Iris Sights

[tropicalshot]

are these sights legal in Fita??
all i could find in regards to the rules
7.3.1.5 A bow sight for aiming is permitted, but at no time may more than one such device
be used.
7.3.1.5.1 It must not incorporate a prism, lens, or any other magnifying
device, levelling, electric or electronic devices nor will it provide
for more than one sighting point.
7.3.1.5.2 The overall length of the sight (tunnel, tube, sighting pin and/or
other corresponding extended component) will not exceed 2cm in
the line of vision of the athlete.
7.3.1.5.3 A sight may be attached to the bow for the purpose of aiming and
which may allow for windage adjustment as well as an elevation
setting. It is subject to the following provisions:

[tropicalshot]

can be seen more clearly here
http://www.euroshooting.eu/en/index.php?505_archery_iris&detail=553

[Eberbachl]

Don't know if it's FITA legal, but it sure looks nice.

;)

[Ed]

Don't know if it's FITA legal, but it sure looks nice.

;)

Any idea how they work?

[tropicalshot]

just look like you rotate the dial on the front and th iris opens and closes, saw someone said they shoot with them in UK just wondered how legal they are

[tropicalshot]

this may be a better pic

[shannonhearse]

If it is fita legal, then it may work for judging FITA field distances (or any unmarked course for that matter)

bow hunters can determine distance to the quarry by noting the iris aperture for a given game silhoutte. Available in 3 different stainless steel attachment threads: 8/32" (505), 10/32" (505-1032), M4 (504L), others available

[Ed]

Don't know if it's FITA legal, but it sure looks nice.

;)

Been doing some research - the FITA Technical Committee declared them illegal on 24 Feb 2006 so now we have an answer!

[The One]

Really? I know some guy who's been shooting one - maybe I should let him know... He must have been through a dozen gear inspections without being picked up on it.

[Archangel]

Been doing some research - the FITA Technical Committee declared them illegal on 24 Feb 2006 so now we have an answer!
Just out of interest, on what basis? As I briefly glance over tropicalshot's post it doesn't appear to me to be ruled out?

[Eberbachl]

Just out of interest, on what basis? As I briefly glance over tropicalshot's post it doesn't appear to me to be ruled out?

nor will it provide for more than one sighting point.

They may claim that the individual aperture blades (if visible) could be used as more than one sighting point?

[Ed]

Just out of interest, on what basis? As I briefly glance over tropicalshot's post it doesn't appear to me to be ruled out?

They do not provide a basis - just a ruling.

[Archangel]

They do not provide a basis - just a ruling.
Oh right, thought I'd read something in the past where they'd explained their reasoning, but I must be mixed up with something else. Thanks :-)

[grantwomack]

These were deemed legal for all FITA rounds except unmarked FITA Field rounds.

They're used over here from time to time, but tend to rust, so not really worth the money.

[tropicalshot]

These were deemed legal for all FITA rounds except unmarked FITA Field rounds.

They're used over here from time to time, but tend to rust, so not really worth the money.

Been doing some research - the FITA Technical Committee declared them illegal on 24 Feb 2006 so now we have an answer!

so who is right????

are they now legal again or does the 2006 comittee ruling still stand

[2Dogs]

Ed

[tropicalshot]

Ed

i'll go with ed as well, he may be checking my equipment one day ;)

[2Dogs]

Grant has NFI about most things.... like he moved from Oz to England.

Enough said :thumb:

[tropicalshot]

like he moved from Oz to England.

Enough said :thumb:

at least i saw the light and moved from England to Oz

[Archangel]

at least i saw the light and moved from England to Oz
Being sent to a penal colony doesn't count as "seeing the light" ;-)

[TrevorK]

According to the linked page, 0.2kg seems very heavy in a recurve sense

[Ed]

Oh right, thought I'd read something in the past where they'd explained their reasoning, but I must be mixed up with something else. Thanks :-)

The ruling was approved by the FITA C & R Committee on 27 April in the same year 2006).

You are right; sometimes they give a reason, at other times they don't.

[grantwomack]

Grant has NFI about most things.... like he moved from Oz to England.

Enough said :thumb:
Heard you were moving to Brisbane.

Enough said. :thumb:

[johnske]

gt says it's legal for target, but illegal for unmarked field (which makes a lotta sense) see http://www.hoytrecurve.com/community/article_detail.php?id=19

[Ed]

gt says it's legal for target, but illegal for unmarked field (which makes a lotta sense) see http://www.hoytrecurve.com/community/article_detail.php?id=19

OK, the interpretation from the FITA Technical Committee in 2006 reads as follows:

"Book 2, Article 7.3.1.9.3 - the FITA Technical Committee agrees unanimously that the use of an adjustable iris lens in the shooting glass is not legal."

Note that Book 2 and the article deal with TARGET ARCHERY so this guy's claim that it is OK for target archery is not correct. Maybe someone should let him know!

[Ed]

These were deemed legal for all FITA rounds except unmarked FITA Field rounds.

They're used over here from time to time, but tend to rust, so not really worth the money.

Where did you get this info from?

[puddin]

there are alot of people that are saying they are legal but as Ed has pointed out fita says they are not and they are the rule we follow.
the others are just wrong

[puddin]

there are alot of people that are saying they are legal but as Ed has pointed out fita says they are not and they are the rule we follow.
the others are just wrong
i would like to correct myself. (wish we had edit function here), just went and read the rule the interpretation relates to and it has nothing to do with the sight of the bow.
7.3.1.9.3 Prescription spectacles, shooting spectacles and sunglasses may
be used. None of these may be fitted with micro hole lenses, or
similar devices, nor may they be marked in any way that can assist
in aiming.
it is the glasses and scopes. so it would appear that the iris if used on a sight is legal, as fita havent said otherwise.

[tropicalshot]

i would like to correct myself. (wish we had edit function here), just went and read the rule the interpretation relates to and it has nothing to do with the sight of the bow.
7.3.1.9.3 Prescription spectacles, shooting spectacles and sunglasses may
be used. None of these may be fitted with micro hole lenses, or
similar devices, nor may they be marked in any way that can assist
in aiming.
it is the glasses and scopes. so it would appear that the iris if used on a sight is legal, as fita havent said otherwise.

wish someone could clarify!

maybe it has to go before Fita again,
personaly i can see no wrong in it, as its the same as changing the sight appeture O'Ring in a TITAN, but with a dial instead of physicaly replacing o'rings.

gt says it's legal for target, but illegal for unmarked field (which makes a lotta sense)

on this basis does that mean the TITAN could be excluded for Field beacause the appeture can be adjusted(allbeit a lot slower)??

[burt666]

on this basis does that mean the TITAN could be excluded for Field beacause the appeture can be adjusted(allbeit a lot slower)??

same theory applies to those new Beiter sight tunnel insert, the open ring ones....

[Ed]

wish someone could clarify!

maybe it has to go before Fita again,


Am in the process of trying to find out further info from FITA. It appears that the original ruling provided to me did indeed, as someone pointed out earlier, refer to 'glasses.' (i.e. of the spectacle type)
I suspect that there was a problem by the person interpreting 'iris lens.
I have pointed out the difference between 'iris lens' (as applied to glasses), and
iris sight and have provided pictures of the sight and also referred them to the two websites quoted on this thread.
Will put something up when I hear from them.

[tropicalshot]

Will put something up when I hear from them.

which is why you are the #1 judge extraordinare

Thanks :thumb:

[Ed]

which is why you are the #1 judge extraordinare

Thanks :thumb:

My apologies if I have misled people. The sights are indeed LEGAL for all forms of archery except unmarked field. I have received a clarification from the FITA Judge Committee Chairman over the weekend. It appears there had been a misunderstanding in the original response which resulted in the word 'lens' being interpreted as part of the sight. Puddin quite rightly pointed out that the response related to the rule re. glasses/spectacles and this is what made me go on to further query it. One of the reasons we sometimes have interpretation problems is that although the rule makers' English is pretty good there has not been a person on the Committee whose first language is English for quite a while.
;)

[grantwomack]

I remember reading about the Ambo about 6 months after it was released, on one of the FITA legality forms. Same way the Titan was approved. Can't find one online now, but I know I read it in about 2004...

[gt]

Note that Book 2 and the article deal with TARGET ARCHERY so this guy's claim that it is OK for target archery is not correct. Maybe someone should let him know!

I take it that there's no need for me to respond to this.