Printable View
Just curious to know how many options you have for your patients in regards to progressive lenses and what kind of dispensary you are practicing in?
Is it possible to properly advise a patient when you only have access to two lenses out of the dozens upon dozens available? Everyone will always have a go to lens for whatever reason but isn't being able to offer choices critical in providing ethical care to the public?
Two choices will never successfully satisfy all of your patient's visual requirements. Realistically, you should have a good, better, best option available in your portfolio. This allows you to cater to your patients in terms of both quality, price and availability of lens materials and coatings.
Private labeled lenses from major manufacturers will keep your cost of goods down and allow you to make more profit without sacrificing quality. Patients don't really care about brand name when it comes to lenses believe me.
If you require any assistance, PM me. I have everything under the sun available at prices you will be impressed with.
I'm inclined to agree with 2020, but it's also important to make a distinction between new lens "models" after the digital revolution and the static hard designs of yore. In the past 5 or 6 years we've seen new PAL "designs" actually mean 3 different versions (per corridor heights, etc.)--whereas before those 2 or 3 different versions were marketed and sold as explicitly different designs. I don't know the secret sauce in production of the most modern options, but if I take the lens reps at their words, the calculations of the top-tier PALs basically create a custom 'design' for each Rx.
So if you're dispensing 2 modern PAL models, it might be fair to consider that 6 or more had we asked this question 10 years ago. Let's be fair...how many of us really used more than 6 designs on our formulary back then?
I've got a flip chart including 13 different PALs on it because I like to be prepared for fly balls. But I'd say 85% or more of the PALs I move you can identify by two different "models," for no other reason than they've proven themselves in the phenomenal rates of customer satisfaction for typical sight demands.
[edit: apologies, y'all. Didn't realize this was Canadian discussion. Didn't mean to migrate illegally!]
We will welcome anyone with good Insight to our side of the board.(But we may not welcome everyone who tries to migrate over the border if trump wins)Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayde
My office works the 'good- better- best' formula but then there is also the 'Cadillac of lenses' as well as the 'basic' (conventional) option. We start by looking at what the patient is already wearing (if not a first timer) and usually suggest something similar if not a step up. We explain how technology has changed and what the benefits of upgrading are and then let the patient decide. Obviously when cost is a factor we adjust to the most appropriate level for their priorities.
There is always 2 distorted parts on them and you could never take a photo through those lenses because it would provide the lousiest pictures through those distorted parts.Quote:
Originally Posted by LordElsinore
Basically they are all the same, the wider or larger the reading area and the distortion just changes shape but is still there.
Chris;Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Ryser
Please advise this forum what brand of progressives you have tried and when in order for you to come up with your hypothesis.
Many thanks,
Golfnorth
Chris;Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfnorth
Please post how you came up with your post about all the distortions on progressive lenses.
I believe that you wear a FT 35 bifocal if I'm not mistaken and if you haven't tried progressives for many years
then you would be posting old information and outdated opinions.
To put things in perspective, kindly advise us what progressive lenses you have tried and when in order for you
talk about all the distortion in progressive lenses.
Regards,
Golfnorth
In order to make a variable power curve you will have progressive distorted parts to the side, and you can not change the optical laws.
Easiest way to find out and go on Google and ask for:
"progressive lenses distortion problems"
About 191,000 results (0.49 seconds)
Chris;Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Ryser
Actually the easiest way would be for you to answer the question that I posted.
I ask you again, sir, "What brand or type of progressive lenses have you tried and how recent was it (what year)?
Regards,
Golfnorth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfnorth
Here is my answer:
Actually after my cataract operations on both eyes about 6 years ago I went back to my collection of old glasses as my Rx had gone back to the basics, and many of them are back into fashion and optically.
As a former frame distributor and wholesale lab owner I could fill half a museum with them.
They are all old, that is a fact. However the principle has not changed. An clean optical surface can not have different curvatures flowing into each other without creating a distortion.
Chris;Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Ryser
Yes just as I thought. You are wearing progressive designs from Noah's Arc.
The original poster should take your answer (or lack thereof) with a gigantic grain of salt.
Golfnorth
I'm actually in the market for new PAL lenses for myself. I've done a lot of research, and EVERY PAL lens map that I've seen shows two distinct areas of distortion, one on each side of the lens, due to unwanted astigmatism caused by the changing power in the lens, just as Chris described. So I'd really like to know, before I purchase new lenses: Is there such a thing as a PAL lens that does NOT have areas of distortion? Because I haven't found one. Even the lens maps for the Autograph series, and the Surmount show distortion.
There is no such thing as distortion free progressive lenses. Even with today's advanced manufacturing techniques, the viewing zones are much wider with minimal distortion, however distortion is a direct result of curvature change which is required to achieve power change.Quote:
Originally Posted by plculver
Lower adds have less, higher adds have more. Unfortunately, despite what lens companies claim in their marketing brochures, it is all fabricated terms of self claimed jargon. Sure the designs are softer and better these days, but they've all been trying to make a better mouse trap for years to no avail.
I really like my progressive lenses. When I have a person 55 and over that is wearing flat top anything, I ask about past lenses. If they have had a bad time with progressives and they are happy with what they have..........next. Easy sale and everybody gets what they want, me money, them, old time distance and near. Oh I do tell them about the non-adapt thing. I don't go to deep into it. You can tell if the person will tolerated the funky blur areas. Am I off topic? sorry.