GTA
All Springer/NP/PCP Air Gun Discussion General => European/Asian Air Gun Gates => German AirGun Gate => Topic started by: Bayman on August 04, 2021, 11:41:33 AM
-
I recently found a peep sight alternative for my Weihrauchs. These sights aren't made for airguns and they are reminiscent of the peep sights found on infantry rifles. They are made overseas but designed and sold by a South Carolina company called Tech Sights. They make several different sights but I found one that fits the Weihrauch 11mm dovetail perfectly. The sights are cast metal, well machined and built like a tank. When you hold them you know you're holding a well made quality product.
The adjustments are positively detented. Perhaps too positively. I found the small windage knob almost impossible to turn by hand. I have been adjusting mine on the opposite side with a coin or broad tip screwdriver. The elevation adjustment is a notched nut that threads the aperture up or down in detented increments. It can be turned with any pointed metal object. I recommend you splurge 5 bucks on their tool that makes adjustments easier. It's still a little awkward, but no big deal. I hardly ever adjusted my Williams peeps once I zeroed the gun with the preferred pellet at a practical range.
A great thing about these sights is the dovetail clamp is beefy and strong. It tightens with one simple slotted nut. No tiny stripped aluminum threads or bowed plates like the Williams if you're not careful. The Tech Sights are a far more "Fool Proof" design.
I've been using two sets of these Tech Sights for the last three or four months with at least 1500 shots on each. One set on my favorite Hw30 and another on my 22 caliber Hw50. They have been absolutely great. The set on my Hw30 crept back once but that was because I didn't tighten it properly. No issues since. I'm very confident they'd stay put on a magnum springer like a R1.
They come with a comparatively thin rimmed 0.062" aperture that I like very much. I found the Williams 0.050" aperture provided me a sharper image than their standard 0.094" but found the 0.050" to be too dark in some common practical settings. The 0.062" aperture on the Tech Sights seems to be a happy medium and works great for me. For those wanting other sizes, they have a kit with a different aperture post and varied sizes of inserts.
I was initially a little leary of the thinner aperture rim because I've tried the ghost ring concept with the Williams and lost a sharp target picture. This happend because the orifice itself became too large. Not so with the standard 0.062" aperture. The thinner aperture rim almost disappears while retaining a sharp image in the middle. This is very nice because it makes target acquisition very quick and easy. I can see why similar sights have been extensively used in combat rifles around the world.
As far as accuracy goes, these sights are as accurate as any peep sight. If you're not familiar with the inherent accuracy of peeps, you're in for a pleasant surprise. Many people on this forum are quite familiar with peep sights and use expressions like, "If I can see it, I can hit it. Speaking of which, peep sights make old eyes young again. At 55 I need reading glasses and have a hard time seeing anything through conventional notched blade sights. I can't explain the science of it, but peeps allow me to see the target and the front sight again. Remarkable, but true!
Front sight compatibility. I have used the Tech Sights with both the standard Weihrauch globe sight with replaceable inserts and Weihrauchs economy model fixed globe sight. The economy globe sight works better for me because it's a little lower and I like the sharper aiming point the fixed cast blade provides. It's available from Chambers Gunspares in the UK under part # OS 223 for about 20 dollars US. Possibly from other Weihrauch parts dealers too.
I have used the standard globe without issues, but it is a little taller, so you have to run the aperture up a bit more. You may run out of elevation adjustment if your gun has barrel droop. This can be fixed by cutting down the insert post or bending the barrel ever so slightly upward. I prefer the latter as I normally center the barrels on my rifles anyway. This prolongs scope life and maintains lateral accuracy at all distances.
Now I will address functioning and aesthetics. As for the latter, the sights are simple, compact and IMO just look fantastic. It's almost like they were made for the gun. They have a decent matte black finish similar to parkerized metal so there's no glare during use. I really love that they have a small footprint and can be mounted at the very end of the compression tube without blocking the operation of the Weihrauch safety. This is good because getting the sight closer to your eye gives you a clearer sight picture and a longer sight radius.
I've been waiting to share this discovery for a while, but I wanted to fully test it before vetting it. I think this is a great product at a very reasonable price. I ordered mine directly from the company and IIRC the rear sight, adjusting tool and shipping cost me under $75.
The model I used is machined for a round receiver Remington. It's normally sold as a front and rear sight set. If you call the company, they will sell you just the rear sight and adjust the price. They were great people to deal with and they provided excellent service with very reasonable shipping rates. Here's the link to the model I used.
https://www.tech-sights.com/product/remington-597-adjustable-aperture-sights/ (https://www.tech-sights.com/product/remington-597-adjustable-aperture-sights/)
Stay well
Ron
-
Great review!
-
Great to know, Ron. Thanks!
-
It's been so long ago since I bought 'em, i don't remember but that peep sight looks alot like one I have on a Ruger 10/22.
-
It's been so long ago since I bought 'em, i don't remember but that peep sight looks alot like one I have on a Ruger 10/22.
Might be the same company Greg. They make models for lots of popular powder burners. I'm not sure how long they've been around. There's been lots of similar designs used on tactical rifles forever. I was very happy to find one that worked well on the Weihrauchs since the Williams aren't always available. IMO this is a better sight for all the reasons I mentioned earlier.
-
It's been so long ago since I bought 'em, i don't remember but that peep sight looks alot like one I have on a Ruger 10/22.
Might be the same company Greg. They make models for lots of popular powder burners. I'm not sure how long they've been around. There's been lots of similar designs used on tactical rifles forever. I was very happy to find one that worked well on the Weihrauchs since the Williams aren't always available. IMO this is a better sight for all the reasons I mentioned earlier.
Wherever and whenever I bought 'em, I also put the M1 Carbine type front sight on that 10/22 - which hasn't been shot in several years. {sigh}
-
I think the science of "peeps"
is the rays coming through that tiny hole- and making it to your iris - are all parallel so they don't need your eye's lense or cornea to bend them so they hit at the same place on your
retina..The retina is where the light sensors are(nerve cells that are triggered by photons)
Yeah tiny holes only let rays in that are more or less parallel-because the hole is soooo tiny-
Might be wrong but that is how I remember it-
In schools a "trick" in science class is to have kids who wear glasses take the glasses off and use a piece of paper with a tiny hole as "glasses"
it works-near sighted far sighted-doesn't matter-cool science in action-
-
Thanks Ron!!
I've been looking on and off for a good peep sight. I have an M1 Garand and I love the sights on that rifle. I would love to find something like that for my HW95. These seem to be as close as anything I've seen yet.
Tony
-
That looks extremely interesting indeed! Thanks for posting this very thorough write-up. Beautiful compact unit - the strong mount and the way it works with Weihrauch's unusual safety are really super, and the military-style "ears" would be great protection when bumping around outdoors.
Does the mount have enough variability to fit other guns with similar (but not identical), 11mm-ish rail spacing, and with a flat rail instead of the arched HW receiver top? For instance a Diana 34. A rail, which sits higher than cut grooves, might take care of that occasional running-out-of-height issue that you mentioned, too.
-
Phoebeisis: there are two reasons that peep sights work better for older eyes:
1. They eliminate one plane of focus. With a forward-mounted notch sight, you must semi-magically focus on the rear sight, front sight, and target all at once. With a rear-mounted aperture, the first of these is eliminated (as is often said, you look through a peep, not at it). You just put the front on the target and go.
2. Air, like any fluid, has surface tension. This creates a sort of "lens" at a small opening - the "pinhole effect" which you described. This is most noticeable at an opening size of 1mm or less (which is why target sights have such itty bitty apertures), but still useful for larger openings.
-
A most excellent review Ron, thanks!
And perfect timing for me as I am in the market for one.
I will be ordering one of these for my R1.
Thanks again!
-
That looks extremely interesting indeed! Thanks for posting this very thorough write-up. Beautiful compact unit - the strong mount and the way it works with Weihrauch's unusual safety are really super, and the military-style "ears" would be great protection when bumping around outdoors.
Does the mount have enough variability to fit other guns with similar (but not identical), 11mm-ish rail spacing, and with a flat rail instead of the arched HW receiver top? For instance a Diana 34. A rail, which sits higher than cut grooves, might take care of that occasional running-out-of-height issue that you mentioned, too.
Mike they fit CZs with flat 3/8 and 11mm rails. I can't promise that they will fit a Diana. There's not much I can say but try it. All their dovetail rear sights are the same but only the Remington model fits the Weihrauch. This is because it has additional milling for the rounded Remington receiver. Getting the Remington model makes it more universal.
-
There’s gonna be a sales spike on that one. They need to give you a commission.
The check is in the mail lol.
-
Mike
You are right-I am wrong
I think for glasses wearers the pinhole effect negates the effect our misshapen lenses and cornea- by the hole being so small it does not transmit rays from the image that would otherwise
blur the image because our bad lenses could not correct for them-
but no free lunch-less light means image will not be as sharp-
Our iris is 4-8mm I think-so a 1mm .04" hole is a lot less light 1/16 if we are at 4mm 1/64 if at 8mm-
I am going to get some sort of peep-I had forgotten all about peep sights and pinhole effect-my eyes are miserable-I need several pairs of glasses for various distances(
and I need reading glasses +4 for reading +3 for computers and scopes ands + 2 for actual distance
I had referactive surgery done about 2007 went from needing -3.75 for distance and no reading glasses to not needing lenses for distance and +2 for reading-a fair trade
But over time my eyes continues to "overcorrect"
The cornea probably continued thinning in the center-so now I need reading glasses for EVERYTHING-
A peep MIGHT allow me to shoot without glasses-
a pinhole-made by a paperclip which by coincidence is .04" more of less 1mm- in cardboard does give me a clear image at a distances-so maybe a peep will be the answer to some of my
shooting problems??
Good discussion-I had completely forgotten about peep sights-
Thanks all-cats bugging me to be fed-gotta go
Charlie
PS Slight aside- last night I noticed -on ebay-ring type sights for crosman 1322 1377-they were cheap-about $13 delivered-I wonder how they would do-they appear to be maybe 2-3mm ??
I have a heck of a hard time getting much more than a blur with the stock sights
-
I sometimes use a peep and I wear glasses. It’s still better than the factory sights, but I do struggle when shooting in the basement. I need to invest in better lighting.
-
Great write up Ron. After shooting your 30 and 50 with these peeps I can confirm 2 things, (1) they are capable of consistent 40 yard shooting (proven by you), and (2) I need a lot of work with shooting peep sights lol
-
I sometimes use a peep and I wear glasses. It’s still better than the factory sights, but I do struggle when shooting in the basement. I need to invest in better lighting.
Shooting indoors is all about the lighting. I shoot in my basement too and do much better outdoors because of the lighting. With older eyes we need a lot of light. Once in a while I can even shoot buckhorns outdoors, but the lighting needs to be perfect, not a chance indoors, even in a very well lit club range. Even peeps work better for me outdoors.
-
Following.
-
A few more pictures
-
Those are the sights a lot of guys recommend for Appleseed Project training.
-
Ron: Thanks for the follow-up! If the sight will fit an arched-top receiver, I'm guessing it will also fit a flat surface like the Diana rail. But even if it doesn't...there are plenty of needy Weihrauchs at my house LOL.
Phoebeisis: Again, part of the secret is that the small hole forms a sort of lens. Light doesn't just come straight through the small opening, but is refracted into a clearer image.
The only problem I've had with aperture sights was with cataracts, which made a nasty little black spot in the middle of the sight picture, if I used too small an opening. Increasing the aperture size over about 2 mm helped (this is using an old match sight with an adjustable iris eyepiece), and after cataract surgery I'm happy to say the problem vanished.
Cementing my reputation as a peep sight slut...I just order the Tech-Sight, complete with tool and interchangeable aperture package...!
-
Mike
I can't find anything that supports your comment that
-2. Air, like any fluid, has surface tension. This creates a sort of "lens" at a small opening - the "pinhole effect" which you described. This is most noticeable at an opening size of 1mm or less (which is why target sights have such itty bitty apertures), but still useful for larger openings.
Below by some anon. person- apparently "do gases have surface tension?" is a frequent question
Do gases have surface tension?
Essentially, if it's a gas, it's doesn't have surface tension. Surface tension derives from the persistent attractive forces between molecules. Gases are defined by their complete lack of intermolecular forces, at least in the ideal case.May 24, 2016
Now your removing one focal plane-makes sense-
I give up
Charlie
-
I am no physicist and probably used the wrong term. The Wikipedia article explains it better than me:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diopter_sight
The point is...most people can see the target a lot better, and aim more precisely, through an aperture sight. Which is why they are almost universally used on military rifles as well as target guns.
-
Mike Great article-thanks!!
I wish I had seen it 24 hrs ago
Before I spent $31.50 on 3 "hole" sights for my 1322 1377
I have LOTS of trouble getting a remotely clear picture with the stock sights on the pistols-the rear sight and the front get lost one in the other-I can't quite see the top of the front sight
The article you posted made it clear that diopter and aperture sights need to be CLOSE to your eye-with the pistols the sights will be waaaay away-so they will be useless I think-
Slight aside-the sights on the article look much like the sights the women were using in the olympics in the 50 meter rifle 3 position competition-the sights were obviously "diopter"
but really fancy-probably zillion dollar sights
Thanks for the tip
Charlie
PS Well I will figure a way to put an aperture sight on the TX 200- 10 3/4 LBS is just too much to shoot standing- with no rest
The 460 is 8.4 lbs-not bad at all- the HW77K about 8.9 lbs-but feels no heavier that the 460-the TX with scope- 10 3/4lbs-a PIG-I feel like I am weight lifting!!
-
Thanks Charles!
It is an interesting article, but I'm not sure their explanation of WHY the small opening clarifies the view, makes any more sense than mine, LOL. It's a question that I will research further. I was intrigued by what distinguishes a "diopter" sight though; it sounds like there is certain optical magic that is lost if one goes above the 1.2mm opening.
That being said, there is still benefit to bigger peep sights IMHO, and you may just like those pistol sights. The human eye is incredibly good at locating the center of a round opening, and another advantage compared to a "notch" sight is simply a better view - you aren't covering the bottom half of the target.
-
Mike
Yeah the exact magic of it-I don't quite get.
I "think" it has something to do with mechanically "blocking" photons that would have bounced off the image at a slightly different angle-so they would hit perhaps 1mm from dead center of
an aperture-those would hit and be blocked-but those that hit dead center in the aperture would be allowed through
Both photons would make it through our 4-8 mm retinal opening-but the ones farther toward the periphery not make it through the tiny 1mm (.5mm radius) peep.
Now OUR eye's lense WOULD bend those "perimeter photons" so they would hit the same spot of our retina as the dead center photons-
BUT if OUR eye's lense is DEFECTIVE it won't be able to bend the perimeter photons properly and our image will be blurred
BUT BUT if we have a PEEP- tiny hole- only very favorably angled photons will make it through-(almost parallel) and they will pass almost DEAD CENTER THROUGH
our eye's lense(since they are going through a tiny hole-1mm vs 4-8mm)-
Our lense's defect won't matter since it does not involve the center of our lense-(much)
Ok-reading my explanation-I don't really buy my own explanation-which is a "fuzzy" distillation of what I read.(fuzzy world's worst pun-I can never resist a pun)
Well I appreciate your optimistic take on the 3 "hole sights" I am going to put on the little pump pistols-I love those little pistols-cheap and fun and one shoots BBs meaning all but free ammo=
-
Unlike lenses, pinholes use the reduction of light to focus instead of relying on optics. The reduction of light causes light to focus at one particular point from any distance. This is what happens when we close down the aperture in our lens; we prevent the stray points of light from defocusing our images.
MinutePhysics-Aperture-Pinhole
What the video fails to mention is that at a certain threshold, reducing the aperture can help create tack sharp images; move past that threshold and you enter in the world of defraction. Light, being the wave that it is, will bend and spread around the edge of an object causing banding and spectrum change. What that means for us photographers is that it will make our once sharp image blurry.
THE ABOVE is something I just "robbed" from somewhere-
The "stray points of light" are the ones that are blocked-and the ones I describe as going to hit farther from dead center of our retina-
If our eye's lense is good-don't need glasses- it adjusts those rays-if it is bad-but we use a tiny pinhole- it does not matter since they are mechanically blocked
But tiny hole means you need GREAT LIGHT-no free lunch
Oh well-I don't really understand it-
but I am going to get one of those fancy $60 for the TX 200 and glue a Daisy fiber optic front on the barrel-yeah it will look "funny" but it will be LIGHT(another pun) lighter than a scope
Thanks Mike and Ron
Ron-you just cost me another $60 or so-but when the TX 200 becomes less piggish-it is worth it 9.25 is a lot less than 10 3/4 lbs
-
Outstanding!!!
Posting for future reference
-
Outstanding!!!
Posting for future reference
Thanks ;)
-
Mike Great article-thanks!!
I wish I had seen it 24 hrs ago
Before I spent $31.50 on 3 "hole" sights for my 1322 1377
I have LOTS of trouble getting a remotely clear picture with the stock sights on the pistols-the rear sight and the front get lost one in the other-I can't quite see the top of the front sight
The article you posted made it clear that diopter and aperture sights need to be CLOSE to your eye-with the pistols the sights will be waaaay away-so they will be useless I think-
Slight aside-the sights on the article look much like the sights the women were using in the olympics in the 50 meter rifle 3 position competition-the sights were obviously "diopter"
but really fancy-probably zillion dollar sights
Thanks for the tip
Charlie
PS Well I will figure a way to put an aperture sight on the TX 200- 10 3/4 LBS is just too much to shoot standing- with no rest
The 460 is 8.4 lbs-not bad at all- the HW77K about 8.9 lbs-but feels no heavier that the 460-the TX with scope- 10 3/4lbs-a PIG-I feel like I am weight lifting!!
The closer to the eye the better the rear diopter sight. I do have a couple of military rifles on which I have installed dipoter sights in the normal rear sight position, which is quite a bit further from my eye. You cannot use as small a diopter hole, but it is quite workable and better than a narrow leaf rear. As far as on a pistol at arms length, forget it
-
(Withdrawn)
-
Good post I have these on a marlin 795. Had to do some filing but once fitted really good sights.
-
I think the science of "peeps"
Works like a pinhole camera. Don't need to focus on the rear sight; just center the front in it.
Peeps maximize the distance between front and rear sights, yielding the least angular error resulting from slight sight misalignment.
-
I just installed one of the rear sights on my Hatsan Torpedo 150 yesterday. Works great with the fiber optic front sight. Would’ve been better with a globe front, but it’s way better than the stock rear. Great people to work with and it got across the country in a short amount of time.
-
Hi Ron
Haven't been online for awhile , hope things are going well. That Remington peep was a great find. I'm pretty use to the Gehmann adjustable on the William mount but that military style peep for the HW looks perfrect. My have to buy another Springer to mount that bad boy. Wish you found it sooner. My setup is working well but the Williams base isn't as strong as your new find . May just buy one with the adjustment too. If your not working I know your in the basement shooting out this crappy day. Take care pal.
Chris
-
I think the science of "peeps"
Works like a pinhole camera. Don't need to focus on the rear sight; just center the front in it.
Peeps maximize the distance between front and rear sights, yielding the least angular error resulting from slight sight misalignment.
Nope you don't even have to do that. I've played with moving the front sight all around the peep hole and the POI doesn't change. It's unexplainable. As long as the front sight is in the peep and on the target you'll hit the target. There's a scientific reason for it that eludes my comprehension. I can tell you that at least at airgun ranges all you have to do is get front sight on the target anywhere through the peep hole and your good to go.
-
Ron: Thanks for the follow-up! If the sight will fit an arched-top receiver, I'm guessing it will also fit a flat surface like the Diana rail. But even if it doesn't...there are plenty of needy Weihrauchs at my house LOL.
Phoebeisis: Again, part of the secret is that the small hole forms a sort of lens. Light doesn't just come straight through the small opening, but is refracted into a clearer image.
The only problem I've had with aperture sights was with cataracts, which made a nasty little black spot in the middle of the sight picture, if I used too small an opening. Increasing the aperture size over about 2 mm helped (this is using an old match sight with an adjustable iris eyepiece), and after cataract surgery I'm happy to say the problem vanished.
Cementing my reputation as a peep sight slut...I just order the Tech-Sight, complete with tool and interchangeable aperture package...!
Mike,
I am wondering if you would mind writing a post about your cataracts and what lens you choose and your satisfaction level.
I bet most of the GTA readers are of "that age" where cataracts are a real probability. Something I will have to deal with sooner rather than latter... :D
-Y
-
Ron: Thanks for the follow-up! If the sight will fit an arched-top receiver, I'm guessing it will also fit a flat surface like the Diana rail. But even if it doesn't...there are plenty of needy Weihrauchs at my house LOL.
Phoebeisis: Again, part of the secret is that the small hole forms a sort of lens. Light doesn't just come straight through the small opening, but is refracted into a clearer image.
The only problem I've had with aperture sights was with cataracts, which made a nasty little black spot in the middle of the sight picture, if I used too small an opening. Increasing the aperture size over about 2 mm helped (this is using an old match sight with an adjustable iris eyepiece), and after cataract surgery I'm happy to say the problem vanished.
Cementing my reputation as a peep sight slut...I just order the Tech-Sight, complete with tool and interchangeable aperture package...!
Mike,
I am wondering if you would mind writing a post about your cataracts and what lens you choose and your satisfaction level.
I bet most of the GTA readers are of "that age" where cataracts are a real probability. Something I will have to deal with sooner rather than latter... :D
-Y
Not Mike here, but Jeff.
My wife and I both had cataract surgery over the last year and a half. Hers covered via medicare and commercial insurance, mine by the VA, we used the same doctor, and we both used a "standard" lens. It turned out that the specialty, bifocal or progressive lenses would have been and extra $2600 per eye, that's 4 eyes so you figure the math. The main reason I got the surgery was to eliminate, or rather reduce the flare from bright lights and in that aspect I am pleased.
I went from near sighted to more far sighted or according to the after surgery refractions a little better than 20/20. With the standard lens you do loose the ability to focus close. One of the optometrists said initally to go to the dollar store and get some cheap reading glasses, which I did, some of the narrow ones I could perch on the end of my nose for close things like reading this computer on my lap, and look over them at say the TV across the room. I used to read well without glasses but distant vision was a no no. Now it's the opposite without glasses. I got a set of progressive lenses simply because I am used to wearing glasses all the time, and especially doing work as a relief pharmacist I need to go back and forth quickly from distant to reading and do not want to constantly be taking glasses on and off. We decided at our ages, 76 and 79, the fancy intraocular insert lenses were not worth the nearly $11,000 for both of us, we could buy a lot of glasses for that price, and the VA does provide me with a free pair yearly, not progressive but bi focal or tri focal. and that would leave a lot of money left over for things like persuing this air gun hobby. We are both quite happy with the result using standard intraocular replacement lenses.
I admittedly could see my leaf rear sights better prior to the surgery, but some blurriness there does not really bother me. I tried out a new HW77 with factory sights, and only firing about 7-8 shots, got a 3/8" group at 10 ten yards, then hitting a soda can at about 30 yards, including offhand shooting. I am planning on a peep rear for it in the next week or so, as they are much easier to shoot.
-
Thanks Jeff for clarifying a few things for me. I am like you use to be, I read well without glasses but distant vision is a no no. I walk around the house without glasses and even watch television (about 15 ft away) without my glasses. I wear trifocals and I will need cataract surgery in a few years and I've been wondering about the regular lens and how I would adapt from near sighted to more far sighted.
-
Jeff covered about everything very well!
I too went with distance lenses after a lifetime of near-sightedness. The close-focus IOL's have a very narrow depth-of-field and one of my surgeon's own staff, who has them, recommended strongly against them! Multi-focus IOL's are not only much more pricey, but also physically a little thicker. If you have any pressure issues in your eyes, your surgeon will not recommend them.
My vision is now about 20/20 for anything farther away than my feet, LOL. Another pleasant surprise is that the world is a more pleasant color; cataracts have a slight brown cast so things now look more blue and fresh.
Before surgery I had progressive glasses lenses. I could read fine, but had issues with close-up work like model building. My optometrist prescribed glasses specifically for that, which add a couple diopters of magnification to the "close" portion of my progressive prescription. (I'd recommend this for anyone by the way - VASTLY better than simple "drug store" magnifiers if you have any astigmatism, etc., at all.)
Also like Jeff, I did this all this again after surgery. The progressive lenses are still needed, now to handle not only reading, but to fill in that in-between, "arm's length" distance that straight readers don't cover (jobs like finding stuff on a shelf are frustrating without this). I also got another set of the extra-mag prescription readers for close work.
All in all I'm very happy with it all...and can now see iron sights again very well!
-
I had gotten on of the flip up Optivisors ,
https://www.amazon.com/Donegan-OptiVisor-Headband-Magnifier-Magnification/dp/B0015IN8J6/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=optivisor&qid=1647179616&sr=8-3 (https://www.amazon.com/Donegan-OptiVisor-Headband-Magnifier-Magnification/dp/B0015IN8J6/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=optivisor&qid=1647179616&sr=8-3)
years ago for really close up work. You can get different magnification plates and even an extra lens to mount in front of it, which makes focal length only an inch or so, but gives tremendous detail. You can use them over your regular glasses. I find the also work well after the cataract surgery.
Nothing is going to be perfect, as we get older the eye "hardens" and focusing at different distances becomes less than perfect. As a pharmacist, I can read labels up on a high to mid level shelf, get one down near floor level and forget it, I will have to get one of the younger techs to look for me or get down on my hands and knees, which with my old age and arthritis is not going to happen. We all get more limitations as we get older and just have to learn to deal with them.