No, it's not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canonshooter
Printable View
No, it's not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Canonshooter
Explain.Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_s
Both systems use a battery for illumination purposes. One does so orders-of-magnitude mode efficiently and with a more affordable battery. There's nothing unfair about that observation.
Both systems could certainly make use of the better battery and more efficient circuitry.
Oddly enough, it is the larger piece of gear that bears the less efficient and more costly illumination system, meaning it could certainly fit/mount the better system were Leupold inclined to expend the cost to integrate it.
Red dot sights by design don't normally have etched reticles on them, so that would be a silly thing to demand, but any device with battery-powered illumination (which both of them are) has an inherent obligation to provide the most effective and efficient illumination it can at its price point. Arguably, the Prismatic falls short on that.
This is where you're coming off the rails.Quote:
Originally Posted by jay35
Take the batteries out of both and what do you end up with?
With the Prismatic, a fully 100% functional sight - that can still even be used for low light CQC purposes with a white light.
With the Aimpoint, you end up with a useless hood ornament.
The far better comparison of reticle illumination battery life would be to compare the Prismatic to a scope with reticle illumination. In that case, the Prismatic is comparable.
FWIW, I have owned the Prismatic and two 1-4X scopes with reticle illumination and never used it in any of them. For the occassional night carbine match or home defense in a dark house, a few hundred hours of battery life is more than enough. Even then, illuminating the reticle is an option, not mandatory in order to use the sight.
For a sight that is 100% useless without a battery, it damned well better last a long time.
I get where you're coming from. I guess my confusion is why can't illuminated 1x scopes utilize the apparently more efficient and more cost effective illumination system the Aimpoint T1 uses? Do illuminated 1x scopes require a lot more power for some reason over an RDS?
So the same 1x device can't be used with irons because it distorts them, but it has "superior optical quality"? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Canonshooter
The Prismatic is a turd that's never caught on for good reason.
As for illumination doing nothing during daylight... there are thousands of shooters who would disagree with the value of "daylight illumination", to the point that Leupold has lost contracts because of it.
Etched reticles provide their own set of hindrances that RDS's don't have, too. There is a reason why very few companies try to do it on 1x optics.
Like so many who are quick to dismiss it, it's obvious you never used one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim D
Your ignorance is really showing now. Maybe you should have that conversation with Kelly Neal, a 3-gun champion who uses one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim D
PS - ask Failure2Stop as well about the Prismatic in 3-gun.
Rob Leatham can crush most people here shooting an XD, does that make it a better gun?Quote:
Originally Posted by Canonshooter
I don't particularly care what Mr. Neal is using, to be honest.
I went through this same spiel with our leupold rep the other week. I, and the market, don't care. Virtually no one uses them, for good reason.
It's clear that you have a dog in the fight though here. By all means, keep arguing with everyone you disagree with, though.
Look, guys. All RDS'/optics have their strengths and weaknesses. No one optic is perfect for all needs, otherwise we'd all be using it and arguing about important things like mount height.
I've used numerous Aimpoints, Eotechs, Trijicons, etc over the years and there are things I like & dislike about all of them.
The Prismatic is no different. It offers certain advantages (etched reticle, adjustable focus, ruggedness) and disadvantages (parallax, eye relief, short battery life).
For some, its advantages (like the adjustable focus for those of us w/astigmatism) outweigh its disadvantages when compared to other optics.
The Prismatic is neither an Aimpoint-killer or a POS. It's just another option whose feature set may or may not suit your particular needs.
JMHO...
Tomac
A Prismatic and an Aimpoint are completely different animals.
An Aimpoint, or any other reflex sight, is designed to provide infinite eye relief and be nearly paralax free. It does this by using light from an LED to reflect off the front lens. LED's have become highly efficient and this allows for a very long battery life. There are also some downsides to this system. You can't have an etched reticle because if you etched the lens it would just stay in the same place and no longer be paralax free. Also the front lens isn't perfectly clear because it has to be made to reflect light back from the LED while still letting light through from the front.
The Prismatic on the other hand is more like a tradition rifle scope but with no magnification. Instead of seeing straight through some lenses like on a reflex sight, the light is bent in a prism inside the scope. This means the scope will have paralax and limited eye relief. To illuminate the reticle requires more light than just a tiny LED resulting in a much shorter battery life. The advantages that the system brings is a much clearer picture and a sharper reticle that doesn't require illumination to be used.
Both systems have very little in common and as a result perform very differently. Both work very well for what they were designed to do, but it's really comparing apples to oranges.