Aimpoint Comp M4 - Why?

[XD45 7,124]

This is something I've been wondering for a while. Why would anybody choose a Comp M4 over one of the T/H micro sights if you're getting an Aimpoint rds? I've been expecting the old school "full size" dot sights to fade away but evidently not.

 

So if you would pick an M4 over a micro, why?

[HB of CJ 1,263]

Sorry to say I do not know the difference.

[Doug Hartley 526]

I have both the H-1 (mounted on my competition R&R Saiga) and an Aimpoint PRO (mounted on my JP 9mm Carbine).  I really like both sights, but the PRO is several hundred dollars cheaper and performs the same to my eyes.  The CompM4 has longer battery life than either of these sights, listed as 80,000 hours or 8 years.  In addition it has more levels of both NV and regular illumination than the T-1, takes AA batteries instead of CR2032s and has a 6mm larger clear aperture.  The CompM4 runs around $850, the T-1 about $650 and the PRO about $400.   

 

Doug 

[Mullet Man 2,114]

I have 2 PRO'S, one old and one new. Can't justify the price of an M4 for the features I'll never use.

 

Versus a micro dot, I just like the larger field of view. A few ounces in weight difference doesn't bother me any.

 

I won't buy cheap Chinese RDS from PA.

[InTTruder 11]

Sometimes its the physics of light, and how we see.  It also draws attention to the target, which is good for older pairs of eyes.  It is more robust than most of the small holograms and microdots, so many of us who grew up on the ACO version of the Comp just like its feel and fit.

[LonnieP 4]

I have an H-1, PRO & M4.

 

The M4 has better quality glass & there is noticeably less parallax/distortion that makes a big difference in accuracy at long ranges.