There are LPVOs that frequently go for 3 to 4 hundred dollars. I guess they are typically 1-6X. Ex: Burris RT-6 and the Vortex Strike Eagle.

There are prism scopes that are of fixed power that can be had for 3 hundred dollars or so.

How much better is a 3X prism scope compared to an above mentioned LPVO on 3X?

The PA 3x is 8 oz and the LPVOs pretty much start at 16 oz so...

Better?  Lighter.  But, better?  Meh.  3x is 3x, the LPVO will go higher in magnification at the price of more weight.  The reticle is key, and the level of brightness of illumination.

Each has pros and cons that is just how it goes.  If you need the higher magnification the LPVO is better.  If you are looking for higher durability and weight the prism is better.  For the most part you can kind of make them both work for a multitude of different scenarios or missions.

Seen this comparison?  At 6:30

Big advantage of a prism scope - eyebox

You can't get too close to a prism scope.  You can get too far away.  When you get closer, you don't lose your usable image.  A traditional scope does not work this way.

This. While most LPVO’s have a longer distance eye relief, most prisms will have longer useable eye relief. This goes hand in hand with the wider exit pupil, which not only increases eye box but light transmission.

The distance you plan to shoot at should be the biggest determining factor though.

I should have been more specific. I was thinking the quality of the image when looking through it and the quality of the reticle.

@s4s4u

@PN5X5

Thanks.

There would be opportunity to use higher grade glass in an optic that doesn't have as many moving parts or bells and whistles, so there may be an improvement in the image quality.  It will really depend on the budget and the man'f, but if comparing a $300 prism to a $300 LPVO I'd expect that money to be spent on things that matter most.  I am still waiting for someone to produce prism sights with a reticle that I can work with tho.

I have a few a few prisms from way back when they were cool and lpvos now.

The godawful eye relief of almost all prisms sucks. It just kills the optic's usability. From what I can tell with some of new iterations,is that they forwent exit pupil for eye relief, which to me screams crap eyebox.

I'll take an lpvo every time now, despite how difficult it seems for some to figure out how to use the magnification ring.

Exit pupil can’t be adjusted for better or worse. It’s a mathematical equation of the objective lens diameter divided by the magnification. (Aside from LPVO’s at 1X due to the multiple lenses creating a mandatory reduction).

Field of view (which you likely meant) is the trade off. The new prisms take advantage of laser cutting so the prism designs are much more efficient. Meaning they can be smaller and offer better shapes to increase both field of view and eye relief. The Steiner, Vortex, and PA prisms compared to the ACOG’s are good example of the increase in performance due to newer technology.

Trijicon is the best for durability and quality, but they’re decades behind in prism geometry.

I have spent I don’t know how many hours looking through an RCO. You can actually use them for recon, range estimation and they have clear glass. They are very durable, great light transmission and the reticle is crazy bright. They served their purpose and are still a great optic, but it is time for an upgrade. I think 4x is the sweet spot for fixed magnification.

My concerns remain with eye relief, and eyebox. Never mentioned field of view. If I have to have the left side of the charging handle in my right nostril to use the optic, it's useless to me. That was the problem with them 10+ years ago. 1.5 - 2.5" eye relief is a joke. Had the same problem with the primary arms glx 2.5-10x. In addition to the eye relief, there's eyebox, or how far to the outside of the optical cone coming from the occular lens you can move your head before seeing black. Smaller exit pupil screams smaller eyebox.

Eye relief and field of view are a scale. A TA31 has an awesome field of view with small eye relief, while the TA33 has good eye relief and a terrible field of view for instance. Something has to be sacrificed in a trade between the two. To get more eye relief you have to give up field of view and vice versa. It’s a rough balance but will stay that way until we move to digital optics in the next 10-20 years.

The TA11 and TA33 prism scopes eyebox blows away a traditional scope.  Not even close.

Doesn’t the Primary Arms 5x have longer eye relief than the TA11?

Better? No.  Weight saving is a maybe but for most people that would not be a deciding factor.
What you will give up with a 3x prism optic is the flexibility in multi range magnification.  Even for the really old and porky Leupold Mark 4 CQT 1-3X, I would pick this over any new 3x prism optic (i had one years ago on my JP rig).  Both have etched reticle in glass.  I don't use illumination 99% of the time so daylight bright isn't a factor.

Prism scopes are not all created equal.  A cheap prism might look better or worse than a cheap variable when you look through it, glass quality is still a thing.  I think a TA11 ACOG visually looks better than every LPVO I've ever looked through at the same 3.5x, and I've had all the expensive ones.

Agree with that assessment.  Trijicon TA11 IS the measuring yardstick from the optical clarity perspective. Leupold 1X Prismatic is another one.

Just different as others have said. I have both and the PA 3x prism and ACOG's are my preferences. Why? Well because I rarely change the magnification on the LPVO's that I have in play right now. Those are  1x4,1x6 and 1x8.

I typically shoot at 50yds to 100yds with some in the 250yd range where the 1x8 is mostly utilized in a DMR type set up.


Again , better depends on what you are using them for. But YMMV

Lies.

My Leupold VX5HD 1-5x CDS ZL2 Firedot scope is 13.9 oz, so I would say LPVOs do NOT start at 16oz. They start under 14oz.

My Leupold VX5HD 1-5× weighs the same as the Trijicon TA11 3.5x, which is my favorite prism optic, BTW. But I get 1x and 5x with an adjustable daylight bright dot instead of just 3.5x fixed and BAC if the lighting conditions are right.

The PA 3x compact prism has relatively poor glass quality. The only reason people find it acceptable is the low magnification. Is it better than their previous attempts for sure, but it is not great glass.

The TA31 4x has poor eye relief. It has the worst eye relief of any optic I have ever used. Enough said.

The TA33 3x has shit FOV. It is so bad my Lepold 1-5× has more FOV at 5x than the TA33 has at 3x. That is simply ridiculous.

So... what is better at $300?

You are inherently comparing two specific optics at that price limitation IMO. The 3x Primary Arms SL compact prism and the Primary Arms SL 1-6×24 with NOVA reticle.

I made a choice for a budget trunk gun. My choice was the 1-6× NOVA, partially because of the soon to be released shake awake battery cap PA is about to release. It is an amazing value, but certainly not perfect. Glass quality is at least as good as the prism (but to me it is better on the NOVA) and you get 6x capability and you get the brightest variable scope reticle ever made.

There is a massive weight and bulk difference though. The PA factory mounts suck for both optics, so both have to be replaced with quality mounts. I use Larue QD mounts. The Larue LT 100 ACOG mount is $175 vs. the $200 of the LT 104 (now discontinued) and the LT100 ACOG mount is half the weight of the LT104.

I guess my point is... for each individual optic the image quality is different. And even if a 3x prism has slightly better glass at 3x than an LPVO, it still only goes to 3x. You can ID better, ID at longer ranges, and shoot smaller groups with higher magnification.

The image quality disparity must be large and the shooter's eyesight excellent to make a 3x to 5x prism the equal of a 1 to 4,5,6,8,or 10x variable scope that has a higher max magnification, in actual use.

For budget optics, where the NOVA is up for consideration, the NOVA optic quality crushes the prisms near its price.

Duplex reticle? Are you just dialing then?

I’d say “optic quality crushes the prisms” is a bit of a stretch if we’re talking all of them. The 5X is unfortunately hot garbage glass quality. It’s actually surprising PA did so good on the 1 and 3X then released that disappointment to complete the line. But the 3X and the Nova are close and it’s going to take a keen eye to see the difference.

Fwiw leupold claims 14.7oz. How much does your mount weigh?

Ime if a lpvo optic has equal glass at 3x then the higher power you don't get smaller groups or better IDing at longer range because the higher power enhances the deficiencies in the glass.

Doesn’t the ACOG weight include a mount? I haven’t seen a good way to mount a LPVO on an AR that weighs less than 5 oz, so let’s compare apples to apples.

That's funny, I don't hate the image on the PA 5x. I certainly will acknowledge it has issues but when I've spent time looking down my street, I don't really feel that it's a bother to me.

No point in going prism unless it’s an acog imo. Almost any acog will have better glass and field of view (unless it’s the ta33 or similar) than a lpvo counterpart. The nx8 is superb though and the only lpvo I have liked. In the cheap range, all the prisms seem blocky and heavy, other than the primary arms micro prisms.

Does placing the LPVO on highest power also enhance the deficiencies in the glass of models more expensive than the ones that go for 3 to 4 hundred dollars?

I made the mistake of selling my TA11 to get a Razor HD 1-6x.  I hated that thing.  The optical quality was dramatically inferior to the ACOG.  Heavy as crap and it was only really useful up to 4x.  6x was like looking through a straw.  

Sold the Razor and bought another TA11.  

The TA11 with an offset T2 is hands down the best setup for a fighting rifle you can own.

Yes, that's my point.

Well, yes but the glass is typically better so it's still really good