What are the popular types of AR coating on the market today? Which ones come with the hydrophobic coatings? Which ones are at the top and which ones are the bottom? And why do some AR types have to be applied on both sides and can't be applied to just the back side..
I will let others praise one and trash another. If you narrow your choices and want to ask me for my opinion on two or three I will be glad to respond by private message.
Good and Bad can be determined by number of different criteria. Consider the purchase of a new car. How could anyone answer which car is right for you unless they are just know to have many many problems. A Porsche for some at $90,000 might be a great car, but if you need a car to haul kids back and forth to school I wouldn't recommend it. (For $30,000 you can have a nice car that will haul kids great).
With AR are you looking for some improved light transmission? or are you looking for the best light transmission possible. Do you just want a hydrophobic that will resist smudging compared to a lens without a hydrophobic? Do you care if this hydrophobic only lasts about four months or do you want it to last at least two years?
If you want to see AR as a high margin add on and pay the least possible for the AR then you might get away with a one sided AR with a short term standard hydrophobic.
You can put the AR on one side and you have AR, you can sell this as AR.
But is it as good as a true premium AR applied to both sides of the lens on a thermally cured hard coat with a super hydrophobic that will last the life of the lens? NO!
Many times you as the retailer of the product will get what you pay for and if your market can stand the increased price, your customers will appreciate the best quality. Remember this will cost you more and you will make more $. Be careful about percentages. Your deposit slips do not have a line for %.
Study what makes a great AR if that is what you want to offer and ask for references from others who have been selling the one you like. If it is a good product and you like it and your customers like it, I doubt that you will have any resistance due to the brand of AR. The customers hardly know it is available much less what company offers what AR treatment, and to the customer you are the expert, lets face it they are trusting you to be able to offer improved vision.
Ar......................
Everybody claims to have the best................optician on the Optiboard have each one their own claim while AR coatings are still in the minority of all glasses sold, similar as PALS but less.
When they have been worn for a few years they start looking unsightly, but the coating can then be removed in 6 seconds right in the store while the customer waits and the glasses can be used again. You can even make sunglasses out of them in another 60 seconds.
Certainly true in the US and Canadian markets however AR market penetration in some Western European countries and Japan excedes 85%.Originally Posted by Chris Ryser
There is no technological reason that an AR must be applied on both sides of a lens, i.e. there is no processing technology that isn't capable of coating only a single surface and almost all coat one surface at a time anyway, infact nearly all technologies coat one surface at a time anyway. However, with the exception of sunglasses there is no justification for AR coating only a single surface.
I won't bash or pump a particular coating. Most are acceptable, some are outstanding and a few are crap. The independent coaters will provide you with free samples (or most will) for you to evaluate. Make up a couple of different pairs of glasses, each with a different coating on each lens. Wear 'em for a few months, it won't take long for you to decide which last longer, clear easier and generally perform the best. Then you can feel confident that you're recommending what you feel is the best balance of performance and cost to your customers.
I have recently begun using uncut stock lenses that come with an AR coating bundled in. The AR is extremely inexpensive and barely increases the cost of the lens without the coating. The AR is described by the company as superhard, multicoated, hydrophobic. As far as I can tell it's the same as most factory brand AR's. I don't know if I would go so far as to compare to Alize but I haven't had any problems. I have had an opportunity to see the AR coating from the Nassau lab, LBI and KMars lenses and they all seem to perform pretty well. Therefore, I wonder if it really pays to spend a fortune on premium "super AR's".
Ilan
The coated lenses from K-Mars seem to perform very well for what they cost. In terms of durability and hydrophobic properties, I think they're better than any standard or house AR that we get from our labs.
The super AR is a big "HYPE" as many independents make lenses as good as the hyped ones and most probably charge less for them.
Don't forget big time advertising does cost loads of money...........and you only spend loads of money if you have and the expense has to come back to you.
Therfore a large part of the expense is built into the selling price...........exactly like any product in other fields.
Look at refrigerators on the market...............different brands and prices and all made by GE with thesame basic setup and some visble differences.
I have to say that I just came back from a little night drive in which I took 2 pairs of glasses. One was coated with a cheap uncut, stock factory AR and one was coated was Crizal Alize. I looked through both and noted that I could see halos around lights when I used the cheaper one. With the Crizal there were no halos and things looked crystal clear. It may be somewhat of an unfair test since both the AR's was on 1.56 lenses, whereas the alize was on Poly. I may need to test it on identical lenses.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks