what ever it is it is just a guide that doesnt mean much, when i actually had the gizmo with the rubber against a lens and rubed the lens i found out that the way that particular batch was proccesed made a very large difference, pick a number between 1 and 500 it's probably in there some place:cheers:
Originally Posted by Ecliptic
Crizal hands down...
Last week I had a couple of patients come in with glasses that were two or three years old. Both of them were VERY unhappy with their lenses because they were so hard to clean and got dirty so fast.
They were bad, I washed one with dishsoap and warm water and it looked bad within minutes. Neither were crazed or badly scratched but I could write on both of them with markers unlike good ARs. Neither patient would get AR again and I can't really blame them.
One of them was some cheap Davis AR but the other was Crizal. It makes me wonder how good regular Crizal is after a couple of years; do all Crizal lenses get like this with regular washing and wearing?
YES. I love it. I have three pairs of glases with Crizal. One of those pairs is four years old and it still looks great. However, I do know how to take care of my glasses... a lot of people are careless and that's why they come in over and over again with nasty looking lenses.
A lot of our customers that come in swearing never to get AR again try Crizal and are really satisfied.
Chris,
If you are saying that all AR coatings are the same, I would have to disagree with this. If you are saying that the base ingredients are the same, I wouldn't know. However, there is absolutely no question in my mind that some AR coatings are absolutely horrible and others are fabulous. I've had a lot of experiences with some terrible coatings that we got from various labs that we used in which every pair of lenses that they were put on looked smudged beyond repair after a few months. On the other hand, our crizal alize patients come in with sparkling lenses visit after visit. Don't get me wrong: I hate paying those alize prices and I wish it weren't so, but it is. On the other hand, I know that you sell a dip product which you claim turns any AR coat into a premium coat. If this is true then it's worth it's weight in gold (literally).
anyone used the Crizal Avance with Scotchgard enough to give a good idea how it compares to the other top coatings?
essilor seems to advertise it as the most scratch resistant A/R... but with the Super Hivision having a bayer rating of 10.9 I find it unlikely! Anyone know the bayer rating of the Avance lenses? or at least used them enough to give a decent review of them?
I tried to email essilor using their website but whenever i try to send the email it gives an error. I also tried to call them and when I asked the supposed coating rep if she could give some kind of comparison she sounded clueless and told me if I had "internet" i could go to their website (which basically says that it is the newest and best... but doesn't have any numbers or comparissons to back-up the claims!).
Anyhow, thanks :)
@nevio: if you find the bayer ratings to not mean too much, then do you have subjective experience that can say how this coating compares to the rest?
anyone used the Crizal Avance with Scotchgard enough to give a good idea how it compares to the other top coatings?
essilor seems to advertise it as the most scratch resistant A/R... but with the Super Hivision having a bayer rating of 10.9 I find it unlikely! Anyone know the bayer rating of the Avance lenses? or at least used them enough to give a decent review of them?
I tried to email essilor using their website but whenever i try to send the email it gives an error. I also tried to call them and when I asked the supposed coating rep if she could give some kind of comparison she sounded clueless and told me if I had "internet" i could go to their website (which basically says that it is the newest and best... but doesn't have any numbers or comparissons to back-up the claims!).
Anyhow, thanks :)
@nevio: if you find the bayer ratings to not mean too much, then do you have subjective experience that can say how this coating compares to the rest?
I have not used Avance, but before I left, I did a lot of Alize. Essilor's is lower than Hoyas. With that in mind, I never got Alize lenses back with scratches. It is one of those things about if it is good enough. An Escalade is huge and big enough for a family of four on a vacation. Just because a Hummer is bigger, does not mean it is more appropriate. At that point, there are other factors to consider.
While i dont care to admit it the Ultra coating from Walman optical has done well with our few patients we send through them.
I have it on my newest progressive lenses. I also have Crizal Alize on some other glasses.
The Crizal Avance is very slick and very easy to clean. The best thing about it is that it stays clean. I wash them in the morning and can go all day without cleaning them again. I have never had this with any other AR.
My other glasses with the Crizal Alize are easy to clean but not quite as easy as the Avance. They also don't stay clean as long, I can't clean them in the morning and not clean them again all day.
As far as scratches go, I don't have any that I can see on my Avance lenses. I think I've had the glasses for about 6 months. I take care of them but I'm not perfect about it.
My husband is not as good about taking care of his glasses and his Crizal Alize with Clearguard lenses do have a few scratches on them. I have replaced them once.
No the lens SV 1.67 Pentax TranGray AR ( In stock ) comes like that with the Pentax AR form Pentax I have a Pair myself they are good lenses.
ArielJG :bbg:
JG Optical & Galaxy Optics, NY
I have used it for about three years now (yes I work for the enemy) and I have to say its the best coating I have used it 13 years in optical. I am my worst customer...I use and abuse my glasses to see what they can take and I have yet to destroy a schotchguard lens. I have a few scratches but nothing like my other lenses. The one thing I have noticed at work is that on a 1.67 lens...it crazed with heat easily..where the poly doesnt.
It hasn't been available except for about 3 months. Are you talking about the LC "Scotchguard" branded lenses? If so, it's not the same. And it wasn't applied over Avance.
Welcome to the board!
Organopolysiloxane is doing the job................
ilanh.........we do not have to glorify a dip product more than it actually does provide.
The microscopic gaps between the crystals of the AR layer are the culprits that collect dirt and facial grease............and because these gaps are very hard to keep clean we developed a water based organopolisiloxane material over 20 years ago that fills those gaps and results in very smooth and slick surface which prevents dirt and grease to get into those space.
Your premium coating contain also organopolisiloxane that been applied by evaporation of a siloxane pill under vacuum which eliminates the extra step of dipping the lenses.
However the result is about the same while the cost to you is about 100 fold more, than if you would have applied it yourself. We do make a living by providing the optical retailer the possibility of doing some finishing operations themselves to reduce their cost and sell the end product with a higher profit or being able to reduce their selling prices which is not the worst idea in todays economy.
I would certainly appreciate a brief rundown on the difference between:
Let me guess:
- Crizal
- Alize
- Alize with Clear Guard
- Avance with Scotch Guard.
- AR stack on lens manufacturer's hard coat
- Stack with hydrophobic/oleophobic top layer
- essilor's proprietary hard coat, stack, and top layer
- Same thing with added anti-static layer?
1. Crizal is the traditional coating with a hydrophobic layer
2. Alize is the easy to clean, with an oleophobic layer in addition to a hydrophobic one.
3. Alize with an anti-static layer
4. An upgrade of Alize with Clearguard that is even easier to clean, stays clean longer, and will retain its ease of clean throughout time.
In my opinion, no need for four options. Each one replaces the next. However, some people still use Crizal (why, I have no clue). Alize with scotch guard quickly replaced Alize. Avance has replaced Alize with Clear Guard. Also, Alize with Clear Guard and Avance were introduced with almost no price increase.
Thank you, ForLife!
in our office we have seen mostly good results with teflon. Crizal alize has also been a very strong coating for us, neither have shown any true issue.
i recently got my father a pair with the hoya super hi vision, so i am pretty eager to see how well that holds up, he is one of the worst about cleanign their glasses i have seen.
Not exactly:
1. mfg's hard coat is stripped and Essilor's substrate-matched hardcoat is applied at the time of AR which supposedly bonds the AR much better to the hardcoat and the hardcoat to the lens.
2. Yes. Crizal w/ slick coat
3. Adds a slicker coat and "static guard" - but wears off with repeated cleanings. Being discontinued soon
4. Same as 3, but it's supposed to stay on for 40,000 cleanings or something like that. Maybe has a higher contact angle. Costs more of course.
Po;isailoxanes.............
An excellent descrition of polisiloxane which are the main ingredient of the subject on discussion.
http://www.eng.buffalo.edu/Courses/ce435/Polysiloxanes/
I wear Alize and I like it. I dont have a problem with it getting dirty or anything.
I have a pair of Vera Wangs that I put it on 3 years ago...no issues ever and they look brand new.
I just bought 5 pairs of Menizzi glasses all with Alize (Im trying to get all that I can before I move. :bbg:).
These coatings are increasingly excellent. However, the price is becoming high enough that it becomes more and more luxury instead of necessity. What a disconnect!
What's more, selling two-tiers of AR sends a terrible mixed message:
"NO, Mrs. Leery, that hard-to-clean stuff was our BASIC AR last time for $49...This is the 'good stuff' for $119."
"Well, Mr. Thinwallet, if you can't afford Optochemical's 'Polysiloxoryser with Kevlar' you can always get the basic stuff for less."
What's an optical to do? Seriously?
This discussion of AR is very interesting and really shows the confusion at our retail level about AR. I blame the misleading marketing and ignorant sales people for the confusion.
That being said, lets not forget that Crizal from a large Essilor lab is most likely different than the same Crizal from a recently purchased Essilor lab or an independent lab with in-house Crizal. This is due to the fact that there are different makes and models of coating equipment, the personnel and technicians, condition of equipment and finally the short cuts that they have exploited. This should also be true of Zeiss and any other coating "licensed" out. It might even include the Kodak; it did when they first came out with it. It was very poor!
Most important I believe is to choose a product with a long standing reputation from a company with the same that is committed to improving product so that we all can confidently increase AR sales. For those of you who "don't blame the patient for not wanting AR based on the past." Well, maybe you are to blame for dismal AR sales in the US. We need not sympathize with them. Remember plastic consumer products from the 70's and 80's? The thin stuff that was brittle. Now, think about how many products we buy today that are plastic, have replaced metal items and last much much longer. The AR today is far superior to what was in the past and it is your responsibility to relay this message to your patients as well as the benefits and value only AR can provide.
my .02
You are correct. It really is creating a barrier between adding it on to help everyone out and adding it on as a luxury.
I have many thoughts on this. My first one is that I shy away from the cheap stuff, because it has a history of failing. In many cases, I believe that I am better off to not offer AR than offer a poor AR that will fail. So then we get into offering something such as Crizal (the older premium coatings that tend to be very strong, but hard to clean). With that said, many patients hate the fact that they are hard to clean and people tend to turn down the AR coating instead.
So now you can Crizal it and put the Optochemical stuff. I am a big fan of Chris Ryser's products and do not want to say anything bad, but I also want to be honest. This product will not match what Alize has to offer. I also question how much better it is than regular Crizal.
I think one option is to look at something like Essilor Trio. It has an easy to clean version. As easy to clean as regular Alize, which is not that bad. Less expensive too. But offers a teal blue (not the Artic Blue of Zeiss, Teflon, or D Alize) that does not look as nice and allows in a little more reflections. I guess that is the customer compromise.
To add to the food for thought, the poor ARs, even the Trios are all offered by the chains. These are their primary coatings. By offering them, you are doing little to seperate yourself from them. So while you are offering the more expensive AR coating, you are doing it for a reason and that is differentiation.
So in the end, my former business has chosen to stick with Avance (or its equal alternatives). Part is to offer the easy to clean AR that people want, part is for duriability, part is for differentiation. Of course, if people want regular SRC, they can have it too. But I feel that we are better to offer no AR than something cheap that will either peel, look bad, or create complaints of ease of clean. I should also mention that no one in town really discusses the easy to clean aspect and most offer hard to clean lenses. So the ease of clean really does gain us word of mouth.
Absolutely. From beginning to end. I agree!
I think the idea of independent coatings is not that they cannot copy Crizal, but we do not know if they could copy Crizal. To switch clients over to try something new is a huge risk.
Lets say I have a business where I do 1,000 sales a year. 600 are put into AR. I have been using Crizal and a rep comes in from an independent company pushing his new AR at 20% less. So I try 300 patients in this new coating. In the next year I try another 300 patients. After one year, I start getting lenses peeling and crazing. Not on all 600, but lets be conservative and say 100. I then get half of them tell me that they will never buy from me again and the other half tell me that they do not want to try the premium AR because they do not trust it.
That is a significant loss for my business.
Therefore, I stay with what I know. Crizal, Teflon, Nikon, Hoya. I am also willing to throw in Vivex, an independent, that I have not tried but have heard only good things about.
But to try any other brands out there is just too much of a risk.
PS - I do want to mention that watch the posters on this board and opticians in the practice who use the cheaper alternatives. They tell you that they are just as good, but are the first to not give AR its due saying it scratches easily and crazes.
another vote for Hoya's SuperHiVision
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks