Advice needed on younger image lenses

**ilanh** · 10-16-2007, 12:18 PM

For some unknown reason my lab provides younger image at a great price. We have been using it primarily as a driving lens (polarized) because of its wide, distortion free distance zone. However, I haven't really evaluated it as an all-purpose lens for distance, interm and reading. Also, I am a bit confused as to the 2mm drop zone and how that would affect the patient's experience or how we fit it. Are people using younger image as a general balanced lens? If so, are you successful with it? It's fully half the cost of many other progressives and comes in a fantastic range of materials and options. I would love to get more experience with it.

**drk** · 10-16-2007, 12:31 PM

Sheedy report rated it high, for what it's worth.

I don't think the total astigmatism rating is very high, though.

**Happylady** · 10-16-2007, 12:44 PM

Lots of people on this board have really liked this lens and had good luck with it. I have it in my sunglasses and while it does have a great distance area it seems "harder" and more swimmy then many other progressives I have tried. Not my favorite but I seem to be in a minority.

**ilanh** · 10-16-2007, 12:49 PM

I rely on the Sheedy report a great deal and refer it to often. However, I think there is a huge difference between lab research and subjective impression. For example, the Sheedy report gave the impression that the Comfort lens is a thoroughly mediocre lens in all respects (it didn't shine in any category). Yet, it seems to be very well tolerated by millions of patients and enjoys wide popularity among the professionals who fit it. One could argue that there are other reasons for this, but the fact remains that the cumulative experience of Optiboard members and the Sheedy report may differ signfificantly. You're right, however, Image hit the jackpot in the Sheedy study.

**DragonLensmanWV** · 10-16-2007, 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by ilanh

I rely on the Sheedy report a great deal and refer it to often. However, I think there is a huge difference between lab research and subjective impression. For example, the Sheedy report gave the impression that the Comfort lens is a thoroughly mediocre lens in all respects (it didn't shine in any category). Yet, it seems to be very well tolerated by millions of patients and enjoys wide popularity among the professionals who fit it. One could argue that there are other reasons for this, but the fact remains that the cumulative experience of Optiboard members and the Sheedy report may differ signfificantly. You're right, however, Image hit the jackpot in the Sheedy study.

We use the Image as our first go-to regular progressive.We use a hundred pair or so a month. Others are fit for special needs and recommendations. But mainly we use the Image. Our adaptation rate is near 100%. In fact, the last several no-adapts were for the Compact Ultra or SolaMax.

**MarcE** · 10-16-2007, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by ilanh

I rely on the Sheedy report a great deal and refer it to often. However, I think there is a huge difference between lab research and subjective impression. For example, the Sheedy report gave the impression that the Comfort lens is a thoroughly mediocre lens in all respects (it didn't shine in any category). Yet, it seems to be very well tolerated by millions of patients and enjoys wide popularity among the professionals who fit it. One could argue that there are other reasons for this, but the fact remains that the cumulative experience of Optiboard members and the Sheedy report may differ signfificantly. You're right, however, Image hit the jackpot in the Sheedy study.

Bingo!
Image doesn't rate as good as the Ovation and others in my anecdotal "studies". As has been said on here before, Image is the best of the "cheap" lenses. Or put another way, It's the least expensive decent lens. There are some cheaper, but why risk it when the Image comes in every material you need and can be fit as low as 17.5 (according to Sheedy and a major lab's published data, and my own experience ). I have no issues dispensing the Image to anyone except for previous Essilor wearers or adds over 2.50. I wear it myself, and just ordered a new pair of this "dated" design.

As a followup to your "cumulative experience of Optiboard members". Is it possible to do a wearer subjective study within our ranks? We don't tell our patients what lens they are getting. We know what they were wearing, and we call them one week later to see "how they are getting along with their new glasses". Seems like we could have a standard list of 2-4 questions that we could ask each patient after they have had their specs a while and compile the data like you would a customer satisfaction surey. Is it feasible? Does anyone want to head it up? Will the data be worthwhile?

I can't head it up, but I have some ideas and will be willing to have my staff ask a couple of standardized questions of each PAL patient.

**HarryChiling** · 10-16-2007, 03:21 PM

I have had great luck with the image. Remember that it's not a mediocre premium lens but an exceptional value lens. It comes in many materials includeing trivex, comes in transitions brown and grey, it comes in polarized brown and grey. It is easy to fit almost all of you patients in this lens without worry of it comes in that flavor or not.

Comfort is an old design, it is mediocre in my opinion. I think the control they have on the processing has done well for the design. You could say the same for the image through Maui Jim, people swear by their Maui Jim progressives and they are an image. If I had a varilux blank and surfaced any Rx on the wrong base it would be a horrible lens, but varilux makes sure people that don't know what they are doing don't get a hodl of their blanks. I have used all kinds of progressives and find that when you fit them correctly they all work well. Some designs are much more forgiving than others, so I would highly recommend that if you have skilled opticians int he offcie you try some of the value designs, I think you would be pleasently suprised, but if you employ a lower level dispenser than stick to the more forgiving designs.

**cocoisland58** · 10-16-2007, 04:13 PM

We use Image as our "generic" progressive lenses. They aren't bad at all for some patients but we don't generally downgrade anyone to them or they do notice the difference. Curious myself a few years ago I had two identicle frames made up for myself, one was Image and the other Panamic (which I wore at the time). Hands down Panamic won because I did notice the swimmy feeling and side blur much more in the Image. Still if you didn't know better you'd probably get used to it.

**Happylady** · 10-16-2007, 05:33 PM

Originally Posted by cocoisland58

We use Image as our "generic" progressive lenses. They aren't bad at all for some patients but we don't generally downgrade anyone to them or they do notice the difference. Curious myself a few years ago I had two identicle frames made up for myself, one was Image and the other Panamic (which I wore at the time). Hands down Panamic won because I did notice the swimmy feeling and side blur much more in the Image. Still if you didn't know better you'd probably get used to it.

Yes, I won a free pair of Image Trivex and made up a pair for my husband. I did have to pay for the AR. My husband was wearing the Panamic at the time (I think) and he wore the Image for just a couple of days and said he didn't like it. He never wore them again. :(

**Christosfer** · 10-16-2007, 09:14 PM

I have also been using the Image lens as a budget alternative to the higher end lenses that we normally dispense. It is my go to lens in sunwear too. Like was said, Maui Jim uses it (Oakley too), and I have not had any issues with it. I think it is a great lens for the money. It also comes in some very large blank sizes for those big wraps and ladies suns. I package it with backside Ar and sell it on a half off second pair; utilizing essilors pair 50 deal, the patient gets a good deal and so do I.

**gemstone** · 10-17-2007, 06:27 AM

The Image is one of my personal first choices. I have problems with the softer lenses that distort the distance peripheral. I like a clean distance.

**KStraker** · 10-17-2007, 07:19 AM

Where can I find this elusive Sheedy report?

Thanks-kevin

**Fezz** · 10-17-2007, 07:27 AM

Originally Posted by KStraker

Where can I find this elusive Sheedy report?

Thanks-kevin

Kevin,

Try this link!

http://optometry.osu.edu/COOR/pdfs/O...SciArticle.pdf

Enjoy!

:cheers::cheers::cheers:

**LENNY** · 10-18-2007, 08:19 AM

Originally Posted by MarcE

Bingo!
I wear it myself, and just ordered a new pair of this "dated" design.

.

I dont think it is "dated" comparing to Comfort!

**DragonLensmanWV** · 10-18-2007, 08:25 AM

Originally Posted by LENNY

I dont think it is "dated" comparing to Comfort!

Yes, there have been changes made to it over the years. At least by looking at the blanks they appear to have been changed a few times. Big lower lip, no lip, small lip on the blank.

**LENNY** · 10-18-2007, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by DragonLensmanWV

Yes, there have been changes made to it over the years. At least by looking at the blanks they appear to have been changed a few times. Big lower lip, no lip, small lip on the blank.

You think the Image DESIGN itself was changed?

**DragonLensmanWV** · 10-18-2007, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by LENNY

You think the Image DESIGN itself was changed?

Well, judging from the way the blanks look, even same base/add and the way the inking pattern has also changed slightly, yes. I wonder if Dave could straighten me out?
I don't think the inking change spelled any real change, it was just that they went to a smaller near circle.

**Andrew Weiss** · 10-18-2007, 03:54 PM

I use the Image as the "step up" from the bargain-basement Navigator. I have put patients into it who were wearing an Essilor Natural with no complaints. I have two pair of my own: one is a Drivewear, and I mounted the corridor low enough so the distortion doesn't bother me. The other pair is a Trivex drilled rimless; it gives me headaches. Go figure. :shiner:

**MarcE** · 10-19-2007, 12:17 AM

Originally Posted by Andrew Weiss

I use the Image as the "step up" from the bargain-basement Navigator. other pair is a Trivex drilled rimless; it gives me headaches. Go figure. :shiner:

I've thought about this myself. My conclusion is that Image is a decent lens, available in everything and only several dollars more than the Bargain-basement lenses. It is my bargain-basement lens AND also my next step up lens. To me the real cheapies just aren't worth it when the Image is such a great value.

**snowmonster** · 10-19-2007, 06:12 AM

ilanh - Don't worry about the 2 mm drop. It's all totally arbitrary. I think the rational behind what kind of drop the manufacturer puts on a lens has something to do with blank size and fitting height, but I could be crazy. I know the Zeiss Brevity is a 6 mm drop, for example. That would be a rare drop, but it doesn't relate to distance vision or anything through the lens. It should be standardized in my mind.

The Image is a good lens. We haven't had any non-adapts to my knowledge, but we've only been using it for about 10 months here. I love that fact that it's available in all materials (except 1.60, which we rarely use anyway) as well as polarized, Trivex and Transitions.

**Fezz** · 10-19-2007, 08:50 AM

I really like the lens. I just wish that the lens markings were not so stinking big! No missing those puppies! I think David and his company have provided us with some really grand products and education and should be applauded!

:cheers::cheers::cheers:

**DragonLensmanWV** · 10-19-2007, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by Fezz

I really like the lens. I just wish that the lens markings were not so stinking big! No missing those puppies! I think David and his company have provided us with some really grand products and education and should be applauded!

:cheers::cheers::cheers:

Yeah, If I could just convince him to re-issue the blended myodisk in high index....:idea: