The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Eyeglass lenses
Varinn
Vancouver, BCRegistered User regular
Vancouver, BCRegistered User regular
I'm due for new eyeglasses/sunglasses in the next little while and have about a $300cad to put in through my extended benefits at work.
I'm budgeting about $250 per set of frames (one each, sunglasses and eyeglasses), so my lens choice is entirely out of pocket and brings budget in to play, with that in mind and if anyone says it's justifiable I can afford to spring up to $800cad for the lenses. My frame choices are looking to be the Oakley Servo for indoor use, and Ray-Ban RB4151 for outdoor.
I've had issues using my current sunglasses because they seem to cause a sort of distortion and/or difficulty judging distances, but it could be either the cheaper lenses or the large curved frames. When it comes to this sort of thing, can anyone weigh in on wether it's worth it for me to spend the extra for Nikon, Zeiss, etc or should I go cheap and plan to replace annually while keeping my frames a few years? I used to have very good experience with Nikon, but that was around 5 years back now and the last two batches I went cheaper, maybe it's in my head but I've never felt they were quite as clear, or quite as reliable.
My prescription is roughly -5.0 in both eyes, with a mild-moderate astigmatism, I normally use high index lenses regardless of brand to keep the thickness down. I wear glasses at work (at a computer but in an industrial environment), hiking, motorcycling, biking, kayaking, and in the car on the racetrack, etc. Depth perception, distortion, scratch resistance, glare resistance, it's pretty much all important. My last couple trackday sessions I've had to forego the sunglasses due to eye fatigue during a 20 minute session and out in backroad canyons I don't trust my eyes with them when I'm riding. It could also be due to them being polarized, which I do not like and will not be getting again (can't see my phone when walking down the street, see through windows, etc).
What does PA recommend? To get it out of the way, I'm not yet interested in laser due to my prescription changing roughly every 2 years, and I cannot wear contacts at work because I'm in a dirty, dust filled metalworking environment. (Also I look like a bit of a herpderp with no glasses on)
TLDR; Is it worth paying the premium to get the best of the best high index lenses with all the coatings, or should I just hit clearlycontacts.ca and get whatever their best is (at less than half the cost of my optometrist, or even the Lenscrafters 50% off sale)
I'm budgeting about $250 per set of frames (one each, sunglasses and eyeglasses), so my lens choice is entirely out of pocket and brings budget in to play, with that in mind and if anyone says it's justifiable I can afford to spring up to $800cad for the lenses. My frame choices are looking to be the Oakley Servo for indoor use, and Ray-Ban RB4151 for outdoor.
I've had issues using my current sunglasses because they seem to cause a sort of distortion and/or difficulty judging distances, but it could be either the cheaper lenses or the large curved frames. When it comes to this sort of thing, can anyone weigh in on wether it's worth it for me to spend the extra for Nikon, Zeiss, etc or should I go cheap and plan to replace annually while keeping my frames a few years? I used to have very good experience with Nikon, but that was around 5 years back now and the last two batches I went cheaper, maybe it's in my head but I've never felt they were quite as clear, or quite as reliable.
My prescription is roughly -5.0 in both eyes, with a mild-moderate astigmatism, I normally use high index lenses regardless of brand to keep the thickness down. I wear glasses at work (at a computer but in an industrial environment), hiking, motorcycling, biking, kayaking, and in the car on the racetrack, etc. Depth perception, distortion, scratch resistance, glare resistance, it's pretty much all important. My last couple trackday sessions I've had to forego the sunglasses due to eye fatigue during a 20 minute session and out in backroad canyons I don't trust my eyes with them when I'm riding. It could also be due to them being polarized, which I do not like and will not be getting again (can't see my phone when walking down the street, see through windows, etc).
What does PA recommend? To get it out of the way, I'm not yet interested in laser due to my prescription changing roughly every 2 years, and I cannot wear contacts at work because I'm in a dirty, dust filled metalworking environment. (Also I look like a bit of a herpderp with no glasses on)
TLDR; Is it worth paying the premium to get the best of the best high index lenses with all the coatings, or should I just hit clearlycontacts.ca and get whatever their best is (at less than half the cost of my optometrist, or even the Lenscrafters 50% off sale)
Varinn on
0
Posts
Does your optometrist include warranties with their products? My wife's place includes them, but some make you pay extra for them.
She says the polarization could be causing the distortion, that some people just can't wear polarized, but any non-polarized lenses should have an anti-glare coating on the back of the lens.
She also says that the "chromatic aberration" you've heard about is a result of polycarbonate lenses, not high-index.
My appointment is this afternoon for my checkup so I can get all the details on what they sell, I've always been a believer in getting what you pay for (hence my reluctance on going to a cheaper source). I know for sure they use Nikon lenses, I don't know if that is the only brand.
Could she offer any input on pros and cons of going polycarbonate vs whatever other options are usually available?? I'm guessing the main benefit to them is their lower weight? One thing I've always wondered is are there any options that are less likely to produce the halos around lights in dark areas? I get minor amounts of it, but always assume it's just the way it is with wearing glasses.
I'm glad to hear the polarization could be a cause of the distortion also, I disliked it already for other reasons mentioned above but it means that I'll have one less thing that could potentially mess with my vision on the next pair.
And I think the halos around lights should be reduced, either by an anti-glare coating or anti-reflective coating. But that's just my two cents, again.
1) Just by virtue of the way it bends light it is more prone to chromatic aberration. This is inherent to it. References to Abbe values were mentioned.
2) To make a polycarbonate lense you melt some polycarbonate and then use a huge ass machine to push it just as fast and hard as you can into a metal mold and then you keep pushing on it until it solidifies. This leaves quite a bit of stress in the polycarbonate which can show up as optical distorsions. By comparison it appears that Trivex is just poured into the mold and lets a chemical reaction "fill" the part, so much less stress and much more time.
Also, I just found out that glasses aren't even made with glass anymore, and I suggested they should change the name of glasses to plastics.
She didn't laugh.
In the end she priced me up for the mid range Nikon as she says my prescription is not strong enough to justify the extra cost for the Nikon 4/5 grades.
Sphere/Cyl/Axis/Prism
OD -3.75/-0.50/072/NA
OS --4.00/-0.25/080/NA
Sunglasses $395 quoted using Nikon 3 HCC with SeeCoat Plus and solid tint (she advised against polarized for me due to my desire to be able to see LCD displays with them on but prefers to use it in most cases).
Eyeglasses $355 quoted using Nikon 3 HCC, no extras.
Frames are extra each will cost me about $75-$100 more than online and about par with other local places like Lenscrafters.
I believe the Nikon 3 means high index, and HCC is the standard coating that includes the premium anti-glare (on both faces), scratch resistance, anti-static, and easy clean. UV filter is standard on all Nikon 3's from her description. The material is apparently just called "high-index plastic" and she said my only reason to go polycarbonate is for A: Cost savings, or B: higher impact resistance (for say, when I'm riding visor up on the bike, or using them at work).
They double and triple measured my existing pairs and guessed without any input from me where I had bought them. Both had a slight difference in the prescription but the big screwup causing my discomfort was from using the wrong pupil distance! Mine measure 57mm apart, my clear glasses are close at 60mm, but my sunglasses (with massively curved, polycarbonate, polarized lenses) are set for a 65mm PD!! They were able to guess where I got them because the place has a reputation of using cheap low grade lenses and often messing up the measurements on install.
EDIT: 2 year warranty on both for lenses, ray-ban frames only carry a 1 year while the oakley would be at 2. No charge for warranty.
So when you say premium anti-glare on both faces, do you mean the front and back of both lenses, or are you saying the front of both lenses?
I debated and debated and ended up choosing polarized lenses for the new sunglass frames, time will tell if the effect it has on lcd screens like my phone and dashboard are too much an annoyance. My plan was to buy them, try them, and if the screen thing bugged me or I found the roads too difficult to judge when riding the motorcycle or out for a spirited drive in the car I could re-lens my current sunglass frames with non-polarized and run my tinted visor in the helmets.
That of course didn't work out due to me sitting on my frames when I jumped in the car this morning and squishing them all to hell and back. Over 2 years with them and the frames were in perfect condition still, so I of course was due to break them the day after I decided I could re-use them with a spare set of lenses!
I can live with the quirks on my phone, but I'm hoping I can live with the quirks of using them for driving/racetrack/motorcycle use. My old glasses had the wrong pupil distance (way wrong) so that might have been the defining factor in my fatigue and annoyance of using them on the roads. For everything else they seem like they'll be great, and if it really comes down to it I'll just spring for another non-polarized pair next year.