Follow up Immersive prismatic.

No. Copied those pictures from the UK forum.

Poster didn't really give any impressions of it.

That ocular bell might interfere with the R2D2 head of a Leshiy2 given my preferred low scope height. But still intrigued.
I think with eye relief more "normal" you'll probably be able to have the end of the scope  just fore the r2d2.

I'm waiting for some credible usage impressions before doing the arithmetic on my bank account -- these are like 80% more than a non-"pro" IR.
 
I think with eye relief more "normal" you'll probably be able to have the end of the scope  just fore the r2d2.

I'm waiting for some credible usage impressions before doing the arithmetic on my bank account -- these are like 80% more than a non-"pro" IR.

I can't even get forward of the R2D2 with much longer eye relief scopes. Granted I have the longer LOP with the REPR but I'm still doubtful.

Regardless, a cheek riser is a simple solution if the scope otherwise checks out.

Another poster suggested the combination of FOV & eye relief might be too good to be true & come with some optical compromises. Nothing specific that I recall. I'll see if I can find that post.
 
Last edited:
I can't even get forward of the R2D2 with much longer eye relief scopes. Granted I have the longer LOP with the REPR but I'm still doubtful.

Regardless, a cheek riser is a simple solution if the scope otherwise checks out.

Another poster suggested the combination of FOV & eye relief might be too good to be true & come with some optical compromises. Nothing specific that I recall. I'll see if I can find that post.
Just from the looks I'm thinking maybe the compromise is "a whole lotta glass."
 
Just from the looks I'm thinking maybe the compromise is "a whole lotta glass."

Yeah I just found it. Basically says to get longer eye relief and FOV requires a more complex & expensive ocular. Whole lotta glass might be more apt.

Said something about low curvature of field which I assume is analogous to depth of field.