Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Polycarbonate

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Uilleann
    replied
    Trivex is still more expensive, and more limited in availability. Though it has slowly improved a bit over the years. The "optics of poly are crap" argument has been well and thoroughly debunked. The powers that it is often used, say +2.00 to -3.00 or so, and cyl under 2.00, iif fit with even a shred of competency 99.999% of patients wouldn't notice any optical difference between glass, CR, poly, Trivex, or 1.60, Abbe values be damned. Add to that the fact that poly is thinner, negating any noticeable weight savings Trivex tries to claim. You'll probably find more than a few pts far more concerned with thickness than optics.

    At the end of the day, fit what you like, what works, what is profitable enough to allow you to keep the lights on, and what allows you to keep your remakes to an absolute minimum. There rarely is a "right" or "wrong" answer to these questions, but there is no valid optical or medical reason NOT to offer poly in your quiver of lens materials. When and where you choose to use it is up to you of course.

    Leave a comment:


  • Robert Martellaro
    replied
    Originally posted by TEMPLBNDER View Post
    I am having an issue with my staff selling premium products. Does anyone think polycarbonate is a premium product? I say there are too many inherent problems with the product that you don't get with Trivex, 1.56, 1.60, 1.67. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
    1) Lowest density, lightest weight, ophthalmic lens available.
    2) The only ophthalmic lens that doesn't chip or crack.

    Need more proof?

    Low chromatic aberration, high strength, available in almost all PAL designs.

    No disadvantages except for high dioptric values in improperly sized frames.

    That makes it premium in my book.

    I have no financial interest in PPG or any of its subsidiaries and affiliates.

    Best regards,

    Robert Martellaro

    Leave a comment:


  • drk
    replied
    Polycarbonate is "premium" compared to...uncoated CR39.

    It's a word game.

    I have used it almost exclusively for about 25 years without any real problem, optically.

    Truth be known, though, I would consider it "a standard material" but the industry doesn't.

    Leave a comment:


  • TEMPLBNDER
    started a topic Polycarbonate

    Polycarbonate

    I am having an issue with my staff selling premium products. Does anyone think polycarbonate is a premium product? I say there are too many inherent problems with the product that you don't get with Trivex, 1.56, 1.60, 1.67. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Working...
X