Roughly a year later: Where does this board stand with Prizm?

[Sushobhon]

Its defiantly a rose lens but not as red as any of the snow lenses, Golf or Field.

What's the light transmission of prizm cricket lens?? Is it brighter than field? What will be more beneficial choice between field and cricket on a bright sunny day in a open ground?

 

[MicahS]

I've never found any data on the Cricket lens as far as light transmission. I think you'll see about the same on both with the Cricket lens increasing contrast on the red end of the spectrum. Both seem to be made for very similar overall conditions

 

[Sushobhon]

Yes you are right.Cricket played with a red ball only in test matches but in the shorter formats of the game played with a white ball... So they will be pretty much the same.

 

[Lupetto]

So I put this little video together...

Great contribution by the above member for prizm comparisons @MicahS thanks!

 

[Sushobhon]

I've never found any data on the Cricket lens as far as light transmission. I think you'll see about the same on both with the Cricket lens increasing contrast on the red end of the spectrum. Both seem to be made for very similar overall conditions

I bought Radar EV Pitch Prizm Cricket lens... Its pretty nice overall.. It has a reddish tint to it... Not as vibrant as prizm golf or snow but after wearing it is still noticable and no problem in bright sunlight... Beautiful prizm lens... I got headache sometimes wearing prizm golf in bright sunlight but no problem with these... Only thing i really want right now is Prizm Outfield Radar EV Pitch lens...if they used the same torch iridium coating as in prizm field and infield lens on prizm cricket.. It will just look stunning.. But performance wise no problem with prizm cricket.

 

[delarscuevas]

I use Prizm Daily for daily and driving. It's nice, even in bad weather. Really makes the colors stand out.

For mountainbiking I use Prizm Trail. It's awesome, the greens are so much greener and the browns are so much browner. It's like riding in a calendar photo.

At the moment, with all the latest Prizm additions, the PRIZM nomenclature is really confusing. Oakley needs to update the Lens guide and lens descriptions ASAP!

 

[thisguy]

I think the Prizm line is a success. They really do make certain colors stand out more. The clarity is a noticeable difference. Although I haven't used a lens for its intended purpose, I really like wearing them.

 

[Sushobhon]

I think the Prizm line is a success. They really do make certain colors stand out more. The clarity is a noticeable difference. Although I haven't used a lens for its intended purpose, I really like wearing them.

Absolutely prizm is a success.

 

[strikerz]

I love my prism Daily lenses I don't wear them all the time however I'm enjoying them for just daily use. I would love to try out a set of road for driving.

I've found myself driving with both the Prizm Road and Trail after bike rides, The Roads are great, except in really bright sunlight for me. I think they are better than the Daily, except on really bright days. Caveat, I have had cataract surgery, so am more sensitive to glare and extreme sunlight than the average person.
Robin

 

[ucdavis4PT0gpa]

I'd argue for their intended purposes they may very well be a success- but that doesn't do much for those of us that like the look of certain lenses but find they're near impossible to wear outside of those intended purposes (if at all). I love the look of say Prizm Field for example but can't stand the fact you can a) see my eyes and b) the light transmission of 15% not only sits right at the line above which I'm not willing and able to wear (16%) but also when looking through them it seems a heck of a lot brighter (like something closer to 22%). In, fact I experience MORE eyestrain wearing Prizm Field in everyday use- not less. Many Prizm lenses also lack polarization which, at this point in my collecting career, is nearly a must.

There are a couple successes- most notably Deep Water: low enough light transmission, doesn't seem to emphasize colors I don't like, Irdium-like coating/can't see eyes, polarized, etc.. But overall I find the Prizm line so far and as a whole has fallen short in the 3 key categories I not only value in a lens but insist of having: 1) lower light transmissions-16% or lower; 2) sufficient supply of polarized options; 3) have enough coating to hide eyes.

Now, I do note we're starting to see the rollout of some new lenses that are, by the looks of it intended to take the place of some Iridiums (notably, Prizm Ruby Polarized and Prizm Black Polarized- the latter of which one hopes is better than the epic fail the Daily's are and closer to BIP). If these types of lenses are aesthetically to my liking and meet the eye hiding and light transmission criteria, we might be getting somewhere.

Keep in mind when coming in with a dissenting opinion like this that I might have something of a more unique perspective given I have highly light sensitive eyes...borderline photophobia probably-I've had my workplace remove half the lights around my desk and I mean I can wear BIP on a cloudy and raining day- no issues, no negative effects, completely comfortably. Not only do I have to be careful with light transmissions but if one looks at my Oakley collection- most of my lenses aren't contrast lenses and the ones that are (Fire for example) are fairly weak in that department.

So, again- for me, the jury is out for me though there is the potential for me to christen Prizm a success given the rollout of new more everyday lenses that are- hopefully- less activity specific and are truly more direct replacements for many of the mainstay Iridiums.