Essilor "freeform" lenses; Premium product, or just high priced?

[anastacia81]

I'm having similar problems trying to decide which brand of progressive to put my patients in. I'm more familiar with the Essilor products, having had great success with the Physio 360 and even the new Comfort and Physio short. I have been trying the Zeiss Individual and comparing it with the Autograph II fixed. I've had to send back a few Individuals because the reading got cut off, and one of my Autograph II patients was nauseated when wearing them.

I guess I'm looking for your feedback for a top of the line "go to" general progressive. Anyone have any thoughts regarding the Essilor 360 products versus the Shamir or Zeiss premium progressives? Cost not being a factor?

[WFruit]

I'm having similar problems trying to decide which brand of progressive to put my patients in. I'm more familiar with the Essilor products, having had great success with the Physio 360 and even the new Comfort and Physio short. I have been trying the Zeiss Individual and comparing it with the Autograph II fixed. I've had to send back a few Individuals because the reading got cut off, and one of my Autograph II patients was nauseated when wearing them.

I guess I'm looking for your feedback for a top of the line "go to" general progressive. Anyone have any thoughts regarding the Essilor 360 products versus the Shamir or Zeiss premium progressives? Cost not being a factor?

Well, cost not being a factor, I would go with the Seiko Free Form. We sell A LOT of them, and I don't think we've had a remake yet. Despite the fact that we sell Shamir and not Zeiss, I would say go with the Zeiss between the two. I've heard fewer complaints about their Free Form. I honestly think Shamir has "over-thought" theirs. However, with the Spectrum release in the US, I'm interested to see how that does.

[MasterCrafter]

MasterCrafter,

Seiko just got a new free form progressive-SURMOUNT and they claim will "WOW" hyperops. Have you tried them? Or anyone have tried Surmont (seiko lens)?
How are they? Please share your views. Thanks.

Laguna.

WOW... lol

No i have not tried them... very intresting.. i wonder why the rep has not been bragging about them yet.

Thanks for the heads up :D

[DragonLensmanWV]

I'm having similar problems trying to decide which brand of progressive to put my patients in. I'm more familiar with the Essilor products, having had great success with the Physio 360 and even the new Comfort and Physio short. I have been trying the Zeiss Individual and comparing it with the Autograph II fixed. I've had to send back a few Individuals because the reading got cut off, and one of my Autograph II patients was nauseated when wearing them.

I guess I'm looking for your feedback for a top of the line "go to" general progressive. Anyone have any thoughts regarding the Essilor 360 products versus the Shamir or Zeiss premium progressives? Cost not being a factor?

My go-to digital progressive is the Hoya ID Lifestyle, though we've been using the Seiko some lately too.

[Judy Canty]

WOW... lol

No i have not tried them... very intresting.. i wonder why the rep has not been bragging about them yet.

Thanks for the heads up :D

Their reps are primarily frame reps, so look to your independent wholesale lab rep for the best information. Seiko does not sell to the "big 3", so they can't help you.

[sharpstick777]

...I'll try to be more specific: Do you have personal experience in wearing multiple pairs of glasses utilizing "freeform", digitally processed progressives from various lens mfgs, and do you notice a quality difference if you switch from one pair to the other? Do you find one design (brand) is superior to the others? Or are they all on the same "playing field" (This is my visual perception); equal in visual quality? If they're pretty much equal in quality (visually), why should I pay more from Company "V" than company "XYZ" for the same visual quality? My take from "cr-39" is that Shamir is noticeably (visually) better, so the other products are used for back up only; correct?

Its hard to say that Lens A is better than lens B without discussing the patients needs. Some Digital free-form lenses emphasis different areas and will be better for some patients lifestyles. There is no single lens that will be the "best" lens for every patient, even in digital/free-form. I think this why some people are missing the "Wow" factor. Each digital lens I have tried has its plus' and minus in certain areas or respects, the key is discovering those strengths and weakness and then matching those with your patients needs. I have posted many reviews in other posts, as have others, that should give you a head start. The best way is try them for yourself.

[sharpstick777]

So here's my question for all ECP's; Do you notice a big difference in quality between one freeform and another? Is Essilor's "freeform" products worthy of the premium price they charge? I'm not trying to bash Essilor; I have a very low dist Rx, so maybe I'm not the best judge. What do you think?

It should be noted, that except for the Ipseo and Ideal (discontinued in many places) that all of Essilor lenses, even digital, still use a cast add power. The Physio, Physio 360 and Physio Enhanced all begin with the same lens blank. They just receive digital processing for the distance RX (and "improvements" to the reading area). The problem with this 50% digital approach is that the most important curve on a progressive is the sagital radius between the distance and reading. When you dont' proccess that digitally, you really limit what you can do design wise and improvement wise. Many people are disappointed in not getting a "wow" factor with these lenses, but its no wonder why. I suggest you try and stay with 100% digital designs that include the add power. You get much better performance.

Essilor has taken the 50% route to keep their profits higher, as they don't have to pay Seiko a licensing fee and they get to use existing blanks improving inventory turn.

[sharpstick777]

Everyone has different "visual sensitivity" and many can wear a variety of the PAL designs. I've fit a lot of patients with freeform and don't see the "wow" factor. They certainly don't look any better in the lensometer. It just doesn't seem that great of an improvement for the cost. Just my opinion.

you still have to match the design to patients lifestyle to get the "Wow" factor. A Corvette is a great car, but if I put a family of 6 into one they will be dissappointed. I would need to put them into a mini-van or SUV.

[sharpstick777]

MasterCrafter,
Seiko just got a new free form progressive-SURMOUNT and they claim will "WOW" hyperops. Have you tried them? Or anyone have tried Surmont (seiko lens)?
How are they? Please share your views. Thanks.
Laguna.

We have had very postive feedback with even low powered hyperopes, its truly a great lens. I am a low powered myope and have a pair on order, I will let you know how they do. They ARE thinnner, just for fun we ran a pair of +6.25 in Physion 360's and Surmount, in the same material 1.67, and the thickness was 27% less in the Surmount.
in the Surmount, the equivelent of 2 material jumps.

[HarryChiling]

We have had very postive feedback with even low powered hyperopes, its truly a great lens. I am a low powered myope and have a pair on order, I will let you know how they do. They ARE thinnner, just for fun we ran a pair of +6.25 in Physion 360's and Surmount, in the same material 1.67, and the thickness was 27% less in the Surmount.
in the Surmount, the equivelent of 2 material jumps.

That means no need to sacrifice material clarity for thickness anymore. Trivex, 1.60 are going to be the new go to materials and when your trying to really impress 1.67 and 1.74. I can't wait for them to start using that 1.74 transitions blank for PALs that's going to be a game changer. Seiko has really stepped up their game.

Well, cost not being a factor, I would go with the Seiko Free Form. We sell A LOT of them, and I don't think we've had a remake yet. Despite the fact that we sell Shamir and not Zeiss, I would say go with the Zeiss between the two. I've heard fewer complaints about their Free Form. I honestly think Shamir has "over-thought" theirs. However, with the Spectrum release in the US, I'm interested to see how that does.

I like shamir for the lower adds but once we get into the +2.00 and above Zeiss Individual just out performs.

[Craig]

. I honestly think Shamir has "over-thought" theirs. However, with the Spectrum release in the US, I'm interested to see how that does.

THAT IS THE UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE DAY!!! The compensation on the Shamir products are wacky at best; they are not consistent nor will they tell you what parameters will have the most pronounced effect.

I know that the US technical reps are very frustrated with the non-chalant attiitude the Shamir has taken to address the thickness, prism and goofy compensation issues. If they just put in a little BI prism, the patient and the dispenser would have greater success with less problems.

Craig

[Fezz]

I am glad to see that I am not the only one having bad Shamir vibes. I have really eased up on using them. I have found that I don't really enjoy over paying for their over thinking.

My "Free-Form" dollars are better spent with other companies.

[erehwon optical]

I have a new comfort enhanced it feels the same as the "old comfort"
However I also have what at the time of the order was billed as a "comfort 360" really like this progressive
low distortion wide mid can't be the same as the enhanced as the wholesaler insists.
I would like a strait answer too, why is it so difficult?

[manoj_verma]

Just don't do a free form lens in poly, use a clear material to maximize the benefits.
Craig

any perticular reason Craig ?

[Craig]

Optics are far better in trivex than poly.