High microvascular density in prostate carcinomas may indicate poor prognosis. Our aim was to compare two different anti‐endothelial antibodies and two different ways of evaluating microvascular scores in hot spots (microvessel density (MVD) and Chalkley counts). Adjacent serial sections of formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded tumor specimens from TURPs on 51 consecutive patients with prostate carcinoma were immunostained for CD34 and von Willebrand Factor (vWF). Estimates of microvascular density were based on projecting a 10×10 grid or a Chalkley grid onto a vascular hot spot of the invasive prostate carcinoma. Anti‐CD34 antibodies stained microvessels in all 51 tumors, whereas anti‐vWF antibodies in 6 tumors resulted in intense background staining causing omission of these. Anti‐CD34 antibodies highlighted significantly more microvessels than anti‐vWF antibodies, and the anti‐CD34 vascular scores with either of the counting methods were significantly correlated, which was not the case with vWF. Both grids used on anti‐CD34‐stained sections resulted in vascular scores that could separate the tumors into prognostic groups. This was not possible using the Chalkley grid on vWF‐stained tumors. In conclusion, anti‐CD34 antibodies are sensitive endothelial markers in prostate carcinoma, and the investigated counting methods are compatible. Moreover, high vascular scores seem to carry a poor prognosis.