The client had 1.00D cyl ou.
He LOVED THEM!
If you haven't gotten started with non-progressive DS lenses, why not start today?
"nuff said!
Barry
The client had 1.00D cyl ou.
He LOVED THEM!
If you haven't gotten started with non-progressive DS lenses, why not start today?
"nuff said!
Barry
What's a DS lens??
Digitally-Surfaced
Oh, they did what I talked about a few months ago and used the SV software on the minus side of a D28. 'Bout time they woke up.
P.S. It should have been a D35 with Transitions.
FT 35's?Originally Posted by Jacqui
I'd much rather have had a DS Round seg 25mm.
Barry
I just got a pair of SV 360's back for myself. Poly, low myope, half diopter cyl and a touch of sph OD, just sph OS. It's not like I can walk on water now, but there is a observable improvement vs. the three other pair of the same but non digital.
I ordered the SV 360 last week. I will let you know if I notice a difference or if I don't
Just think how much better it would be in Trivex!!:D
DragonlensmanWV N.A.O.L.
"There is nothing patriotic about hating your government or pretending you can hate your government but love your country."
Or CR39 for that matter.
Yep. Hardly ever do I sell a flat top that it isn't a 35, why would I? The market for flat tops are either older (much older) people or those who want or need it for specific tasks. Both of these groups appreciate the wider view. Transitions are still a marvel to the older crowd too so that would be a plus.
these groups appreciate the wider view. .............
Statement of the day....................could be improved a bit by saying ALL groups would appreciate it.
Just think, those who are using FT 35's and wider, I'll bet are the same that push PAL's. Now think about the wider view in any bifocal or trifocal as compared to a PAL.
What do we really belive?
Chip
I'm either from the old school, or at least a different school.
There is no comparing the optical performance of a +2.00 or less add bifocal to a similar progressive, ESP. If the bif is ds/ff optimized, IMHO
I think we've become too palcentric.
Since I hate the ledge, it's ft 28 or better, round sets foe me.
Ol' codger Barry
So got mine today. Initial review is that these do seem crisper. Almost like a RX improvement. With that said, I have not said "wow" yet. But it just seems like everything is a little less dull.
Have any proper studies been done that demonstrate to what extent patients notice a difference with DS lenses (excluding PALs)? Nothing wrong with anecdotal evidence, but I'd like to see some real data.
Hey yeah, I "butter" the bread of their expectations *before* they get 'em...
But, without a doubt, those Cyl Rxs greater than 0.75D Cyl really notice and comment on their new "HD" vision.
They even bring back friends to get the same.
Best damn advancement in ophthalmic lenses since the original Punktals, IMHO.
Barry
What I noticed is when I came home, I switched to another pair. They just did not seem clean (and trust me they were). It is like switching from an HD station to the exact same station non-HD.
Pardon my saying, but you seem a little loosey goosey tonight. Would that goose be grey?
Loosey or goosey, yous take yer pick...
That gentleman I mentioned at the top of my post...
Just came back yesterday...
and ordered 3 (that's THREE!!) more pairs of Essilor DS 360 lenses ( SV & BIF) to his own frames.
He twisted his head, and remarked: "These really are quite something! I've never felt I've seen this well in a long time."
BTW, his Rx had changed: by only 0.25 diopters in the sphere OU!
Not enough, IMHO, to explain the degree of difference he noticed.
FWIW
Barry
What's your price differential from reg ft 28s to the 360 product?
+$250.00 (includes Avance)
Is there really a such thing as a 360 FT28? I don't know of anyone at Varilux that can vouch for that and I asked my rep.
Barry just dispensed one. Pay attention to what he says. It's available in CR39 or poly. Front is spherical, back is aspheric but not atoric.
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. - Richard P. Feynman
Experience is the hardest teacher. She gives the test before the lesson.
I think I will just rather avoid this board then be misinformed. I have talked to a few folks and although the process may be applied to any lens blank, should the lab choose. A "360 FT" does not exist, so either Barry is deceiving his patients or Barry has been deceieved by his laboratory, happens everyday. I would suggest asking more questions since the tongues in this industry seem to be forked as a rule.
my essilor rep will be in tomorrow to talk about the ft 360
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks