Zeiss Individual vs. J&J Definity
This has probably been discussed before but I need a comparison of the Zeiss Individual vs. The J&J Definity. It is my understanding that although they are both classes as free form lenses, they are actually different. The Zeiss is a true freefrom and the J&J is not. Explain why ..............
please.:D
They are exactly the same. They use the same technology
Good For=Life, .............you are strating to catch on.........the all use the same tricks.....................but change the advertising.Originally Posted by For-Life
Chris, its the advertising that sells the product. If the advertising sells my customer a better, more expensive product, then, I'm all for it!
"Always laugh when you can. It is a cheap medicine"
Lord Byron
Take a photo tour of Cape Cod and the Islands!
www.capecodphotoalbum.com
are they the same because they use the same technology? or the same because they are exactly the same? A D28 and C40 use the same technology, but clearly are not the same
Harry, Of course you have a good point.............to almost being right.................
If your closest competitor does some smart advertising the other way round convincing YOUR customers that he has a good point.............would you not loose some business?
I believe you would customers are being convinced that product A is similar to product B but retails for a lot less.
In today's newpapers I saw the newest add by Ford promoting heavily the Focus, with all the fancy equipment of more expensive cars, trying to cash in on the economic squeeze plus the expensive gasoline.
Don't you think this policy is a smart move, diverting the customer interest to a smaller less expensive vehicle that will get you where you want to go for less than you could do in your Hummer where a tank full of gas is over a hundred dollars.
Dont you think that this way of thinking will eventually, or even very fast carry over into the optical business according to the economic foecast's ?
IF they are actually different designs, the differences would be so small that one would not warrant any benefit over another.
Same........but not the same...................
They are all the same technology .............but never exactly the same. They have to make a little change here and there to make the claim = NEW.
That's like saying a Hummer is exactly the same thing as a Ford Contour, because they both use internal combustion engines. Not only that, but these two lens designs are fundamentally different in terms of both their performance and their implementation, even in the context of progressive lenses, in general.
For starters, Definity is currently a non-customized free-form progressive lens, which means that it really isn't much different from a semi-finished lens design.
Gradal Individual, on the other hand, is fully optimized for the wearer's prescription, pantoscopic tilt, vertex distance, PD, and reading distance. The physical design is changed, for instance, to account for the effects of the interaction between the prescription, oblique aberrations, and the optics of the progressive surface with the lenses in their position of wear. This ensures the widest fields of clear vision possible. The ECP is also provided with a small device to measure these position of wear parameters.
Additionally, the inset of the corridor and near zone of Gradal Individual is adjusted depending upon the reading distance, distance prescription (prism), and wearer's distance PD. Very few free-form designs currently do this, I might add. To the best of my knowledge, most -- including Definity -- use a fixed inset.
Gradal Individual is also available in two corridor lengths in order to allow fitting heights down to 15 mm. Definity has a single, relatively long corridor by today's standards.
Definity uses an ultra-soft lens design, similar in look and feel to a progressive lens like SOLA's XLGold. Gradal Individual has larger central viewing zones, and is very similar to Zeiss's Gradal Top progressive lens (at least until the prescription optimizations are applied).
Definity has split the progressive optics between the two surfaces for reasons that I won't get into (since it makes very little difference to the overall performance of the design). Gradal Individual uses a traditional toric back surface and a free-form progressive front surface. Gradal Individual is available in both 1.67 and 1.6 high-index.
But, yeah, other than that, they're both exactly the same. ;)
That said, now that Essilor owns the product, I would expect them to improve Definity's implementation if they continue to market it actively. So some of these statements may be subject to change eventually.
Darryl J. Meister, ABOM
But it's easier to say that they are the same.;)
This is an interesting thread for me - because we dont have the JJ definity lens in the UK. Amongst the threads there seems to be a tendancy for posters to say product A = Product B its all marketing hype, or there are no difference between coatings. As optical professionals we should know better than that, it is the small differences that sometimes make the difference, we should be educated enough to know the differences, and dispense on the differences
Well, there's a tendency with Chris, anyway. ;) But I think he means well.
Darryl J. Meister, ABOM
What we have to understand as opticians is the concept of value.
What is the difference between product A and product B. Then what is the difference as far as costs go. Then develop a value. If product A is slightly better than product B, but much more expensive then where is the value?
yes - lets look at cars
when the following features arived on F1 cars (or Champ cars) we could all but dream of the technology in our cars
Now you tell me you dont enjoy one of these features on your car
- ABS
- Traction control
- engine managment
- LSD's
- Fuel injection
- Adjustable mapping
- intellegent suspensions
- ESP
- ride height adjustment
- split braking
Freeform lens making, optimised position of wear etc.. is the way forward.. It is early days, and it is expensive.. back in the late 60's progressives were in the same bracket, and everyone was saying they would never replace bifocals
Do you want to give your patients the very best in vision, or do you want to give them the second best? Do you want ABS, traction control etc?
Value is obviously subjective though. I may or may not see much of a difference in performance between an Acura sedan and a Honda for the difference in price. But of course, plenty of Acura owners do. Judging the value of a product is ultimately left to the discretion of the individual consumer, not the salesperson. Moreover, by making statements like, "These two products are identical," you are misguiding those consumers into basing their evaluation of value strictly on price, which knocks out half of the value equation.
For that matter, there are plenty of products in every industry that even offer fewer features or inferior performance at a higher price point. Further, getting back to the original statement, even if Product A and Product B offer "equal value" for a given individual that doesn't make them identical products; it just means that the consumer would be equally satisfied with the purchase price of each (at least with all other things being equal). And where do you draw your own line for "value?" Do you only offer the cheapest lenses you can find to your patients? Do you refrain from even offering high-end frames or premium lens treatments because they are "not worth it" to your patients?
Darryl J. Meister, ABOM
This has nothing to do about what I am talking about. I am not talking about the difference between Super No line with no coating versus the Individual with Carat Advantage. I am talking about two products that are extremely similar minus a slight change. How much better vision would you gain between the Individual and the Definity? I bet if you were to try the lenses on the same person (everything else being different) that no one could tell the difference.
well if you dispense them to -1.00 ds with a 1.50 add you possibly have a point. If the Rx was +5.00 - 2.00 with a 2.00 add - I would want the freeform lens with position of wear optimisation, because (at the least) you ought to be dispensing a different Rx to that in the trial frame in most frame set ups
Have you ever actually tried both designs on the same person to test this assertion out? If not, what are you basing your claim on?
Darryl J. Meister, ABOM
I have heard testimonials. Come on Darryl, you are an extremely bringht individual. You are actually going to say that the one lens is much better than the other?
Last edited by For-Life; 10-30-2005 at 09:41 AM.
my mate tells me a ferarri is great, but I wouldnt be able to drive one (legs too long). Swot up the knowlege, and start dispensing with a purpose, make factualy qualified decisions .... thats what the patients are paying you for
Tendency with Chris.....................
For-Life..............Darryl is the mathematical wizard on the optiboard who can shake optical formulas out of his sleeves and can teach most, or all of us some real valuable lessons.
When it comes to sales tactics Darryl is also a very true and fierce company man, who does defend the interest's of the lens manufacturing sector and the interest's of the corporation he works for, above all. This is a quality I respect and admire and it also makes for some interesting dicussions.
I would never dare to question or oppose Darry's capabilities when it come to mathematics and optical formulas because, he is a master, and I could not even tell, if he would be wrong.
The tendency with Chris is that having been through a life long expierience in the optical trade, having worked in just about every part of the optical business for many years, most of it for my own ventures.
When you are working on your own, you are forced to make decisions. These decisions will affect your own business either in a positive or a negative way. In your own business the bonuses, or failures will also carry over into your private life.
The company employed person only makes minor decisions on his own within the business, and if they are wrong no big deal is made out of it. That is why large corporations function similar, and like governments today.
Therefore when having been around for a long time as an independent business owner you have probably made many successful moves as well as some adverse ones for which you had to pay heavily.
This, having been around for a long time...........is called "life long expierience".
So, above mentioned "tendency" is based on "life long expierience" which lets you recognize and feel the back stage of the theater even before the play is on.
you have to compare variables to variables. Not packages to variables.
yes you are right. Which variables does the J&J lens take account of when they individually design the lens, for each specific patient, RX, frame set up etc?
When it comes to me squeezing in a car, I would beg to have a hand made seat
I understand that the Individual takes these variables into play, but I have to question will these variables have an effect? Because all lenses take PD into play. A pantoscoptic tilt should be adjusted at ALL times, so this lens would not be much more different in that situation. Most PALs do have some changes with RXs.
Just because the Individual takes these variables into mind does not mean that these variables will make the lens any better.
Which brings us abck to ground zero.........................they are still the same in principle...................
And the various manufacturers fight for their place in the sun as these type lenses can be sold at a much higher price.......say profit........while the production cost is the same as any other simple lens.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks