Your thoughts on Zeiss GT2

**rob.optician** · 02-08-2007, 02:41 PM

I have been dispensing the Zeiss GT2 for the past few weeks and have really liked this lens...
What are you thoughts on this design?
This is the first Zeiss lens that I have used and would like to hear any other thoughts on the Zeiss family of PALs.

:)

**Warspite** · 02-16-2007, 12:12 AM

Most Progressive lens designs today only reach 75% or less of their total add power by the minimum height standards set by the manufacturer. The Zeiss GT2 however reaches 100% of the total add power even at its minimum recommended height setting. So, many of your patients will find it comfortable to wear and easy to find the "sweet spot" when reading.

**Happylady** · 02-17-2007, 07:16 PM

I have a pair and they are fine. I don't find them any better or worse then several other progressives that I have tried.

**akeroptical** · 02-18-2007, 10:43 AM

I have actually had mixed success. Some of my patients like it while others have responded as though it was a hard lens design(which it is partially). I would say its a good lens overall but don't be surprised if you non-adapt a few. The people I non-adapted all described the same thing. Narrow reading area with alot of peripheral distortion. I came to the conclusion that it was the patient and not the lens because of all the other sucessfull fittings I have had with the GT2. I switched the non-adapts to a Gradal Top and and that solved it.

Overall, its a good lens but don't fit it to high, I have started to cheat this lens a bit low. (1-2mm)

Maybe Darryl could chime in.

**Darryl Meister** · 02-18-2007, 04:05 PM

Narrow reading area... Maybe Darryl could chime in.

The reading area is actually higher and effectively wider than Gradal Top's. However, Gradal Top does have a slightly larger distance zone. The actual magnitude of peripheral astigmatism is about the same in both though. Frankly, while we obviously hear more about "problems" with progressives since customers are less likely to call in simply to pay you a compliment, the feedback has been unusually positive so far.

**rdcoach5** · 02-18-2007, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by akeroptical

I have actually had mixed success. Some of my patients like it while others have responded as though it was a hard lens design(which it is partially). I would say its a good lens overall but don't be surprised if you non-adapt a few. The people I non-adapted all described the same thing. Narrow reading area with alot of peripheral distortion. I came to the conclusion that it was the patient and not the lens because of all the other sucessfull fittings I have had with the GT2. I switched the non-adapts to a Gradal Top and and that solved it.

Overall, its a good lens but don't fit it to high, I have started to cheat this lens a bit low. (1-2mm)

Maybe Darryl could chime in.

I agree that you have to fit it lower than usual by 1 or 2 mm. Interestingly, I find that I can bump the Physio and Koda Unique up 1-2 mm. And after all that ,you'll still get the pt complaining the seg is too high as they walk around with their nose in the air.

**Warspite** · 02-22-2007, 10:04 PM

Also, if you know that a Dr in office, or one you received plenty of RX's from tends to increase the add power because of designs in other progressives you may want to decrease the add power in a GT2 by .25 to simulate what they (the dr and patient)expect...or drop the height, although dropping the fitting height may create some distant peripheral issues.

**Metronome** · 03-11-2007, 02:25 PM

Delete this post.

**Metronome** · 03-11-2007, 02:38 PM

Delete this post.

**rob.optician** · 04-11-2007, 11:57 AM

so far I have had good experience with this lens. I've had a couple non-adapts that complained of a narrow reading area - or hard to find sweet spot. These non-adapts were mostly Varilux Comfort wearers...and I've noticed that trying to switch a happy Comfort wearer into ANY other prog. design can be difficult.

Darryl - I would love to meet with a Zeiss rep. just to talk about different Zeiss products...can you put me into contact with the rep. for Northwest Ohio?

Thanks!
:)

**Darryl Meister** · 04-11-2007, 02:35 PM

Darryl - I would love to meet with a Zeiss rep. just to talk about different Zeiss products...can you put me into contact with the rep. for Northwest Ohio

Just PM or e-mail with the contact information of your practice, and I'll put one in touch with you.

**rdcoach5** · 04-11-2007, 07:26 PM

Originally Posted by rob.optician

so far I have had good experience with this lens. I've had a couple non-adapts that complained of a narrow reading area - or hard to find sweet spot. These non-adapts were mostly Varilux Comfort wearers...and I've noticed that trying to switch a happy Comfort wearer into ANY other prog. design can be difficult.

Darryl - I would love to meet with a Zeiss rep. just to talk about different Zeiss products...can you put me into contact with the rep. for Northwest Ohio?

Thanks!
:)

Call me at Perrysburg eye center- I'll give you cindy's cell phone
Bob Taylor

**Robert Martellaro** · 04-20-2007, 03:11 PM

Part of my routine when dispensing PALs is to have my client look at a distance object, move the head up and down, and confirm that the clearest vision occurs when the standing posture is relaxed and typical. About five to ten years ago I noticed that the newer PALS were blurring much less when they tipped their head back; my guess is that this latest generation of lenses had a slighly less linear power change, as if the rate of change was much slower slightly below the fitting cross, and then changed faster well below the FC. I responded by being much more aggressive in positioning the FC central pupil, and presently fit all PALs central pupil without complications.

However, if the Rx'd add power is increasing, then we must warn the client that the new glasses will initially feel slightly more busy, with the distance zone compressed on both meridians. If the client performs lower than average near tasks, one might feel a need to place the FC slightly lower. I believe it would be best to use a longer corridor lens and leave the FC center pupil.

**rdcoach5** · 04-26-2007, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by rdcoach5

Yes, fit it lower depending on the patient's lifestyle.I have the exact same Rx with the same height in the same frame with the Physio, Unique and GT2. Of the 3, the GT2 has the widest near and intermediate. The add starts more quickly on the GT2 which makes it seem like it has more distance side distortion. I have found the GT2 to be much superior at near and intermediate but worse at distance than the other 2. Now this is comparing the Physio, which was a wow compared to the previous progressives .The Unique is better in dim light. The GT2 is better than both for near and int. There are advantages to each.
Bob Taylor

After wearing this lens for a few weeks, I find I can't go back to my Uniques, which are the same Rx in the same frame and seg height. Wider intermediate and near. I wouldn't fit them lower because computer is so much better.Not as much neck raising and have gotten used to intermediate starting higher. In fact I like it so much better.

**Barry Santini** · 05-19-2007, 12:52 PM

I'm a myope (-2.00) and astigmat (-2.00), and I think my GTs are an excellent lens. I fitted mine right at pupil. The very outer distance peripheral areas are not as good as a full free-form like 360, but overall, I think it is an excellent lens, somewhat better than my ol comforts (which I have in my sunglasses still), but...

they're not gonna be as good as any of the newer free-form interated lenses (like my other accolade freedom and Gradal individuals.) But it is a good lens, never the less.

My two cents

barry