EoTech states it's a parallax free right on their website. If you think you know it all then debate it with them.
When it's mounted on a AR/M-16 it sits above bore axis, just like any sight. That doesn't mean it has parallax.

Yeah, Aimpoint says it's parallax free too. It's just ********. You can buy into the marketing hype all you want. Physics is physics. I agree, it would probably be pointless for you to try to debate it.

It is true, however, that the parallax is negligible with either optic and only exists a close ranges where a 20mm parallax error is not going to have a significant effect.

Height-over-bore issues are the same for any optic. Has nothing to do with parallax.

[mecra]

A Red Dot is not equal to Holosight. Completely different technologies.

Different methods of achieving the same end. Other than the ability to project a more complex reticle rather than just a single dot, no advantage to holographic projection.

Lens tint. EOtechs have none. I can't stand tint in optics.

[cgrant26]

Both are great. I went with an Eotech first because I prefer the wider FOV and the reticle. My next sight will be an Aimpoint T1. Like they say on Arfcom, get both!

[Hmac]

Both are great. I went with an Eotech first because I prefer the wider FOV and the reticle. My next sight will be an Aimpoint T1. Like they say on Arfcom, get both!

After years of Eotechs and being satisfied with them, I bought an Aimpoint T-1 (4 MOA version). I never could warm up to it. One of the advantages of a red dot sight is accurately getting sight on target without relying on a consistent or careful cheek weld, but I found the T-1 with its 20 mm tube to make that more difficult. It's harder for me to pick up the dot quickly than it is with an Eotech, or an Aimpoint with 30 mm tube. Relative to the "tint" comment above...while the lens of an Aimpoint isn't tinted, there is a lens coating (a band pass coating necessary on a reflex sight) and I get some occasional weird internal reflections in some lighting conditions. Neither of those things are a problem for me on the other Aimpoints with their 30 mm tube.

In that regard I agree that the Eotechs have an advantage in their field of view. However, these sights are designed to shoot with both eyes open, so field of view relative to "situational awareness" is moot. However, I do find that with the smaller tube diameter of the micros, the field of view relative to quickly finding the reticle in a hasty weapon presentation to be problematic. I pretty stongly prefer the Eotech form factor to the Aimpoint micros. I prefer the 30 mm Aimpoint PRO to the Eotechs mainly because it's substantially lower cost, although I confess that the convenience of battery life (and possibly better reliability) is a nice bonus.

[20mm]

After years of Eotechs and being satisfied with them, I bought an Aimpoint T-1 (4 MOA version). I never could warm up to it. One of the advantages of a red dot sight is accurately getting sight on target without relying on a consistent or careful cheek weld, but I found the T-1 with its 20 mm tube to make that more difficult. It's harder for me to pick up the dot quickly than it is with an Eotech, or an Aimpoint with 30 mm tube. Relative to the "tint" comment above...while the lens of an Aimpoint isn't tinted, there is a lens coating (a band pass coating necessary on a reflex sight) and I get some occasional weird internal reflections in some lighting conditions. Neither of those things are a problem for me on the other Aimpoints with their 30 mm tube.

In that regard I agree that the Eotechs have an advantage in their field of view. However, these sights are designed to shoot with both eyes open, so field of view relative to "situational awareness" is moot. However, I do find that with the smaller tube diameter of the micros, the field of view relative to quickly finding the reticle in a hasty weapon presentation to be problematic. I pretty stongly prefer the Eotech form factor to the Aimpoint micros. I prefer the 30 mm Aimpoint PRO to the Eotechs mainly because it's substantially lower cost, although I confess that the convenience of battery life (and possibly better reliability) is a nice bonus.

I was going to post some mathematical formals that would probably confuse you and your copy/paste information from wikipedia/arfcom. I'm glad I refrained from doing that and instead decided to drink some more beer. I'll also admit that I didn't quite like the prospect of using this forum to render mathematical symbols properly.

The EoTechs and most other holographic sights are completely parallax free. The only real parallax would come from imperfections in the flat diffusion/projection layer the laser diode image is projected upon, or the unparallel alignment of surfaces to each other . This is completely contrary to the reflex system used in red dot sights, along with the convex optics they utilize.

Completely different technologies, and completely different results as you've so eloquently outlined in your own post.