Rifle Scopes Leica PRS 5-30×56 with PRB Reticle

#302
Anyone still using these , they are being offered at discounted prices here in Europe ,but so far not much love for them ,not many reviews aside from 'paid' ones
 
#305
Am looking at Leica PRS and Khales K624i they are about 2400$ and Khales is about 150$ cheaper with better reticle options, although Khales K624i these days looks is a bit long in the tooth, there is nothing wrong with it while for me Leica PRS is a bit uncharted territory.The supposedly unforgiving parallax is a bit off-putting for PRS/NRL style shooting.

* It looks like its built on generic LOW body and mechanics like used in mid range Delta Stryker with a Leica touch. Delta stryker had an awfully picky parallax past 300y .
 
Last edited:
#306
I’m not sure that I really buy that the parralax is unforgiving but I’d really bet than the glass will be much better on the Leica than the Kahles 624. I guess I’ll find out next week when I get mine.
 
#307
I got one mounted up for my uncle, shot it for a little bit when i was sighting in. We were able to pick it up for $2000 so it was a pretty good deal.

The glass in very good, reticle is very fine, but useable, the circle center is kind of cool, allows you to see your target a bit better then some larger center dots.

The eye box is a little tight, and as you get further from center you get some blurriness. It feels like a good quality scope, turrets are very positive, parallax is alright, not great/not bad.

I wouldn’t over look this scope if you can find one for a deal. I run a zco 4-20 and while I wouldn’t trade mine for his, i think the leica is a good scope for what we picked his up for. I probably wouldn’t buy it at the $2800 price point as you are getting into better scopes territory.
 
#308
Just got mine.

Absolutely clear glass. Much better FOV and way more pop that the Razor Gen2 that it replaced and I don't have any issues with the eye box, it find it just as forgiving as the Gen ii and Athlon Cronus. I wasn't sure with the PRB reticle but I love it, the circle is much smaller than you think and I actually really like that style of tree. It's a keeper for sure. My only complain is the parallax is kind of stiff but otherwise I love the turrets, tooless zero that still allows you to set your zero stop exactly where you want (which was one of my requirements)

For 2000$ I think it's a great deal but I would struggle to pay the actually MSRP on it since you're getting close to S&B/Minox/Used ZCO territory.
 
#312
The nylon material that MK Machining uses seems to be more rigid than that of the Tenebraex. I have Tenebraex flip up caps on my Steiner scopes.

Also, I don't like the 2 piece design of the Tenebraex scope caps for the Leica PRS.
 
#314
Another difference between the MK and Tenebraex caps is the length of the eyepiece cap. The MK cap extends further onto the scope body. In my case it covers the most of the gap that is created when I have the diopter adjusted for presbyopia.

It does not look like it in the photo, but I there is a small gap between the cap on the objective and the picatinny rail on the receiver.




 
#315
Here is my combo

I have been using the PRS with PRB reticle for the last 2 years and it's been awsome for me.
Used many other brands and I think it compare up there with the tier one scope.

Now, liking or not some features is like choosing a car over another one. That is why there are so many options out there.
 
#316
Looks like they've added sizes that fit better.

I have a few of these scopes with MKM caps, and had to put tape under them. It's been over a year since I ordered, but 1.735 and 2.638 were the closest they had at the time.
 
#317
Been a minute.
Almost pulled the trigger on the PRS but after reading this thread I’m second guessing. So it tracks. It returns to zero.
But glass is meh? There’s lot of cheaper scopes that meet the criteria that have meh glass that I could buy. I run a few ATACRs and Kahles 525. I can’t be going backwards here.
 
#318
The glass in mine is very nice. I would take the Leica over the Kahles and ATACR. The Leica is a no frills scope but has everything I need.

I didn’t read anywhere about the Leica having glass that is subpar but often glass quality is subjective to the user. Personally the glass is not quite as good as something like S&B but better than the Japanese glass.
 
#319
Love my Leica PRS. I’m not sure who’s saying the glass is “meh”, but I’d agree to disagree. Haven’t compared is side by side with Kahles, but the Leica glass was a bit better than the ATACR’s we compared it to.
 
#321
Another satisfied Leica PRS owner. I have found that the glass on PRS very good and it is less fatiguing. After spending a day at the range using the PRS, my eyes don't have difficulties focusing while driving. Koshkin had a similar observation.
 
#324
This is where I always scratch my head when it comes to optics. Clearly glass must be subjective as we all know, and there also must just be a huge variance in samples. Because all of my 318 and 525 Kahles to my eyes are nicer to look through than my S&B’s. Yes, the Kahles does have some noticeable CA but other than that, I much prefer the view. Brighter, sharper, etc. So comparing the Leica PRS to a S&B for me is not exciting to hear.
 
#325
I ran a PRS for a few years and had a Kahles 525 also. The Leica is a very good scope, glass, parallax and tracking was very good.

The PRS is a scope meant for exactly that, competition use. Kahles/S&B/NF are scopes made to be more durable and service, so everything depends on the use.

I got my hands on the new S&B 6-36 and sold both the Kahles and the Leica, and got another 6-36. There is a noticeable difference between the technical solutions on the S&B vs the Leica, and it also costs 35-40% more. To me, the glass is better on the S&B and alot more turrets/models/reticles to choose from.

I would not hesitate to recommend the PRS, it all depends what you are looking for.
 
#326
Glass quality estimates by users are very subjective, large differences open up any time you are comparing in adverse optical conditions like dusk or dawn. In bright daylight, folks think the 1000$ scopes are dope

But to be fair i think the low and mid-range optics are probably those that advanced the most, in top-end its always the last few percentage points of an improvement that cost big bucks, and realistically difference between user's eyesight likely outweighs that, hence subjective estimates of limited value.
 
Last edited:
#328
Yep, very subjective. I've had 3 Kahles 624s, and all 3 were foggy to me. I couldn't stand to look thru them. The guys I sold them to loved them.
 
#332
Any one compared this scope, because these are made in Germany and Portugal.
I have seen my friend scope, that is made in Germany.
I did received one for test today, this is made in Portugal.
Place is not the same i did look thru the German made scope, neither is the weather, but i feel that the German made was better image quality, or am i just thinking it, because this is made in Portugal.
These should be same glass, tube, inner parts, no matter is it made in Germany or Portugal.
 
#333
Mine was one of the first sold in the USA and says “Made in Germany”.
Leica has long manufactured products in Portugal.
To determine if there really is a difference, you need to do at minimum a ‘Blind Test’.
Human perception is fraught with error introduction and objective testing of some sort is the only way to find any differences.
’Blind Testing’ is the best you can do without instrumentation.
-Richard
 
#334
I don't have a PRS, but do have Kahles 525 and a Leica Magnus. The Magnus has better all around glass. Color, brightness and sharpness- it comparesfavorably to the ZCO I compared it to. Koshnin has said the Magnus glass is better than the PRS, so am just guessing here that the Kahles and PRS are pretty close.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts