Frames & index question

**Daisy** · 08-30-2005, 09:41 AM

I am choosing between 2 easy-clip frames. Although I prefer how one frame looks, I wonder if I'd see noticeably better with the other? (i mean for near/far, as i think i'm not very concerned about my side vision).

My rx is -6 add 1.5

Frame 1 measures 45 mm by 29 mm INSIDE and its fitting height is 18-19. Looks better.

Frame 2 measures 47 mm by 30.5 mm INSIDE and its fitting height is 19-20. It's titanium (does that matter much?).

The fitting height of the lens is 18. It comes in index 1.6 and 1.67. My optican says the 1.6 has less aberrations, so for the smaller frame he'd probably recommend the 1.6, but for the larger frame says I might prefer the width/weight of the 1.67

Any comments on which choice of frame (and/or index) please? Thank you.

**Jedi** · 08-30-2005, 09:47 AM

Your optician has provided you with good information. If you want to get specific about edge thickness and you know your PD (pupil distance) and the DBL (distance between lenses), plug your #'s into the calculator found on Darryl's website.

**Daisy** · 08-30-2005, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by Jedi

If you want to get specific about edge thickness and you know your PD (pupil distance) and the DBL (distance between lenses), plug your #'s into the calculator found on Darryl's website.

Gee sorry I dont know those technicalities. Just mainly wondering about whether the frame that's 1.5 mm higher would provide perceptibly better vision (given i somewhat prefer how the smaller frame looks). Thanks all.

**Happylady** · 08-30-2005, 11:05 AM

What progressive is he using? If the smaller frame looks better, I would go with that one! It is true that 1.6 has better optics, but I use 1.67 all the time with no problems. I did have one woman notice that letters had a yellow edge to them with her new 1.67 lenses, but she felt it was a small trade off for how much thinner the lenses were then her old ones!

I recommend you get an ar coat and if you have an option between different brands of ar, it is worth it to get a more expensive one. An ar is particularly important with the 1.67 as the higher index of the lens, the more reflections it has without the ar.

Titanuim is a nice material. It is lighter then standard metal frames and usually strong.

**Jedi** · 08-30-2005, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by Daisy

Gee sorry I dont know those technicalities. Just mainly wondering about whether the frame that's 1.5 mm higher would provide perceptibly better vision (given i somewhat prefer how the smaller frame looks). Thanks all.

The deeper frame will give you more reading area, not necessarily better vision. If you do a lot close work I would tend to go with the deeper frame.

**Daisy** · 08-30-2005, 05:26 PM

It's the Comfort lens, but you can upgrade to premium like Ziess, Panama, Rodenstein, SolaOne or some others.

I do read some books & papers with my glasses, so is the extra 1-mm of fitting height in the taller frame that much better? Or instead what if I go with the 1-mm shorter frame I prefer and upgrade the lenses to one of those premium brands?

**Happylady** · 08-30-2005, 07:23 PM

Are you sure it is the Comfort and not the Natural? I ask because I have run into several places selling the Natural and telling people it is the Comfort. The lenses are similar but not the same though lots of people think they are the same. The Comfort has a channel that is 2 mm shorter which means you reach the reading area sooner.

I have been in the business long enough to remember when the minimum fitting height for the Comfort was 22 and the Natural was 24. Later it was adjusted to 18 for the Comfort and 20 for the Natural. Now I think the recommended heights are the same!

I really don't know much about Zeiss lenses, someone else can help you there. If you can get the Rodenstock xs(stands for extra short) it is an excellent lens for fitting in a small frame.

The Panamic is a great lens, but I don't think the reading area is any better then the Comfort in a small frame. The Piccolo is a great choice for a small frame. I have worn the SolaOne at 18 and really liked this lens for reading.

**Daisy** · 08-30-2005, 07:48 PM

Yes I know about short lenses, but he recommended I get 18 mm fitting height and a regular lens instead. He's ensured both frames have at least 18 mm or a sliver more; the larger frame has 1 mm extra than the smaller frame (see first post).

Yes I'm quite sure the lens is The Comfort (The Natural was a robert redford movie :bbg: ).
And their usual premiums are Panamic, Ziess Top and Rodenstock (but you can get most others from their supply labs).

I just wonder how much difference a fitting height of 1 mm will make when it's around 19 mm?

**Happylady** · 08-30-2005, 08:27 PM

There are several Rodenstock lenses. The Life is a nice lens, but I am not sure how much reading there would be at 18. The XS is the best for small frames.

When facing this problem with my own patients I will often take a dark marker and mark out the bottom 1 mm of the lens area of the larger frame. That would allow you to see how much difference it would make to you. Ask the optician if he/she will do that for you.

Personally, I think it will make a little difference, but not a lot. If you really like how the smaller frame looks better I would get that one.