This product hasn't arrived in the UK yet. It sounds as though for the majority of people a separate pair of sunglasses will still be the best choice. In fact, I'm struggling to think of a scenario where it would be advantageous over separate pairs. Anybody think of one??
But once they improve the reaction speed it should replace regular transitions completely.
Would be advantageous for people that can't keep up with two pair of glasses. Also for patient with AR who can't leave thier clear glasses in the hot car when fishing in sunglasses.
Also keeps patient down to the cost of only one frame, probably less lens expense also.
Having said this, one good pair of clear glasses and one good pair of polarized glasses is a much better solution.
Chip
Well the most significant problem I would forsee would be that almost no ophthalmic frame, unless the Px wants to look ridiculous, would provide anywhere near as good coverage as a decent sunglass could. Most ophthalmic frames aren't very wrapped, and there's not much point in lenses which eliminate glare if light can still get in at the top or bottom of the frame, or the periphery.
Having said that, if they matched the quality of regular transtions but incorporated polarization, I would recommend them all day long... but apparently, they don't.
Originally Posted by Robert_S
Funny, we have people come in all the time getting wrap Ray-ban and Oakley in transitions. They love them. Most of our customers are international though.
We do too, in our Nike ophthalmic range for example, but even then they tend not to be big enough at the top or bottom to function as a proper sunglass would.
On the first few Vantage I have seen come through, the AR stacks have a slightly different residual color, a little more yellow on the green AR's. Anyone else notice this?
sharpstick777: I'm not sure what the mechanism would be for a different residual color. The Vantage process uses exactly the same hard coats as other Transitions technology, and the AR coats are run in the same cycle as other products of the same base material. Is what you are seeing a result of the slight residual tint in the unactivated state?
RT
They work... first of its kind...
I'm talking about actual Sunglass frames they will get Transitions in. A popular one is people getting Transitions in a Flak Jacket or Jawbone. I think it looks hideous, but they love it. All that matters..
Must admit that, yes. Mine are delayed three weeks, sadly. Again, the problem with being the first of its kind... I'm sure I'll have a ton to say after I get mine and take them out cycling.
I'm Andrew Hamm and I approve this message.
I got the kit from Transitions that I ordered through a link I got on here. It's pretty cool. I find it more effective to use the activated lens with a Maui Jim polage that we have compared to the one that Transitions sent.
No, its not a residual issue. Its very slight, no patients and most opticians won't notice, but the residual color in some AR's is slighty different. I have only compared a few, but yes it should be the same.
I've fit my first patient into them, and he's already returned them. With Crizal AR in a Comfort DRx, they had an irridescent purple sheen to them and they don't get dark enough or light enough, not to mention the time it takes to transition, and for him they aren't even close to polarized enough. We're refitting him into a Comfort Enhanced with Transitions XtraActive and a second pair of polarized lenses.
I've fit three and they're all delighted. But they all knew what they were getting, and two of them also have prescription sunglasses.
No transitions product is a substitute for dedicated sunglasses, and any optician who markets them as such is doing their patients a serious disservice.
I'm Andrew Hamm and I approve this message.
I just fit two patients with the Vantage yesterday. Made sure they knew it's not a substitute for sunglasses. Keeping my fingers crossed!
Agreed.
How frustrating is it, though, when a patient comes in wearing a photochromic lens (usually not a decent one either), and you bring up sunglasses, and they say very proudly, "I don't need sunglasses; I have these!".
Welcome Rachel42486 to Optiboard.
Some one else who's see's the AR's coming out slightly different? Thanks for sharing.
I must say I'm disapointed in the Vantage. I have two jobs from two different labs and both have the same residual indoor tint like the Extra. I wear Transitions VI and there's a significant darker indoor tint to the Vantage. This could be another deal breaker like the long fade back time.
My Vantage lenses are not too dark indoors but they do not get very dark outside. Maybe it's too hot right now. They may work better this fall/winter !
Do they seem too light looking through them? I went to a talk Transition did and they say it is a bit lighter but since it is polarized it seems darker looking through it.
I have a pair of Drivewear glasses and they usually aren't real dark but they work great.
Yes, they are not dark enough to look through. The polarization seems to be MAYBE around a grey A. THey don't seem any better than Trans VI.
If the Vantage isn't a substitute for sunglasses, what is it?
Something like the early colored photochromics where we were supposed to say: "This not a sunglass, these are fashion tints?"
Are we supposed to sell it so that in a few generations the Mfg. can afford to develop it to the point where it is a substitute for sunglasses?
Chip
If we wait for a product to work so well it's indistinguishable from magic, we will be putting our patients in non-AR CR-39 single vision and flat top bifocals for many more years. Also, manufacturers will have no financial incentive to continue to work out the kinks in new products if there are no early adopters. As long as we are transparent with our patients about the functions, advantages, and drawbacks of every product we are dispensing to them, they will see it as technology, not as something that just kind of happens to their vision. This, I believe, is the strongest argument against such dumbed-down terminology as "no-glare" and "invisible bifocals."
I tell my patients, "Transitions aren't a sunglass product. They are an eyeglass product, a convenience product, an eye health product." As a result, I sell a crapton of both Transitions and polarized sunglasses. Expecting Transitions to take the place of dedicated sunglasses is like expecting progressives to take the place of dedicated computer lenses. Sure, it does most of what the specialty lens in question does, but the specialty lens does it twice as well.
As long as Transitions are UV-activated (the only practical way to make the technology work), they will not work in a car, and will not replace sunglasses. As long as Transitions don't go from nearly-100%-transparent indoors to 70-80% polarized outdoors, they will not replace sunglasses.
It seems to me that the next step is something like the emPower lens: swipe the temple and you activate the tint.
Last edited by AngeHamm; 06-22-2012 at 12:34 PM.
I'm Andrew Hamm and I approve this message.
Were you sitting in on our Vantage lunch and learn?Couldn't say it better. WE just rolled them out and I think we've done 4 so far this week. I'm thinking they are going to be perfect for camping. (Cuz who wants to switch clear and sunglasses when one's had too many drinks?)
I'm getting them for exclusively outdoor use. They're going to rule for hiking, camping, cycling, and running. You know, when the 1.67 SV finally arrives...Were you sitting in on our Vantage lunch and learn?
Educated patients with reasonable expectations = happy patients = profitable patients.
I'm Andrew Hamm and I approve this message.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks