SOLAOne Vs. SOLAOne HD

**Rainstorm** · 07-12-2012, 11:33 AM

I just had a patient get an Rx change and among other issues, he doesn't appear to be too happy with his new SOLA HDV's 1.66/67 index. He was previously in the SOLAOne and I'm considering going back to that or maybe going into the SOLAOne HD. I don't like to change people too often, but I've been so pleased with my SOLA HDV's that I've been "upgrading" to this lens on a lot of my patients. Can someone give me their opinion on whether the HD version of the SOLAOne is comparable but better or is it just a different animal altogether?

**sharpstick777** · 07-12-2012, 12:31 PM

Why is your patient unhappy?

**Rainstorm** · 07-12-2012, 12:48 PM

He feels that his SOLAOne has a wider reading area than the HDV, Some of it may be a base curve issue but some is in the design I think. I'd like to give him the upgraded benefits of an HD lens, but not sacrifice his reading width.

**chip anderson** · 07-12-2012, 01:10 PM

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

**uncut** · 07-12-2012, 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by Rainstorm

I just had a patient get an Rx change and among other issues, he doesn't appear to be too happy with his new SOLA HDV's 1.66/67 index. He was previously in the SOLAOne and I'm considering going back to that or maybe going into the SOLAOne HD. I don't like to change people too often, but I've been so pleased with my SOLA HDV's that I've been "upgrading" to this lens on a lot of my patients. Can someone give me their opinion on whether the HD version of the SOLAOne is comparable but better or is it just a different animal altogether?

Is it the same Rx as his previous ones, and is it the same index?

**Rainstorm** · 07-12-2012, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by uncut

Is it the same Rx as his previous ones, and is it the same index?

Rx: Dr. had originally increased the Cyl and patient had a complaint that was related to that, Dr. backed off the Cyl a bit which will solve some of the issue. Index is the same, 1.66/67. We're staying away from the SOLA HDv on this guy, I just wanted to know if SOLAOne (his old lens) and SOLAOne HD were significantly different based on operation of the reading area.

**Robert Martellaro** · 07-12-2012, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by Rainstorm

I just had a patient get an Rx change and among other issues, he doesn't appear to be too happy with his new SOLA HDV's 1.66/67 index. He was previously in the SOLAOne and I'm considering going back to that or maybe going into the SOLAOne HD. I don't like to change people too often, but I've been so pleased with my SOLA HDV's that I've been "upgrading" to this lens on a lot of my patients. Can someone give me their opinion on whether the HD version of the SOLAOne is comparable but better or is it just a different animal altogether?

I believe the HD version lacks the variable corridor, and uses default values for position of wear.

It's unlikely that the Rx optimizations would cause any problems. However, the HDV has a variable corridor- if the new fitting height is different than the old height, the corridor's power profile will be different, maybe significantly so, especially in combination with the Rx change.

**uncut** · 07-12-2012, 03:11 PM

I know this may sound like there should be a yes,no answer to your question.

The elephant in the room is that when manufacturers move a product from one method of production to another, new rules of engagements kick in. It is no different for multifocals. The base curve choice, even size of frame, this time might be influenced by the HD guidelines. The rx might have totally more plus in it. The patient is most likely another year or two older........all this factors into whether the reading zone shrank.

**Darryl Meister** · 07-12-2012, 03:40 PM

Can someone give me their opinion on whether the HD version of the SOLAOne is comparable but better

SOLA HDv employs the SOLAOne lens design platform, which is then optically customized with various improvements that are only possible with real-time optical design and free-form manufacturing, so that the intended optics are provided for every prescription and at every fitting height.

If a wearer has previously been happy with SOLAOne, then he or she should be as happy, it not happier, with comparable SOLA HDv lenses. Keep in mind, however, that differences in add power, refraction, fitting, fabrication, material, and so on may contribute to any differences in optical performance observed by the wearer.

So I would recommend verifying the refraction, fitting, and fabrication of the lenses if there has been a complaint regarding near vision. And remember that the increase in add power will result in more unwanted astigmatism with narrower viewing zones. Similarly, short fitting heights will also necessitate certain optical compromises.

You may also want to compare the fit of the eyewear to the wearer's previous SOLAOne lenses. Significant differences in lens tilt, facial wrap, vertex distance, and/or fitting height may introduce noticeable optical differences at near.

Best regards,
Darryl

**MasterCrafter** · 07-19-2012, 09:51 AM

Did he pay alot more for the HD lenses? If he did it could be buyers remorse

**Darryl Meister** · 07-19-2012, 10:01 AM

Did he pay alot more for the HD lenses? If he did it could be buyers remorse

Always a very real possibility...

Best regards,
Darryl

**bigeyejim** · 07-23-2012, 05:09 PM

I have a patient who wore the SolaOne HD, First generation for a few years, then I put him in the Individual. Didn't like it as much, and his complaint was that the reading area on the Individual was too small. That's the feeling I get as well.

FWIW.

**Darryl Meister** · 07-24-2012, 10:22 AM

I have a patient who wore the SolaOne HD, First generation for a few years, then I put him in the Individual. Didn't like it as much, and his complaint was that the reading area on the Individual was too small. That's the feeling I get as well.

The original Zeiss Individual lens provided significantly more distance vision utility than SOLAOne HD, but slightly less near vision utility. This viewing zone balance worked very well for the European market, where the lens was first launched.

In the US market, however, some patients seemed to prefer slightly more near vision utility, so the near zone of Zeiss Individual was enhanced slightly. Additionally, Individual 2 is available with a new "Near" emphasized option for those patients who require even more near vision utility.

Best regards,
Darryl

**bigeyejim** · 07-24-2012, 10:31 AM

Thanks, Darryl for the info. It makes perfect sense. My favorite lens is the Individual, but again I do a lot of near, so that is a complaint of mine. Our lens of choice is the GT2 3D, so for the vast majority of our patients, we have a fine choice. This patient does a lot of detail work with photography and the like, so his near requirements are much more than the average.

I will be looking into the new Individual, as I have been reading about the "Near" aspect of the lens.

I think those Sola HD lenses were far ahead of their time...I don't know how well they did in the market, but it seems like they were there before everybody else. But then again, that's my UNEDUCATED GUESS!!

Cheers,

jim

**Darryl Meister** · 07-24-2012, 10:40 AM

I think those Sola HD lenses were far ahead of their time...I don't know how well they did in the market, but it seems like they were there before everybody else. But then again, that's my UNEDUCATED GUESS!!

I'd have to agree with you. SOLAOne HD was first launched back in 2004, when the free-form lens market was just beginning to emerge in the US. The lens continues to do very well for us, although most of our marketing effort is now put behind the ZEISS brand.

Best regards,
Darryl

**sharpstick777** · 07-24-2012, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by Darryl Meister

Additionally, Individual 2 is available with a new "Near" emphasized option for those patients who require even more near vision utility.
Best regards,
Darryl

Darryl, how is the intermediate handled when someone orders a "near" version of the Individual 2? For example, is the entire corridor "wider" with a harder design resulting in both a wider reading and computer, or does the distortion move "up" to widen the near, so only the reading area increases, the intermediate stays the same, and you loose some distance width. As with most Zeiss lenses, its an adaptive design as the add power increases (neither soft nor hard, but it changes as the add goes up), but how does the Individual 2 adapt in higher add powers? Does the design get "harder" or does the area of distortion increase? Thanks.