Zeiss Individual vs. Hoya ID

[mhayley]

I love the Zeiss Individual and Short i... they have been my favorite lenses for over a year. I am impressed with the technology of these lenses because they are truly custom lenses (unlike the Physio 360, which I understand is still made from a mold.)

I heard that the new Hoya ID uses the same principles as the Individual, and that the Hoya ID is also only made in Germany - which is where the Individual and Short i have only been made for a couple of years.....
( :idea: hmmmm... makes me wonder if there is a connection there....)

So does anyone know what is the difference is, (if any) between manufacturing process of the Zeiss Individual and Hoya ID?

[Bobie]

• Gradal Individual is Individual Free Form PALs.
• Hoyalux iD is Free Form Integrated Double Surface Progressive Design PALs

Hoyalux iD is not individual PALs and all performance will drop if the frame can not adjust to standard position of wear.

Gradal Individual can have fully performance even in non-standard position of wear by order individual parameter of the frame.



Zeiss Gradal Individual
SPH. + 5.00D CYL. - 2.00 A 150 ° ADD 1.50D
PD 60 mm, BVD ( Back Vertex Distance ) 9 mm,
pantoscopic angle 3°
Form : http://www.zeiss.de/4125680f0053a38d...256894003cf487

[RT]

The connection between ID and Individual being produced in Germany is that the equipment used in production is from Germany. The designs are quite distinct.

ID is also produced in Asia. The logistics of ordering from Germany are easier, and thus the US is supplied from Germany.

[Bobie]

RT ,
Could you please give us the URL for the detial of how free form PALs have been produce. :bbg:

[Chul]

So far as I know, The Hoyalux iD has dual-add design which means some add power located on front surface and the rest located on back surface. However, Zeiss Gradal Individual is back design.

Hoyalux iD's Dual-add reduces vertical eye movement and swimming. in addition, increases horizontal visual field.

Hoyalux iD: doesn't fully reflects patient's parameter such as panto angle, Vertex distance etc.

Zeiss Gradal Individual: fully reflects patient's parameter(Position of wear).

[Robert Martellaro]

So far as I know, The Hoyalux iD has dual-add design which means some add power located on front surface and the rest located on back surface. However, Zeiss Gradal Individual is back design.

I believe that the Individual uses free-form generators to place the progressive on the front surface, with standard generators for the back surface.

Correction- the Individual may be direct-to-surface/free-form on either the front or back depending on the lens power.

Regards,

[Bobie]

Chul ,
Hoya say iD have Integrated Double Surface Progressive Design and try to inform that iD is better than Dual Surface PALs like DEFINITY.

In Thailand , Hoya rep tell us " Hoyalux iD is the world best PALs in the world ".
We listen but we not believe and we never believe info from PALs company , because they lies us many time. Sometime they lies even they know the truth. Sometime they lies because the get info from the big liers in PALs company.

In our test , Hoyalux iD is very good PALs and the performance of Hoyalux iD is greater than Ipseo , and about the same with Multigressiv ILT , but can not compare to Impression ILT.:bbg:

[RT]

RT ,
Could you please give us the URL for the detial of how free form PALs have been produce.

Bobie: I could, but since I work for HOYA, it would just be a lie.

[Bobie]

RT,
We will try to plot Hoyalux iD and post the picture in 2007. :cheers:

[KStraker]

I just ordered a pair of ID's for the owner/Dr. I'm wondering how much we would sell these for if they turn out to be as good as the press? I am aware of the wholesale cost, but don't want to post it here. I'm just wondering what some of you sell this lens for? Thanks-Kevin

[AWTECH]

KStraker said:

I just ordered a pair of ID's for the owner/Dr. I'm wondering how much we would sell these for if they turn out to be as good as the press?

FYI: ICE-TECH Advanced Lens Technologies offers a lens that will compete with the ID and patient satisfaction is fantastic. We are not a big lens company but our technology is based on working with the leading individualized lens technology company. Our designs are fully optimized and do not carry the ID price. We offer a perfect frame fit lens. That is a spherical front that is matched to the frame curve with the PAL design on the back surface.

I would challenge you to put your Dr. in the ICE-TECH and the ID, don't tell him which is which. Using the same frame see which one he can see best with.

The retail price for individualized lenses will range from $500 per pair to $700.00 per pair.

[KStraker]

KStraker said:

FYI: ICE-TECH Advanced Lens Technologies offers a lens that will compete with the ID and patient satisfaction is fantastic. We are not a big lens company but our technology is based on working with the leading individualized lens technology company. Our designs are fully optimized and do not carry the ID price. We offer a perfect frame fit lens. That is a spherical front that is matched to the frame curve with the PAL design on the back surface.

I would challenge you to put your Dr. in the ICE-TECH and the ID, don't tell him which is which. Using the same frame see which one he can see best with.

The retail price for individualized lenses will range from $500 per pair to $700.00 per pair.

I'll take a look at your information and consider doing just that. Thanks-Kevin

[blackbirdy4444]

The HOYA ID is everything they say it is. I have several success stories of Zeiss Individual wearers that are now in the ID and much happier. And when they received their Zeiss lenses, they thought it would never get better.

[Barry Santini]

• Gradal Individual is Individual Free Form PALs.
• Hoyalux iD is Free Form Integrated Double Surface Progressive Design PALs

Hoyalux iD is not individual PALs and all performance will drop if the frame can not adjust to standard position of wear.

Gradal Individual can have fully performance even in non-standard position of wear by order individual parameter of the frame.



Zeiss Gradal Individual
SPH. + 5.00D CYL. - 2.00 A 150 ° ADD 1.50D
PD 60 mm, BVD ( Back Vertex Distance ) 9 mm,
pantoscopic angle 3°
Form : http://www.zeiss.de/4125680f0053a38d...256894003cf487

Of course, all of these *optimized* progressives' optimization is based upon the assumption that there is an assumed optimization of the refraction being done for that particular person.

Sadly, this is far from the field experience of us opticians (at least in the US). My point is that the full benefits of these optimized progressives is not realized without an optimized refraction.

Given a choice, I'll always recommend Varilux Comfort *with* an optimized refraction, as compared to any *optimized* progressive without.

Cost benefit for me says that (and I don't have any direct experience with this lens) Rodenstock ILT mono wrap-style single vision beats all progressives. I think we should be recommending more additional specialty pairs, rather than one all-in-one pair, despite the technology currently available.

My two cents...what yours?

Barry Santini, ABOM

[blackbirdy4444]

i agree that additional specialty pairs are a good idea. but that does not mean that the progressive pair that a person has should not be the best they can get.

I am confused by your terms. The ID is not using standard progressive designs front and back.. and just intregrating the two that happen to work best for the patient. The entire lens is a completely 'individual' composition based upon rx parameters plugged into the software. with the zeiss lens, extra measurements are required for 'optimization' but these can also be supplied with the ID.

However, they are not required. To this point consider that literally speaking, your margin of error fitting a lens like the ID is actually larger, not smaller than in the past. Rather than requiring them, and getting a large amount of measurements that are incorrect, the extra measurements are optional.

Hoya is calling there lens an "integrated double surface' lens to help get across the point that it is easy to just 'free form' both surfaces of a lens, much more difficult to have the front and back 'free form' surfaces interact with each other perfectly. that is one major key to their success. Just because a lens is produced on a free form generator does not make it good. The software calculations are the magic, and so far, from what i have seen and even read on optiboard, i can't see that anything comes even close to the technology in this lens.

[Barry Santini]

I agree that the premise of the Hoya ID design is superior, but I will wait for field experience (my own included) before I make a judgement.

I prefer the term *non-representative* to incorrect when referring to parameter determination.

I'm not really sure how *representative* our pupilometers are!

Barry

[rdcoach5]

The HOYA ID is everything they say it is. I have several success stories of Zeiss Individual wearers that are now in the ID and much happier. And when they received their Zeiss lenses, they thought it would never get better.

Blackbirdy, Please tell us more about your patients who have tried both Zeiss Individual and then Hoya ID and liked the ID better.For example, was the Rx the same? Frame and fitting ht similar? Ant other free-forms to compare? How long did they have their Zeiss lenses?
Bob Taylor

[Darryl Meister]

The entire lens is a completely 'individual' composition based upon rx parameters plugged into the software. with the zeiss lens, extra measurements are required for 'optimization' but these can also be supplied with the ID.

Is this in fact true? I haven't seen any information from Hoya suggesting that Hoyalux iD is customized for the wearer's actual position of wear (or even for their basic prescription)...? Do these lenses also come with compensated prescriptions then?

[AWTECH]

Blackbirdy4444 said:

Hoya is calling there lens an "integrated double surface' lens to help get across the point that it is easy to just 'free form' both surfaces of a lens, much more difficult to have the front and back 'free form' surfaces interact with each other perfectly. that is one major key to their success. Just because a lens is produced on a free form generator does not make it good. The software calculations are the magic, and so far, from what i have seen and even read on optiboard, i can't see that anything comes even close to the technology in this lens.

There is alot of technology in this lens but this does not prove that it manages the astigmatism and power error better than another individualized lens. It is a different approach and a very costly way to accomplish a lens design. A spherical front curve offers the best cosmetics and with a proper design can be individualized and manage the power error and astigmatism as well if not better than a dual side design.

[Robert Martellaro]

There is alot of technology in this lens but this does not prove that it manages the astigmatism and power error better than another individualized lens. It is a different approach and a very costly way to accomplish a lens design.

Allen,

You might find this piece written by Mo Jalie interesting.

http://www.danskoptometri.dk/artikle...generation.pdf

A spherical front curve offers the best cosmetics

I would think a flatter aspheric front curve would be an advantage in this respect, especially in plus powers.

[Darryl Meister]

There is alot of technology in this lens but this does not prove that it manages the astigmatism and power error better than another individualized lens. It is a different approach and a very costly way to accomplish a lens design.

In fact, because of the relatively thin nature of spectacle lenses, there isn't really much you can accomplish using two complex surfaces that you can't accomplish with one complex surface and one spherical surface. You certainly can't do much with the inherent unwanted of the progressive optics, which are basically the same regardless of the surface configuration, since the surfaces of a thin lens essentially "add" together. Further, using a lens with the progressive optics on the back will reduce skew distortion as much as, if not more than, "splitting" the optics of the lens between the two surfaces.

[Robert Martellaro]

Is this in fact true? I haven't seen any information from Hoya suggesting that Hoyalux iD is customized for the wearer's actual position of wear (or even for their basic prescription)...? Do these lenses also come with compensated prescriptions then?

Darryl,

I suppose that's a rhetorical question, but just in case, the lens is optimized for work (near) distance only and comes with a card that shows the Rx, compensated back vertex add power, and lists the inset for each eye. I'm reasonably sure that the corridor length (11mm and 14mm) and inset can not be specified by the optician. Can I specify a near PD/inset when I order the Individual?

Thanks in advance,

[Darryl Meister]

the lens is optimized for work (near) distance only and comes with a card that shows the Rx, compensated back vertex add power, and lists the inset for each eye.

It's compensated for near working distance, only? That doesn't sound like much compensation, especially since multi-design semi-finished lenses already do a pretty good job with that. I would have thought that, at the very least, iD would come with basic prescription optimization if they were going to bother with any form of customization at all. I suspect the compensated back vertex Add power is provided in no small part because of the use of a partial back-surface lens design combined with back vertex (instead of front vertex) lens measurements for Add.

Can I specify a near PD/inset when I order the Individual?

I don't recall whether you can specify the near inset with Gradal Individual; I'd have to check. You can certainly specify the near working distance, which the near inset is ultimately based upon (ignoring for the moment the effects of prism from the distance portion). However, regardless of whether you can specify the near inset, I wouldn't recommend specifying the inset unless you have a compelling reason to do so (such as a monocular patient with a compensatory head-turn). The calculations used to compute the customized near inset are very precise, and are based on both the specified distance Rx power and the specified near working distance.

[Robert Martellaro]

I don't recall whether you can specify the near inset with Gradal Individual; I'd have to check.

Darryl,

Thanks, I do have a handful of monocular clients who wear 2.25 to 2.75 adds.

I would have thought that, at the very least, iD would come with basic prescription optimization

The inset is optimized for the distance Rx, PD, and add power. To the best of my knowledge it is not optimized for back vertex distance, dihedral angle (wrap), or panto.

Regards,

[Darryl Meister]

The inset is optimized for the distance Rx, PD, and add power

The inset, perhaps, but it doesn't sound as though the optics of the actual design have been optimized at all.