I got my new Physio lenses today

[Happylady]

I got my pair of Physio lenses today. They are poly with Crizal Alize. The add is a +2.00 and the distance is about -2.25. They are at 17 high.

Theses are really nice lenses. I have always been fond of Sola Ones but I think my clear distance area is a little wider. There is some blur but I can turn my head a fair amount before I run into it.

With some progressives I almost feel like I need to tip my head down slightly but not with these. In fact I can tip my head up a little without running into the channel.

I am sitting here at my computer and they seem fine there, also. My screen is placed low enough so that I am looking down on it. I do need to keep my head straight to look through the correct place but this would be true with any progressive.

The reading is good, also. I can see an entire page in a book but just. Wider then that I do need to turn my head slightly.

I am not aware that I am wearing a progressive when I am walking around or just looking around which is nice.

The Crizal Alize is great, very easy to clean.

Has anyone else tried these or have any feedback on them?

[drk]

Have about 4 patients in Physio (Panamic refits) and they like it just fine.

[spartus]

We've dispensed lots...probably 30 or more, and so far everyone's liked it quite a bit--there was one former VIP wearer that sticks out in my mind particularly, since she couldn't stop looking around and smiling as soon as she put them on. She was back in the other day (about 2 weeks after dispense) for a small fitting adjustment and was still very happy with it.

It's very quickly becoming our lens of choice. I'd really like to have CR39/1.60/Polarized as options sooner rather than later, though.

[drk]

Sparty:

It seems that Essilor is most keen on polycarbonate and 1.67, no? I get their drift, but I likey the new 1.6 as much as you do...why not add that much more optical clarity by increasing the abbe value to 42? Price, I guess, but that Physio is a little high-falutin' already. What's another $40?

[spartus]

Yeah, unfortunately. I suppose they're trying to simplify the range by only offering three materials, and CR39 grudgingly at that.

Okay, maybe not "grudgingly", but slower, certainly. I'm certainly no great fan of poly, but I do have to say that Airwear is typically of a better quality than the Lighten Up uncuts I get from Nassau. Much lower number of nonadapts, at least.

1.60 seems a better compromise from nearly any angle than does poly, but likely they don't own the appropriate patent (Seiko MR-8, right?) to profit as much as they could. 1.67 is great and all, but it costs annoyingly more than 1.60, so you have to pass on the non-savings to patients.

Bah. I even like 1.56 for certain situations. I'm pretty sure I'll never get a 1.56 Physio, though.

[drk]

but likely they don't own the appropriate patent (Seiko MR-8, right?) to profit as much as they could.

I never thought of that. Likely very true.

[For-Life]

I argue that an extremely high percentage (over 99 percent) cannot tell the difference in optical clarity between 1.6 and 1.58.

[AWTECH]

Spartus says:
QUOTE] It's very quickly becoming our lens of choice. I'd really like to have CR39/1.60/Polarized as options sooner rather than later, though.[/QUOTE]

ICE-TECH Advanced Lens Technologies is about to release a new progressive lens. The only polarized lens produced with the polarized film approximately 0.1mm from the surface with the outer 0.1mm layer of lens material equal thickness which means these will be the thinnest polarized progressives possible, plus they offer a 30% better usable lens area than current progressive designs. They can have mirrors added and due to the spherical front curve, many mirrors show the front surface changes with traditional PAL progressives.

The ICE-TECH PAL lens design adjusts the prescription for frame angle and tilt and the non spherical PAL surface of this design is on the eye side.

[hotlantaman]

I ask this with hesitation due to the fact that in my first post on this board, I was accused of being an incognito member of your industry intent to do dastardly deeds, and the thread was locked. Maybe someone can explain that to me someday.

I'm sure that it takes all the fun out of the conspiracy theories, but I'm just a guy with a first time prescription for progressives. My optometrist prescribed panamic lenses. After reading posts on this board, I inquired about the physio. He said that he has seen very little of the lens yet, and it will be weeks/months before he will know himself whether or not it is truly a better lens than the panamic. So, my choice is get a panamic now, or wait a bit and see what kind of feedback he gets on the physios. For those of you who are familiar with both the panamic and the physio, in your opinion, would it be worth my while to wait and see how the physio fares? I don't have to have the glasses right away; they are for eye fatigue and just a bit of far-sightedness (i.e. I can see without them). I hope that is a legal question to ask here.

[Happylady]

I ask this with hesitation due to the fact that in my first post on this board, I was accused of being an incognito member of your industry intent to do dastardly deeds, and the thread was locked. Maybe someone can explain that to me someday.

I'm sure that it takes all the fun out of the conspiracy theories, but I'm just a guy with a first time prescription for progressives. My optometrist prescribed panamic lenses. After reading posts on this board, I inquired about the physio. He said that he has seen very little of the lens yet, and it will be weeks/months before he will know himself whether or not it is truly a better lens than the panamic. So, my choice is get a panamic now, or wait a bit and see what kind of feedback he gets on the physios. For those of you who are familiar with both the panamic and the physio, in your opinion, would it be worth my while to wait and see how the physio fares? I don't have to have the glasses right away; they are for eye fatigue and just a bit of far-sightedness (i.e. I can see without them). I hope that is a legal question to ask here.

How is your doctor going to know unless he sells it or tries it himself?

I have worn both. Panamic is nice, Physio is nicer. One complaint I get with the Panamic is that the intermediate isn't wide. The Physio has up to a 30% wider intermediate area. The distance is great, it doesn't blur till I get pretty far over.

[AWTECH]

Happylady;

How is your doctor going to know unless he sells it or tries it himself?

I don't think I agree with this logic regarding the tries it himself or sells it, how is your heart surgon going to know what to do with having bypass surgery?

What about the optician who is most likely to recommend the lens choices does not need glasses? Can people with perfect vision not become good opticans?

Individual single person testing is not the answer.

The best way to confirm a new lens design is by meaningful knowledge of the design goals of the product and confirmation that these goals have been met.

[mneblung]

The Physio has up to a 30% wider intermediate area.

Happylady,

Is the intermediate wider on the Physio 360 compared to the Physio? If so how much? Their web site says the 360 is optimized for office enviroments and I was wondering if this is one of the areas it is?

[Happylady]

Happylady,

Is the intermediate wider on the Physio 360 compared to the Physio? If so how much? Their web site says the 360 is optimized for office enviroments and I was wondering if this is one of the areas it is?

I don't know the answer to this. Maybe someone from Essilor knows.

[mneblung]

Hopefully someone from Essilor will read this and comment.

[lakcheong]

Are the labs charging higher prices on Physio?

[rinselberg]

Happylady, Is the intermediate wider on the Physio 360 compared to the Physio? If so how much? Their web site says the 360 is optimized for office enviroments and I was wondering if this is one of the areas it is?

I'd appreciate it if someone could specify the exact web page that has been referenced here. I've been to the Varilux website (varilux.com) but I haven't found anything very descriptive there. I like to read whatever's on the Web about these new products.

[mneblung]

http://www.varilux.com/Vision+Care+P...ign/Design.htm

Scroll on down to the area on Physio 360

[maryoptical]

I argue that an extremely high percentage (over 99 percent) cannot tell the difference in optical clarity between 1.6 and 1.58.

:D For polycarbonate lenses , the index is 1.586.

[Samuel Jong]

I have worn both. Panamic is nice, Physio is nicer. One complaint I get with the Panamic is that the intermediate isn't wide. The Physio has up to a 30% wider intermediate area. The distance is great, it doesn't blur till I get pretty far over.

Any experience with Individual or FrameFit from Carl Zeiss? Both are individual family.

[Bobie]

Did anyone ever compare Physio vs Physio 360 vs DEFINITY ?