There are physical and functional differences in the cameras of the iPhone 14 and iPhone 14 Pro. The camera is, perhaps, the only feature that never fails to get an upgrade with the launch of every iPhone series. It's pretty easy to tell both the models apart due to this, even from a distance. The standard 14 has a dual-camera setup placed diagonally, while the iPhone 14 Pro has three lenses with a larger camera module. The Dynamic Island on the iPhone 14 Pro is all the hype in the tech industry right now, as it seems to be the only significant design change Apple has made to the new generation of iPhones.įlip both the phones around, and you'll notice a massive difference in the cameras, a pattern traditionally followed by previous iPhone lineups. Power on the displays, and you'll immediately notice that the iPhone 14 Pro has ditched the notch on the front, replacing it with a pill-shaped cutout that Apple calls "Dynamic Island." The iPhone 14 Pro has a stainless steel frame, which makes it heavier than the standard iPhone 14 with its light aluminum build. What's really different is the build and the front design. I paid $445 which I thought is reasonable for a high quality red dot.If you put both the models side by side, you'll barely notice any significant size difference, but upon a closer look, you'll see that the iPhone 14 Pro is ever so slightly taller than the standard iPhone. One of the biggest pluses for me was that it co-witnessed somewhere between absolute and lower 1/3 with the fixed A2 front sight. 5 and 6 are good for darkness or very dim indoor lighting, 7 is good for cloudy or dawn/dusk or fine target work at distance, 8 and 9 work in bight sun and 10 would be great in blindingly bright conditions. I don't use NV which leaves you with 6 positions. There is only one well placed rotary switch which is easy to manipulate. It does return to zero after removing and remounting. The mount is rock solid, simple and works as advertised. Also, the lens covers come with it instead of having to purchase them if you want them for the MRO. The Aimpoint only had two - "it's large" and the mount knob is "big". 1) There were too many asterisk qualifiers that went with the MRO. I researched every article and Youtube video I could find about the MRO and PRO before deciding. I paid $445 which I thought is reasonable for a high quality red dot. I think the asterisks are overblown, but they do exist. * if you aren’t overly concerned about parallax Seems like the MRO is bring given the nod based on being smaller vs being better in any other way. If they were the exact the same size, I suppect that the MRO would not ever be preferred over the Pro. There is more "controversy" and asterisk with the MRO vs the Pro. If you are never going to use night vision then the Aimpoint ACO will serve you just as well. I have a lot of Aimpoint PRO's and feel it's the best all around value on the market. I like the MRO, I just think you have to be aware of it's limitations. I moved it to an AK because I only use that rifle inside 100 yards. This convinced me that RDS requires individual shooter zeros, perfect centering of the dot in the window, or both. My nephew was on leave (Designated Marksman with 187-3 101st Airborne) and shot 20 rounds at 200 and didn't even hit the paper on a NRA 200 yard center. I zeroed my Trijicon MRO at 200 yards and could shoot 4" ten shot groups centered on target if I took care to to keep the dot in the center of the viewing window.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |