Optical Dynamics Vs. Fast Grind

[David_Garza]

Which is better?

Personally, I have yet to speak with anyone who has a Fast Grind system they use and are happy with....on the other hand I know two local practices that use the Optical Dynamics system and recommend it.

What does the Board have to say about either or both?

[jefe]

Which is better?

Personally, I have yet to speak with anyone who has a Fast Grind system they use and are happy with....on the other hand I know two local practices that use the Optical Dynamics system and recommend it.

What does the Board have to say about either or both?

Are the owners of the two places which have the Optical Dynamics system enemies of yours? The owner of the place where I worked bought an Optical Dynamics system. He spent something like $50,000 on it, and, at most, we produced 100 pairs of lenses. There was a high spoilage rate, and it took too much time to produce a set of lenses to make it a system we would use on a daily basis.

If you're still interested, I can see if my former employer is willing to sell his system to you. Just PM me.

[opticalman]

I have been following these systems for a few years now. I am just about to the point of making the move to Fast Grind. This system has so much more capability than the ODC. They have just introduced a new High Definition progressive and I have noted that they are always updating the system. Regarding casting, I have too many friends that have been burnt. I have one that has the ODC AR and he says its crap.

[Don Gilman]

I contributed to the design and development of the FastGrind System and we have been selling systems all over the world for 20 years. While every system we sold is not being used the vast majority are. We even have some of the first sytems sold in 1991 still being used on a day to day basis. In my opinion if a system is not being used it is not because it doesn't work, its because the OD, MD, or optician does not have the gumption to tell the "staff" to use it. Too often "the staff" is brainwashed by the three piece suit guys from the big "E" and others expounding on the latest greatest lens that everyone must have ground to 1/100 of a diopter. Pity the poor patient on a tight budget who would love to have a no line multifocal and is quoted big $$$$$$. We have many customers grinding 20 and 30 pair per day because they have an operator (lab tech) whose job it is to do that. I won't attempt in this forum to explain the differences in casting and grinding a lens, but to paraphrase an old ad, WE MAKE GLASSES THE OLD FASHIONED WAY, WE GRIND THEM as are 99% of the lenses made today. Whew!

[David_Garza]

Are the owners of the two places which have the Optical Dynamics system enemies of yours? The owner of the place where I worked bought an Optical Dynamics system. He spent something like $50,000 on it, and, at most, we produced 100 pairs of lenses. There was a high spoilage rate, and it took too much time to produce a set of lenses to make it a system we would use on a daily basis.

If you're still interested, I can see if my former employer is willing to sell his system to you. Just PM me.

LOL! No enemenies, they are both at least an hour from our optical. One said he looked at the Fast Grind but decided on the Casting system, the other has been using ODC for several years.

Thanks for all the information keep the comments coming.

[snowmonster]

We've owned your basic type of surfacing equipment for the past 4-5 years now and I couldn't imagine using either FG or ODC. They are too limited as far as materials and power, and their pre-blocked lenses themselves will cost more as well. And think about how much Trivex or polycarb your office does, which can't be processed with either system.

All of our semi-finished product is significantly less expensive than the pre-blocked lenses that FG sells. The one exception is the photochromic monomer that ODC uses. I think might be the place where it's a better deal. I can't imagine that you can really make a thin plus-powered lens with ODC because of the molding system, think about how many plus-powered Rx's you process over the course of a month or year.

I would look at buying a used conventional surface lab if you've got the space. You'll have a lot greater flexibility in the long run, less overhead, and used equipment can be found for a reasonable price.

[DragonLensmanWV]

Ask your friends with the ODC system to comment on the wonderful thinness of their plus powered lenses. See what you get.

[Don Gilman]

Good points. I don't want to get in a shouting match on Opti Board however the additional cost of our blocked lenses have to be compared against the additional cost of a full lab, even if used, and the additional space, mess, trained personel, and equipment repair have to be taken into consideration. Our equipment comes with a lifetime warranty and we occassionaly have used refurbished systems with the same warranty. In many cases our pre blocked lenses can be less expensive than semi finished lenses because of our buying power. Do the math first.

[snowmonster]

I have, that's why we surface everything or use stock lenses depending on material and lens power. I can't quote prices on Optiboard, but there's quite a difference.

Again, take a look at how much polycarb your office does. We are about 50% polycarb. Is ODC or FG as shatter resistant? Are their lenses thicker than polycarb?

Also, our backside coater easily pays for itself by selling front and backside coated lenses with a warranty at $40 (patient cost) per job. Most semifinished lens manufacturers out there will warrant coated lenses, so you just return the scratched ones back to them for credit.

I will at least give FastGrind credit on being a more versatile system than ODC, but I would rather spend a little more on a full blown system as it will easily pay off in the long run.