2022 note: this is an old MKI sight, the company has made several improvements, be sure to read all posts
I've had this sight for a while but only recently had the opportunity to test it. I tried it on my SIG522:
My first impressions are that the sight is well-made, quite sturdy and attaches firmly to a Picatinny rail. I would have preferred it if it wasn't secured with grub screws, because they will marr the rail (and in my case they did make marks on my Yankee Hill Machine riser).
Anyway, the build quality is good, the sight attaches firmly to the rail and the packaging and manual that comes with the sight are both clear and nicely presented.
I agree with comments elsewhere on the web about the branding on the sight itself. I think the large white print is an eyesore, and could have been toned down a lot.
Having said that, I didn't find that it interfered with the use of the sight.
The See All is a novelty in some ways because it doesn't use any batteries, instead it uses a polycarbonate lens to magnify a black triangle which is attached to a fibre-optic block up front. You do not look at your target through the lens or the fibre-optic block, instead you get a sight picture by aligning the upper edge of the clear lens with the two black lines found on either side of the apex of the black triangle. You then line up the target on the apex of the triangle.
See this picture here:
If you don't align it right you get the fibre-optic block obstructing the target (barrel is tilted too far down).
If you have it too far the other way, you lose the lines adjacent to the triangle and then lose the apex of the triangle itself.
When I was setting this sight up on the rifle, I tried it at various positions on the rail and for me at least the sight picture was clearest with the See All forward on the rail. I use a Yankee Hill Machine riser because it is more comfortable with the SIG.
So, the big question: how do I like it?
Well the answer is, I wanted to like this sight and I had high hopes for it but ultimately I don't like it. Here are my reasons:
1) It takes a lot of work to get the correct picture. It is by no means a fast process, it takes much longer than a red dot and much longer than irons.
2) The sight itself obstructs a lot of your view, even in my case where I had it mounted up front. You always have the feeling you are only seeing half the target. It feels more obstructive than irons and obviously it is more obstructive than a red dot (when comparing unmagnified units like the Burris Fast Fire III or even the cheap Mueller Quick Shot).
3) There is a definite transitional area where you can have a kind of mirage effect as you approach the correct sight picture. You can almost see it there in my first picture of the sight aimed down range. That backstop is 27 yards away, now look at the top edge of the sight. There is an indistinct area which comes into play and causes a lot of strain on the eye whilst you try to resolve the sight picture as clearly as you can. It's a constant dance with me vs the See All and that thin mirage effect as you get sight picture with it. You may well be better off in a more dimly lit environment (I have aimed it in a fairly dark room and the fibre-optic blocks collects a lot of ambient light, you can aim it surprisingly well).
In terms of outcomes at 27 yards, I fired known batches of CCI Mini-mag with the rifle unsuppressed and then known batches of RWS Target Rifle, with my ASE Utra Suppressor attached.
This was the best 20-round group I could get with the CCI, rifle rested on a sand bag at a slow steady rate of fire:
And this was the best 20-round group I could get with Target Rifle and the suppressor:
Those groups are slightly larger than the groups I could get with my Burris Fast fire III attached, firing in the same circumstances. The difference is that I don't get any eye strain with the Burris and I can get sight picture a lot faster than with the See All.
This was my best standing group with CCI, no suppressor, 20 rounds:
With the Burris Fast Fire III I would have no rounds out of the black, and the group would be better. I attribute this to the effort being expended to align the sights when using the See All.
To sum it up from my perspective, the sight is novel but it is too much work.
I then handed the rifle to a known good shooter at out club. He had the same experience as I did. He suggests the sight might come into its own after someone has spent a few thousand rounds developing a good muscle memory to align the sight the same all the time.
A second shooter tried the See All on my SIG for 40 rounds, mixed standing and seated shooting at 27 yards and got a group a bit larger than my last lot there. He agrees it is not a pick-up-and-go sight.
Finally, I gave the sight to a friend with a long-barrelled Browning Buckmark pistol. He mounted it as far back as possible, closest to the eye. Even so, he complained of the triangle being indistinct and of not being able to get a consistent sight picture. This is a known good shooter and his groups at 10 metres with the pistol were fairly bad.
I have a theory where this sight could shine, and that is on my crossbow. It looks like it will stand up to the two-way recoil present on my crossbow and because of the slow rate of fire and lower accuracy demands, the little mirage in the sight picture will not play a big role.
I aim to test that, after the holidays...
I've had this sight for a while but only recently had the opportunity to test it. I tried it on my SIG522:
My first impressions are that the sight is well-made, quite sturdy and attaches firmly to a Picatinny rail. I would have preferred it if it wasn't secured with grub screws, because they will marr the rail (and in my case they did make marks on my Yankee Hill Machine riser).
Anyway, the build quality is good, the sight attaches firmly to the rail and the packaging and manual that comes with the sight are both clear and nicely presented.
I agree with comments elsewhere on the web about the branding on the sight itself. I think the large white print is an eyesore, and could have been toned down a lot.
Having said that, I didn't find that it interfered with the use of the sight.
The See All is a novelty in some ways because it doesn't use any batteries, instead it uses a polycarbonate lens to magnify a black triangle which is attached to a fibre-optic block up front. You do not look at your target through the lens or the fibre-optic block, instead you get a sight picture by aligning the upper edge of the clear lens with the two black lines found on either side of the apex of the black triangle. You then line up the target on the apex of the triangle.
See this picture here:
If you don't align it right you get the fibre-optic block obstructing the target (barrel is tilted too far down).
If you have it too far the other way, you lose the lines adjacent to the triangle and then lose the apex of the triangle itself.
When I was setting this sight up on the rifle, I tried it at various positions on the rail and for me at least the sight picture was clearest with the See All forward on the rail. I use a Yankee Hill Machine riser because it is more comfortable with the SIG.
So, the big question: how do I like it?
Well the answer is, I wanted to like this sight and I had high hopes for it but ultimately I don't like it. Here are my reasons:
1) It takes a lot of work to get the correct picture. It is by no means a fast process, it takes much longer than a red dot and much longer than irons.
2) The sight itself obstructs a lot of your view, even in my case where I had it mounted up front. You always have the feeling you are only seeing half the target. It feels more obstructive than irons and obviously it is more obstructive than a red dot (when comparing unmagnified units like the Burris Fast Fire III or even the cheap Mueller Quick Shot).
3) There is a definite transitional area where you can have a kind of mirage effect as you approach the correct sight picture. You can almost see it there in my first picture of the sight aimed down range. That backstop is 27 yards away, now look at the top edge of the sight. There is an indistinct area which comes into play and causes a lot of strain on the eye whilst you try to resolve the sight picture as clearly as you can. It's a constant dance with me vs the See All and that thin mirage effect as you get sight picture with it. You may well be better off in a more dimly lit environment (I have aimed it in a fairly dark room and the fibre-optic blocks collects a lot of ambient light, you can aim it surprisingly well).
In terms of outcomes at 27 yards, I fired known batches of CCI Mini-mag with the rifle unsuppressed and then known batches of RWS Target Rifle, with my ASE Utra Suppressor attached.
This was the best 20-round group I could get with the CCI, rifle rested on a sand bag at a slow steady rate of fire:
And this was the best 20-round group I could get with Target Rifle and the suppressor:
Those groups are slightly larger than the groups I could get with my Burris Fast fire III attached, firing in the same circumstances. The difference is that I don't get any eye strain with the Burris and I can get sight picture a lot faster than with the See All.
This was my best standing group with CCI, no suppressor, 20 rounds:
With the Burris Fast Fire III I would have no rounds out of the black, and the group would be better. I attribute this to the effort being expended to align the sights when using the See All.
To sum it up from my perspective, the sight is novel but it is too much work.
I then handed the rifle to a known good shooter at out club. He had the same experience as I did. He suggests the sight might come into its own after someone has spent a few thousand rounds developing a good muscle memory to align the sight the same all the time.
A second shooter tried the See All on my SIG for 40 rounds, mixed standing and seated shooting at 27 yards and got a group a bit larger than my last lot there. He agrees it is not a pick-up-and-go sight.
Finally, I gave the sight to a friend with a long-barrelled Browning Buckmark pistol. He mounted it as far back as possible, closest to the eye. Even so, he complained of the triangle being indistinct and of not being able to get a consistent sight picture. This is a known good shooter and his groups at 10 metres with the pistol were fairly bad.
I have a theory where this sight could shine, and that is on my crossbow. It looks like it will stand up to the two-way recoil present on my crossbow and because of the slow rate of fire and lower accuracy demands, the little mirage in the sight picture will not play a big role.
I aim to test that, after the holidays...
Last edited:
