I did say I would follow up with a Holosun 507COMP vs Trijicon SRO comparison very soon, didn’t I? That’s right. I did, in my first impressions review of the Holosun 507COMP, and I simply could not help myself. The thing is, it is no secret that I am a Trijicon SRO enjoyer. It’s been my absolute favorite competition pistol optic since I reviewed it in 2022. I’ve run an SRO on the H&K VP9 Match, the Staccato P, the CZ Shadow 2 and even the CZ Czechmate.
However, it’s also no secret that I enjoy Holosun pistol optics. They are very well built for their purposes, and their multi-reticle technology offers several advantages over a plain dot. Even so, more often than not I opt for Trijicon optics on my defensive and competition pistols. That said, the Holosun 507COMP intrigues me. So much so, in fact, that it has replaced the Trijicon SRO on the Shadow 2. That happens to be the pistol I primarily compete with. In my opinion, there is good reason to give the Holosun 507COMP a fair shake. I believe a comparison of the two will make it pretty obvious why.
Holosun 507COMP vs Trijicon SRO on Price
One difference I covered in the initial review is that the Holosun 507COMP is noticeably less expensive than the Trijicon SRO. As I write this in August 2023, the Holosun is new to the market, and its average street price is about $380. The Trijicon’s average street price is $555. Even at the lowest prices I’ve seen to date, the 507COMP comes in at $365. The SRO’s low is $444 or $469, depending on the variant. The 507COMP may drop even lower once the initial demand fades. However, the SRO might also see a price drop as demand shifts toward Trijicon’s new pistol optics, like the RMR HD. Nevertheless, that’s all speculation. What isn’t speculation is that the Holosun 507COMP is available now at a lower and much more attractive price. In terms of price, I have to give the win to the Holosun.
What Competitors Want From an Optic
As we all know, price isn’t everything. This is arguably most true in the competitive shooting sports market. Avid competitors frequently drop enough coin on a blaster to rival a car loan. At the end of the day, they are looking for a competitive advantage. That means the equipment has to perform. Reliability and durability are certainly nice, but they are often secondary to raw performance. For optics in the action pistol sports, performance translates into faster and more accurate target acquisition and shot placement. This is why competitors, including myself, tend to favor large windows and large dots (up to a point) on their pistol optics. With that in mind, let’s take a look at the lenses and “dots” on these two optics.
Window Size
Starting with the lenses, both optics offer a large window, or viewport if you will. The Holosun 507COMP window is rectangular and measures 0.87 in tall by 1.1 in wide. The Trijicon SRO window, by comparison, is almost circular and measures 0.98 in tall by 0.89 in wide. In other words, the 507COMP is wider, whereas the SRO is taller.
In my opinion, a taller window is preferable to a wider one. This is because the dot, or the reticle in the case of the 507COMP, moves vertically under recoil. That vertical movement provides invaluable feedback. As such, a taller window provides more feedback than a wider one. Is a vertical difference of 0.09 in significant enough to matter? That’s hard for me to say with absolute certainty, but I lean ever so slightly toward yes. As a result, the window-size round of Holosun 507COMP vs Trijicon SRO goes to the Trijicon.
Reticle Options
As I mentioned already, in the action pistol sports a larger aiming reference is preferable, up to a point. For a deeper discussion on this, please refer to this previous blog post. The gist of it is that larger reference points are easier to perceive visually. In turn, that allows for faster, albeit coarser, aiming and shooting. Diminishing returns begin when the aiming reference grows larger than the acceptable impact area on a target. For sports like USPSA and IDPA, the SRO 5 MOA dot variant does very well. It is also the variant participants most commonly prefer. However, some folks, including myself, would prefer an even larger dot, even though larger dots make dialing a precise zero more challenging.
Based on this, the Holosun 507COMP’s multi-reticle system obliterates the single dot on the Trijicon SRO. One can use the 2 MOA center dot alone to dial in a very precise zero. Only the SRO 1 MOA variant can best that. Then one can switch to the largest reticle configuration for the competitive application at hand. I’m still testing a few of the settings on the Holosun. So far, the 20 MOA ring alone lends itself well to IDPA and USPSA matches. The 8 MOA ring works very well for Steel Challenge. This may not be as big of a deal to folks who keep specific pistols with specific optics for different games. However, I have to give the versatility win to the Holosun 507COMP.
Glass and Tint
One thing that is sometimes a sticking point for folks is the tint the lens coatings give an optic. Too much of a certain hue can be a problem for some folks. Whether that problem really affects one’s visual performance, or it’s just personal preference, is perhaps a topic for another discussion. However, I will note that the tint is more noticeable and darker on the Holosun 507COMP. I’d also argue that image distortion from magnification appears more often on the Holosun 507COMP. I speculate that these lens quality differences have something to do with the price difference. That is neither here nor there, though. In terms of clarity and lens quality, I have to give the win to the Trijicon SRO.
Holosun 507COMP vs Trijicon SRO on Size
Another notable difference is in the physical dimensions of the two optics. Both share the RMR mounting footprint, and the SRO is slightly taller. More importantly, the SRO has a protruding overhang that results in an overall length of 2.2 in, compared to the 507COMP’s 1.77 in. This matters for some pistols. The SRO’s overhang has been known to cause reliability issues. When it hangs too far forward over a pistol’s ejection port, it can interfere with cartridge ejection. While this is entirely pistol dependent, I have to give the dimensional win to the 507COMP. Without an overhang, it shouldn’t interfere with any pistol’s ejection.
Durability
Even though durability is a secondary concern for most pistol competitors, it is still a valid one. The SRO has a track record of being more durable than several other pistol optics on the market. Still, it also has a track record of breaking or failing after a significant impact, such as a drop. At this point, I don’t have enough experience with the 507COMP to say it will take a beating better than the SRO. Nor have I seen durability testing that suggests it. Nonetheless, the track record of Holosun’s 507 product line suggests that the 507COMP will prove more durable than the Trijicon SRO. As I mentioned in the initial review, I’m not about to torture test the Holosun, but I am hopeful. Since I don’t have enough data to support my hypothesis, I will not declare a Holosun 507COMP vs Trijicon SRO winner on this front.
Closing Thoughts
I’m still not certain that the Holosun 507COMP is the Trijicon SRO killer some are suggesting. Comparing the two optics, however, I think the Holosun 507COMP is a very promising competition pistol optic that, if nothing else, deserves serious consideration. I’m not about to start replacing the SROs I have mounted on other pistols.
On the other hand, I’m going to hold off on picking up other competition optics for a good while. That lasts at least until I declare either the Trijicon or the Holosun a clear winner for the activities I participate in. Honestly, I might well conclude that one optic is better at some of those activities while the other is better suited to the rest. If I counted wins correctly in this Holosun 507COMP vs Trijicon SRO comparison, the Holosun edged out the Trijicon. That said, and given the SRO’s track record, the SRO is not out of the fight. At least not for me.
