progressives HELP

[JJ]

OK, i get asked many times to explain the difference between some of essilors progressives. I have surfed the net for help but havent really found the easy answers.

My employer mainly sells essilor; my big comparison is always the comfort or the ovation and then what really makes panamic so much better (my co worker once had a customer go with panamic in one pair and natural in the other because she wanted it tinted for sunglasses; she preferred the natural over the panamic. it wasnt a money issue she didnt care about cost...in the end she went natural both pairs)

so......can someone simple put the ad and dis advantages for comfort vs ovation why one is better than other and then how do you explain why panamic is so much better and so much more money

I would call our rep but my employer does not allow us to and info has to trickle down from the top and as a part-timer i dont see much of the info......doesnt trickle that low

someone please help me to explain these lenses to my customers in a better more informative way:( :o =:D

[Jim Stone]

There are over 50 types of progressives available. The biggest difference is the ad campagnes. For the most parts you could put them all in a bag and the best would be the one you pull out. If a person has a problem with, one it usually because poor fit or manufacturing. That's the painfull truth.

[Homer]

JJ

Jim offers a bit of an over-simplified answer, IMO, but he also makes a good point: The differences aren't as great as the manufacturers would like you to think.

My guess it that I could go back to fitting all Super-No-Line's or VIP's and have the same success rate.

Is it not interesting that when each of the modern lenses came out they were the "best", "widest", "softest", "aspheric", "most adaptable" lenses available .... and with increased cost?

I find it also interesting that when each company makes their presentations that they have dispesers who can show that their lenses are the most accepted in some kind of "double blind" study and we buy (paying big bucks) for that BS ................. double blinded.

[JJ]

thats the way i feel also, my mom wears 5 different brands at all different times (she switches between all her glasses) and finds no real differance at all but.......

the customers dont really understand that.....they want the pro and cons between all of them

[Homer]

I must have 6 or seven different lenses, none of which are Comfort or Panamic, and I switch between them with ease.

The only one I did not like when i first put it on was the Comfort about 8 years ago. Go figure! I had Delta in a pair of sunglass that I didn't like either.

Of course they want to know the pros and cons and you can say there basicly aren"t any! So it goes like this, "because the differences are quite technical and often not experintal, If it is OK with you, Mr/Mrs/ Ms Jones, I will select the one that I think will work best with your prescription and your particular method of use."

You are the professional.

Of course there are several coridor lengths that might be considered depending upon the frame size and use.

[Pete Hanlin]

Seems to me the fact that different patients prefer different designs is self-illustrative that there are indeed differences in each design.

Panamic and Ovation come from the same "generation" of PALs. Which is to say that they both feature individual designs for each base curve/add power combination. Each design was developed by seperate teams, however.

Panamic is a revolutionary design for Essilor. Panamic incorporates something called Global Design Management(TM). What this means is that Panamic was not designed to have a "wider" channel. In fact, Panamic wasn't designed to have a channel at all. Instead of working towards a wide channel with optimal properties, Panamic is designed around balancing the entire lens.

In Panamic, levels of unwanted astigmatism are equally balanced on either side of the intermediate. While you can create a "wider" intermediate than Panamic's, the result is more unwanted astigmatism on one side of the intermediate or the other. Therefore, binocular vision is compromised. Also, the wearer will notice greater amounts of "swim" at intermediate and near.

What does all this mean for wearers? When properly fit, Panamic provides wider zones of binocular vision. Even though the design does not appear particularly wide on a contour plot, the effect experienced by the wearer should be one of more comfortable vision. Unfortunately, this also means Panamic is less forgiving if fit to improper parameters.

Most PALs have "sweet spots," Panamic has no such specific area of vision that is better than other areas in the lens. Again, the idea is to provide the eyes with similar images to each other. However, if the lens is fit either off measurement or off power, the eyes do not benefit from the design- and furthermore- do not have the reference points inherent to traditional PAL designs.

Comfort, on the other hand, was a design that combined a relatively short corridor (Comfort actually reaches 85-90% of its total add power just 12.4mm below the fitting cross) with a very soft design. Comfort is very forgiving and works relatively well even when misfit.

Natural is very similar to Comfort, and Ovation is similar to Panamic. All of these designs feature near point insets that increase as add power increases and progression lengths that vary depending upon the ametropia of the patient.

There will be situations where a patient is going to be more comfortable in a Comfort or Natural than in a Panamic or Ovation. Field reports have indicated that it can be difficult to convert a Comfort wearer into another design.

I hope this at least partially answers some of your question regarding the differences in Essilor PAL designs. Yes, to some degree PAL designs will be similar. However, throw them all in a bag, and you can tell the difference (first of all, you just look at the identification marks on the lenses, and...). Just kidding, Varilux has conducted wearer tests over the years involving 1,000s of patients through the process of designing new PALs, and the results of each new test provide new information on what PAL wearers experience and require.

You should see some of the design innovations that are waiting just around the corner! There will be some truly exciting stuff in the coming two or three years!

[Homer]

Hi Pete

Good esplaination, but I have this question:

[QUOTE]Pete Hanlin said:

What does all this mean for wearers? When properly fit, Panamic provides wider zones of binocular vision.


Wider than what?

[JJ]

thank you pete

pretty much exactly what i was looking for; i was hoping or deep down inside knew you'd answer this one for me

thank you to everyone who answered

[aaron]

Pete,

Sorry to interject, but what exactly is the differance between the Panamic and Ovation?

aaron

[CME4SPECS]

If you really want to confuse your customer start talking brand names. I offer PALS...period! Unless they specify a particular brand, or ask what they are wearing they'll probably never know.

[Jim Stone]

Pete Hanlin said:
Seems to me the fact that different patients prefer different designs is self-illustrative that there are indeed differences in each design.

Panamic and Ovation come from the same "generation" of PALs. Which is to say that they both feature individual designs for each base curve/add power combination. Each design was developed by seperate teams, however.

Panamic is a revolutionary design for Essilor. Panamic incorporates something called Global Design Management(TM). What this means is that Panamic was not designed to have a "wider" channel. In fact, Panamic wasn't designed to have a channel at all. Instead of working towards a wide channel with optimal properties, Panamic is designed around balancing the entire lens.

In Panamic, levels of unwanted astigmatism are equally balanced on either side of the intermediate. While you can create a "wider" intermediate than Panamic's, the result is more unwanted astigmatism on one side of the intermediate or the other. Therefore, binocular vision is compromised. Also, the wearer will notice greater amounts of "swim" at intermediate and near.

What does all this mean for wearers? When properly fit, Panamic provides wider zones of binocular vision. Even though the design does not appear particularly wide on a contour plot, the effect experienced by the wearer should be one of more comfortable vision. Unfortunately, this also means Panamic is less forgiving if fit to improper parameters.

Most PALs have "sweet spots," Panamic has no such specific area of vision that is better than other areas in the lens. Again, the idea is to provide the eyes with similar images to each other. However, if the lens is fit either off measurement or off power, the eyes do not benefit from the design- and furthermore- do not have the reference points inherent to traditional PAL designs.

Comfort, on the other hand, was a design that combined a relatively short corridor (Comfort actually reaches 85-90% of its total add power just 12.4mm below the fitting cross) with a very soft design. Comfort is very forgiving and works relatively well even when misfit.

Natural is very similar to Comfort, and Ovation is similar to Panamic. All of these designs feature near point insets that increase as add power increases and progression lengths that vary depending upon the ametropia of the patient.

There will be situations where a patient is going to be more comfortable in a Comfort or Natural than in a Panamic or Ovation. Field reports have indicated that it can be difficult to convert a Comfort wearer into another design.

I hope this at least partially answers some of your question regarding the differences in Essilor PAL designs. Yes, to some degree PAL designs will be similar. However, throw them all in a bag, and you can tell the difference (first of all, you just look at the identification marks on the lenses, and...). Just kidding, Varilux has conducted wearer tests over the years involving 1,000s of patients through the process of designing new PALs, and the results of each new test provide new information on what PAL wearers experience and require.

You should see some of the design innovations that are waiting just around the corner! There will be some truly exciting stuff in the coming two or three years!

This is the kind of BS you get if you talk to the manufacturers. Just pick out one you like and call the manufacturer. They will send you all the hype you need to sell you customer. Most will even send a "detail man " to help you sell them.

[Robert Martellaro]

JJ,

I have a natural and a panamic in two identical frames, in my Rx (-4.50 +2.00 add) set at 22 high, on my desk as I write this. The only difference of note is more blur at the distance periphery with the panamic. The panamic is generally more aspheric which allows the use of flatter base curves. The comfort in the 1.6 index has one of the steepest base curves in the industry (8.50 with a true curve of 8.38 I believe).

I would not be concerned with the distance blur on the panamic unless the client was a part time wearer, a pilot, active in sports, drives 50k a year and so on. The flatter curves are a big plus for hyperopes especially in rimless. If my client had a Rx in the +6.00 to +8.00 range the comfort is the only lens I know of that would keep the back curve from going plano, or even worse, convex.

PAL brands fit in the last 2 weeks...

Concise, xp, life2, comfort, max, percepta/finalite, panamic, fusion2, and the omni.

Robert