The whole point to the adjustable diopter is to have a clear focus. Not sure why you would end up with a blobby/blurry reticle.
I have astigmatism and have no problem adjusting the diopter for a clear reticle.

The reticle is clear, the chevron is so tiny that my eye cannot resolve it as a crisp chevron. I wear strong progressive lens glasses and super small reticle elements, etched or not do not work for me as they are meant to be at least. I can and do adapt to them. From my time spent on this forum I don’t think I’m alone in having trouble with small chevrons…

I have been dealing with this my entire life. My vision is 20/20 corrected but that isn’t the whole story with eyesight and vision correction. In the past I have brought various optics to the eye doctor to help game my vision for optimal results and most things work great, just not tiny chevron's for whatever reason.

Dots and crosses work much better for me and I wish PA would incorporate them more often but they don’t so I seek out other options.

I have almost a 20/20 vision but need glasses to read stuff like street signs that is a bit away.

I would suggest it's your progressive style lens. I never could adapt to that style and use bi-focals.

You should be fine with either the 2x or 1x/mag combo. Most people that struggle with prisms are trying to use them with rx glasses and or contacts. If someone has 20/20 and still can’t focus a prism, it’s user error, not the optic. When running a 1x/mag combo you are simply adjusting two diopters. It’s not that complicated but I guess some people have a hard time with it.

Again, having ran an extensive amount of rounds with both options, the GLX 2x reigns supreme in terms of versatility, speed, and weight, but you really need some time with each option to know which one is best for you.

The internet is no substitute for trigger time so I would suggest keeping an eye on the EE. 2x and 1x pop up regularly below retail and if one doesn’t work for you, you can easily recoup most of the expense with a resale.

Lol

It must be amazing to garner the experiences and eyesight of everyone else on the planet and be able to determine for everyone else what should and shouldn't work.

I’m in awe of your awesomeness.

For the record I don’t struggle with prisms, I use the SLx 1x with a magnifier and without, the GLx 2x and the SLx 3x.

The chevron on the 2x is tiny and the optic would work better for “me” if it had a dot or the chevron was larger. I can still use it very successfully despite this limitation. For example the chevron in the SLx 1 x and 3x are sized much better and I am able to clearly see them. They are easy to use, I prefer when optics are easy to use and don’t add unnecessary constraints.

I also believe the GLx 2x is the best value GP rifle optic available at this time and your right about one thing, OP will have to see for himself.

The Op asked for opinions and that is exactly what he is getting, one opinion isn’t any more valid or invalid than another.

You have your individual eyesight and experience and I have mine. We can agree to disagree.

And, the 1x

And, the 2.5x

PA has some pretty nice glass for the $$$, but their choice of reticle is a bit baffling, especially on low powered prism scopes.  Hell, I have a 5x full size PA prism and would much rather it had a dot than the ^, but that is what it has and I deal with it.  I will never buy another ^ tho, and this 5x may be in the EE before long if I find something to replace it.  But, for now it makes for a nice piggy-back rig, using the prism for PID mostly.

Have you checked out the newish swampfox raider 1x micro prism? They offer it in a dot reticle. I have one coming but I got the bullet rise reticle.

Yeah that’s cool friend but my post wasn’t directed at you and I’m not really sure what you’re getting butt hurt about. We both prefer the 2x and we’ve both recommended the op try both because only he can determine what works best for him. Maybe dial down the caffeine a little.

ETA: I just found your post below that I guess you assumed I was referring to. I was solely referencing the op’s statement that he had 20/20 vision. That’s why I quoted him, not you.

It appears you have a very unique vision issue . Good luck with that