Nothing changes. Think of it like a hologram that's projected 50 yards away. The little closer/further your eye is away for the sight makes no difference. The size of the reticle doesnt change!
That is difficult for me to understand because I cannot understand how changing the distance of the eye from/to the sight has no effect on
BOTH the field of view
OR the apparent reticle size relative to the size of the "box" on an optical device that is 1x.
I can understand it for a "powered" device, but not for a 1x device.
I will use a simple "thought experiment" to illustrate my problem and then maybe you can help me solve it.
I have 100 feet in front of me an infinitely-tall, infinitely-wide, infinitely-thin (so I'm told, anyway), solid-black, completely opaque wall.
Therefore, I have no idea whatsoever what's beyond the wall.
However, "on" this wall I can see a single spot of white, or light, or something, that is, as far as I can tell, about the same height as my eye above the level ground on which the wall and I both stand.
I want to determine what that spot of light is, so I begin to approach the wall to examine it.
The closer I get to the wall, the apparent size of the spot of light gets bigger and bigger until I can tell that it is not a spot on the wall, or a mirror. It is a hole.
Getting progressively close to the wall, at a couple of meters or so from the wall, I can tell that the spot is actually a square "opening" that is now relatively large enough so that, as I move my head this way and that horizontally and vertically, I can see through it some detail in the distant landscape beyond the wall.
At a bit under a meter from the wall, I pull out my handy dandly ruler and place it along the bottom and side edges of the window and determine by feel that the "hole" is actually a glass window that is a 1" square.
I keep the ruler on the wall next to the bottom edge of the window as I bring my eye even closer to the window and, as I do that, the apparent size of the window (and the apparent size of the distance between the inch marks on the ruler) increases dramatically, but the objects on the distant horizon seem hardly to increase in size at all. That is, as my eye gets closer and closer to the window, the number of equally spaced trees, planted in a horizontal row relative to the wall at a distance of what I am told is 200 metres, grows close to that of my naked eye as I place my eye very close to that now-seemingly-huge window.
As I place my eye almost right on the window, my field of view beyond the wall is as large as that of my naked eye.
End of experiment.
I think you now see my problem in understanding how changing the distance of my eye from a 1x sight has no effect on EITHER the field of view OR on the size of reticle relative to the either the area that reticle covers within the area of the "view" within the "frame" of the sight OR the area that the reticle covers on an object in the distance.
(In my mind, as the EOtech sight is moved farther and farther away from the eye, the outer ring of the EOtech reticle
must at some point expand beyond the viewed image area and only the central dot remain visible on a decreasing field of view.)
So, to clear up all of my confusion about what I will see when using the EOtech sight, I'd like you owners of EOtech sights to explain to me what I will see when I subsitute your sight for the glass window in the above thought experiment.
