*NEWB Thread* Preferred lens materials and coatings

[Toby J]

Hi all, Im new to the field and am learning as much as I can through trial and error. I'm so glad to have found this board. So far I've used the search function to help with some of what I've compiled, but here are some newb thoughts & questions.

Material preferences:

• Does this seem like a reasonable starting point/fitting order?

1) Trivex: for up to +/- 4D
2) 1.60: between 4D and 8D
3) 1.70: past 8D

Lens coatings (AR):

Cheap AR's dont hold up to well and can putoff potential customers from purchasing them ever again from what I understand.

• What are the top 2 premium coatings on the market: Crizal Avance? Hoya SuperHi?

Progressive Lenses: here beings my love-hate relationship, because I have the most problems with PALs. Currently, we are with all Varilux products but that is about to change. I dont know enough about freeform and their advantages, is anyone having any WOW's with them??

• What are the best lenses for 1st time wearer? I've used Definity with success.
• Best lens for computer user?
• What are the best premium lenses?

Toby

[GAgal]

:cheers::cheers:Welcome to Optiboard :cheers::cheers:

I think you have a good start especially for a newbie!

• Love Trivex! Great for powers +/-4
• The only hi-index we offer is 1.70, so that's all we sell
• Cheap AR can cause problems, but we offer the customer a choice in basic AR and premium AR. The premium ARs you have listed are excellent
• The best progressive and best premium lens question is hard to answer. Everyone has their own personal preference
• For computer use, I prefer a FT35 modified with intermediate prescription at top and a near prescription in the segment

Glad you're here and I hope this helps :D

[Jacqui]

:cheers::cheers:Welcome to Optiboard :cheers::cheers:

I think you have a good start especially for a newbie!

• Love Trivex! Great for powers +/-4
• The only hi-index we offer is 1.70, so that's all we sell
• Cheap AR can cause problems, but we offer the customer a choice in basic AR and premium AR. The premium ARs you have listed are excellent
• The best progressive and best premium lens question is hard to answer. Everyone has their own personal preference
• For computer use, I prefer a FT35 modified with intermediate prescription at top and a near prescription in the segment

Glad you're here and I hope this helps :D

I pretty much agree with this except for the material and there I use what Toby does. The 1.60 will give you a thinner lens for less $$$$ than the others.

[Fezz]

:cheers::cheers:Welcome to Optiboard :cheers::cheers:

I think you have a good start especially for a newbie!

• Love Trivex! Great for powers +/-4
• The only hi-index we offer is 1.70, so that's all we sell
• Cheap AR can cause problems, but we offer the customer a choice in basic AR and premium AR. The premium ARs you have listed are excellent
• The best progressive and best premium lens question is hard to answer. Everyone has their own personal preference
• For computer use, I prefer a FT35 modified with intermediate prescription at top and a near prescription in the segment

Glad you're here and I hope this helps :D

Great post!!!

I REALLY like the highlighted stuff!

I like Jacqui's take on the 1.60 as well!!

:cheers::cheers::cheers:

[Chris Ryser]

[
For computer use, I prefer a FT35 modified with intermediate prescription at top and a near prescription in the segment

Good statement.............................That is what I am wearing because my progressives would drive me nuts. :bbg:

[Toby J]

Good statement.............................That is what I am wearing because my progressives would drive me nuts. :bbg:

Could someone explain this more. I've filled a few computer Rx's that I recommended a progressive instead :hammer:Go easy on me, Im working on my optics foundation!

[DragonLensmanWV]

Could someone explain this more. I've filled a few computer Rx's that I recommended a progressive instead :hammer:Go easy on me, Im working on my optics foundation!

Easy - just adjust the (normally) distance portion for their intermediate power, drop the add by 50% and you're off!

[rinselberg]

Could someone explain this more. I've filled a few computer Rx's that I recommended a progressive instead :hammer:Go easy on me, Im working on my optics foundation!

With the FT35 "Flat Top" (above), modified with an intermediate prescription for the distance zone, the user will be able to see the computer screen clearly from the nasal edge of the lens all the way to the other (temporal) edge.

With the FT35, the user will experience "image jump" when he (or she) refocuses away from the distance zone to use the small reading segment--or the other way around.

With a progressive power type lens, the user will look through the distance or intermediate zone (depending on how it is setup) to read the computer screen, but he will not see clearly from one edge of the lens all the way to the other edge, because there will be a narrower central corridor of clear vision. Outside that corridor there will be perceptible optical distortion.. or "aberration", as some would prefer to say. Distortion or aberration in the periphery of the lens. (The periphery being the part of the lens nearest to its nasal edge or to its temporal edge.)


The shaded areas (green; pink) are where there is perceptible distortion as the user looks through different areas on the surface of a progressive power type lens.


But with a progressive power type lens, the user will not experience "image jump" as he refocuses from the distance or intermediate zone into the closeup or reading zone--or the other way around.


I've never worn lined lenses so hey--I'm just regurgitating what I have read on this forum.



If you find this post helpful, please click or select the "Woody" icon to send a vote to the SETI@home forum and move me closer to my goal of being elected a SETI@home User Of The Day. You will receive an instant (or almost instant) audio confirmation of your vote.

[Chris Ryser]

But with a progressive power type lens, the user will not experience "image jump" as he refocuses from the distance or intermediate zone into the closeup or reading zone--or the other way around.

I've never worn lined lenses so hey--I'm just regurgitating what I have read on this forum.

rinselberg, I gave my vote................ That was a beautiful presentation and I want just make one suggestion................

If you were sold on progressives because of the image jump you need to learn that within a few days you will neither notice nor feel it anymore.
Maybe on progressives you wont notice the distortion anymore either.

However it is there, and your vision is just not as clear as it would be with a straight top. Furthermore when you get older and you reading area has to be made stronger as of an add of 1.50 to 1.75 the progressive area gets narrower and the reading part will become smaller.

On a flat top 35mm it will always be the same........you will see the full screen without any distortion and you will have a crystal clear reading area that is a clear 35x30 cm or 13.46x12 inches. This actually means that you don't have to move your head up and down and sideways to see an object clear.

I am sure that some fanatic advocates of progressive lenses will fall all over me...........but facts are facts.

[Ginster]

Welcome to OPtibouard, My Husband works on a computer all day and out of everything I 've put on him He likes the Office the best.

[Toby J]

• What are the best lenses for 1st time wearer? I've used Definity with success.
• What are the best premium lenses?

Toby

Thanks for the help so far guys! What about 1st time wearers, and premium lenses?

From what I've understood, go with a soft design on 1st time wearers/early presbopes (because the intermediate is not a big deal at that stage)

[GAgal]

Thanks for the help so far guys! What about 1st time wearers, and premium lenses?

From what I've understood, go with a soft design on 1st time wearers/early presbopes (because the intermediate is not a big deal at that stage)

Hard designs have a high level of blending in the unused portion of the lenses. This gives a much clearer reading and distance portion, but can cause more of that upset, dizzy feeling. Not a good idea for someone with vertigo, balance problems, or people who are sensitive to motion.

Soft designs have the blending more spread out and the blends enter the corridor more, resulting in the "soft" part of the design. Helpe eliminate dizzy feeling, but it sacrifices some of the crispness of vision in the corridor.

In actuality, most lenses today are neither hard nor soft, but a combination of the two blending designs (confused yet?) Myopes need clearer vision at the distance so the distance part of the lens has harder blends and softer blends at the near to help with the dizzies. Hyperopes need clearer vision at near so the opposite is done. Next, you're going to get into free-form designs and then you are really going to confused because most people are, no matter how long you've been in the business. :D So, hard design, soft design, it really doesn't matter since neither one in produced in its true original form anymore.

Now, premium lenses. It's a matter of opinion, so pick one that you like. I've had some practices, mostly those who are OMDs, say that everything besides the Varilux line sux (not true btw) and that if we put them in anything but Varilux we're making the patient suffer. I've had others say that Seiko Proceed II and III are the only way to go because of the technology they use and the shorter fitting heights they provide. The bottom line, most premium progressives are going to excellent for most patients and provide clear vision with minimal adaptation time. So, find one or two that you like and sell it; however, don't be afraid to try something new every once in a while so that you don't get trapped in a rut and let the newest technology pass you by. This will hurt your patients and yourself in the long run.

[Chris Ryser]

Myopes need clearer vision at the distance so the distance part of the lens has harder blends and softer blends at the near to help with the dizzies. Hyperopes need clearer vision at near so the opposite is done.

:D So, hard design, soft design, it really doesn't matter since neither one in produced in its true original form anymore.

..............try something new every once in a while so that you don't get trapped in a rut and let the newest technology pass you by.

...............and do not forget that the distortion will be there for all eternity and no new technology can eliminate it on these lenses.

And if a patients will ask you....."what is the best and optically totally clear lens ?" ...............what will you answer without being a liar ?

[Jacqui]

And if a patients will ask you....."what is the best and optically totally clear lens ?" ...............what will you answer without being a liar ?

I got a bunch of white GLASS for that. :D

[DragonLensmanWV]

...............and do not forget that the distortion will be there for all eternity and no new technology can eliminate it on these lenses.

And if a patients will ask you....."what is the best and optically totally clear lens ?" ...............what will you answer without being a liar ?

We answer with "It's also the heaviest lens I can put on you. It's really clear, but really heavy. I don't feel it's right for your -6.00 Rx." Also makes us not a liar. We still do a dozen glass jobs a year.

[Fezz]

We answer with "It's also the heaviest lens I can put on you. It's really clear, but really heavy. I don't feel it's right for your -6.00 Rx." Also makes us not a liar. We still do a dozen glass jobs a year.

I usually ask if they have an airbag in their vehicle. If they do, I ask if they would really feel comfortable with a glass lens in front of the eye IF the bag should go off.

[rinselberg]

Who's standing up for glass lenses? I think that Chris Ryser was comparing lined lenses to PALs when he said "the best and optically totally clear lens"..

Just my two cents worth.

[DragonLensmanWV]

Who's standing up for glass lenses? I think that Chris Ryser was comparing lined lenses to PALs when he said "the best and optically totally clear lens"..

Just my two cents worth.

Could be, but that is true.
Fortunately we've been able to convert Frankin-style segs in to FT-35s for a lot of people.
We do an awful lot of Images and Precise/Precise Short progressive, but still we do a large amount of Ft-28.

[Chris Ryser]

Who's standing up for glass lenses? I think that Chris Ryser was comparing lined lenses to PALs when he said "the best and optically totally clear lens"..

Just my two cents worth.

rinselberg you are correct again.......................

I never even said anything about glass..................just a plain simple ST35 in today's materials,.......................without distortions.

[DragonLensmanWV]

rinselberg you are correct again.......................

I never even said anything about glass..................just a plain simple ST35 in today's materials,.......................without distortions.

True, true, but look right at the line so that it bisects your vision and tell me there's no blur or double vision there.

[Chris Ryser]

True, true, but look right at the line so that it bisects your vision and tell me there's no blur or double vision there.

Dragon..........Now that you mentioned it, I first too the lens cleaner in my hand and gave the glasses a good spray and dried them with not sandpaper.

I wear my line at lower pupil height for more comfort.................and you are totally right, if I concentrate to look steady through the line there is a good blur and some double vision, but I have to concentrate to see it., like looking through a rifle scope.

However when wearing them normally you actually are not aware of this fact, because of getting used to it.

When I put on my progressives I do see crooked door frames but I guess one can get used to that too, what I could not get used to is the small reading are of the +2.50 add.

[Toby J]

Alright, now back to the other question :p

I will try this now for my fitting order/preference, anyone else have absolute favorites. (We are getting away from Varilux/Essilor. We just want to use the 'best' or premium lenses, but I realize how subjective it can be).

1) Premium PAL: Shamir, Kodak
2) Digital Lens: Autograph, Definity
3) Computer PAL: Office
4) Short PAL: Navigator Short
5) First Time: Younger Image, Navigator
6) Economy lens:

Whaddya think?

[GAgal]

...............and do not forget that the distortion will be there for all eternity and no new technology can eliminate it on these lenses.

And if a patients will ask you....."what is the best and optically totally clear lens ?" ...............what will you answer without being a liar ?

Usually, I don't have anybody ask that. They usually say "I want them no-line bifocals that no one can see" and I say OK. That would be a progressive lens and then I explain to them about the corridor and the distortion on the sides and then they say "I still want them no lines" or "I don't think I can handle that. What else ya got?" :cheers: See, no lies.

Toby~ good list

[rinselberg]

Alright, now back to the other question :p

I will try this now for my fitting order/preference, anyone else have absolute favorites. (We are getting away from Varilux/Essilor. We just want to use the 'best' or premium lenses, but I realize how subjective it can be).

1) Premium PAL: Shamir, Kodak
2) Digital Lens: Autograph, Definity
3) Computer PAL: Office
4) Short PAL: Navigator Short
5) First Time: Younger Image, Navigator
6) Economy lens:

Whaddya think?

Toby J: I think that you need to rethink your approach on this.

I've been an engineer (in a related field) and not directly anywhere in the chain that services the eye patient.

My only relevant hands-on experience with lenses are the ones that I recently started wearing. They are PALs. I think they work pretty good. At least I haven't been disappointed with them. I knew about the limitations of PALs (narrowing of clear vision corridors or skew distortion; small reading area) going in.

I closely followed many of the discussions here about spectacle lenses and especially about PALs.

I browsed at all of the lens manufacturers' Internet websites.

I think you need three tiers of progressive power lenses (PALs) to offer your customers:

The top tier should be represented by the "flagship" products that the lens manufacturers expect to go to those customers who are willing to pay the most premium price. These are going to be the newest lens designs with the most buzzwords from the manufacturers: "Digital" or "Free Form"; "back surface" or "dual surface"; "customized Rx"; "optimized for position of wear". Accompanied by what may be a longer and more generous warranty if the customer isn't satisfied or comes up with scratched lenses at some point down the line.

The bottom tier should be where you go when a customer exhibits more than the average amount of price sensitivity. These are perhaps not the newest products (although they could be).

The middle tier is where you go with customers that are responsive to some of the buzzwords associated with your top tier lenses, but are not willing to pay your top tier prices.

The object of the game should be to figure out what kind of customer is in front of you in terms of top tier vs. middle tier vs. bottom tier. But you don't want to provide them with lenses that will not serve them reasonably well.

There are a lot of parameters to play with. For example, if you have what you assess to be a "middle tier" customer, you could sell them a top tier lens design but trim some of the cost by offering it in hard resin or CR-39--the most basic and least costly lens material. Rationalization: The customer had a demanding Rx, but wasn't sensitive to the thickness of the lenses, so CR-39 was OK.

The game should be played by figuring out what is more important in the customer's mind. Is the customer particularly interested in keeping their lenses clean? That clues you to a "premium AR". Is the customer sensitive to how thick the lenses are? That may clue you to one of the higher index materials instead of CR-39, considering the Rx. Wants a drill mount? They need Trivex or poly or 1.67 (depending on their Rx and what you believe about drill mounts vs. lens materials). Are the customer's visual requirements (as manifested by the Rx) relatively straightforward? Kind of low or mid-range as far as the sphere/cylinder correction? Right eye isn't too much weaker than the left eye? No weird prism requirements? A low add, less than 2.5 (2.25?)..? Then the winner might be a lens design from your bottom tier but with the premium AR and another lens material instead of the more basic CR-39.

I don't think that there should be a "First Time" category. Or a "Short PAL" category. You need to be able to offer "short PAL" in your top tier, middle tier and in your bottom tier. Same for "office" or "computer" lenses.

I'm just throwing this one out (somewhat against my better judgement) and I'm going to see what the reaction is. It might be fun to see how posters respond to this. (Or it might not be fun...)

[chrome surfer]

I have to catch you tomarrow. This thread is great. This stuff would have been great for me many moons ago, ;-)