Which autolensometer is a good buy, which do you like?

[Mandy]

I am looking to buy a new autolensometer, that is simple to use, reliable and accurate. Do you have any suggestions?
It will be used by my staff, some of which are having a very difficult time accurately verifying progressive lenses.
Thanks

Mandy

[charan]

The good old b&l r very accurate , I don't trust auto lensometers.

[Nikolay Angelov]

Charan,
i don't trust mechanical lensmeters.

Parts wear out and they go out of calibration etc. [Current auto-lensmeters calibrate at every start up and have no moving measuring parts AFAIK (Hartman sensor).]

Mechanical lensmeters accuracy is operator dependent. If 5 people work side by side ... everyone will have to setup the lens meter every time they want to do a measurement after a colleague.

And as a whole the accuracy is low, you can not reliably spot 0.06 errors.

They lack useful features like:

1. UV measurements and comparisons
2. easy prism marking and measuring
3. printing results
4. measuring progression channel length and width
5. graphing rate of progression
6. Converting the results between plus and minus cylinder with one button
7. ...

All of our Zeiss mechanical lens meters are collecting dust in the storage room.

IMO the only reason someone would consider using a mechanical lens meter is: lack of money for better tools.

Mandy,
you can look into Nidek's auto lensmeters. The LM-600PD is a great choice:
http://www.oculus.sk/lens/lm600.pdf

You can check them all out here:
http://www.nidek-intl.com/products/e...ion/index.html

[Barry Santini]

IMHO, NONE of the current auto lensmeters that have the nice features you've detailed, AND are fascile when it comes to:

1. Marking the OCs/MRPs on FTs, SV and Progressives
2. Making a qualitative evaluation of the OZ being checked.

An Auto lensmeter that does what you've detailed and what I have is my dream instrument. I use both now to get the job done.

B

[Nikolay Angelov]

We use the Nidek LM-1200PD and it does all of the above with ease.
Here is a brochure:
http://www.argusoptik.hu/pdf/lm_1200.pdf

And the manual:
www.marco.com/brochures/LM-1200_OME_Draft.pdf

The new LM-1800PD is even better.

I forgot the network connectivity. In the exam room the lensmeter sends the measured data to the phoropter automatically.

Making a qualitative evaluation of the OZ being checked

I did not understand that part. What does OZ stand for.

PS: We don't mark lenses for edging. We use Nidek intelligent blockers (ICE-900).

[Barry Santini]

Don't like/trust Intelligent blockers. Perfer manual way. OZ = Optical Zone. There is a qualitative judgment that can be made with an optical/manual lensmeter that can fool or produce erroneous readings in an auto lensmeter. We also pass each and every lens passed our pupil to check for localized waves.

B

[tmorse]

I don't trust mechanical lensmeters.
Parts wear out and they go out of calibration... Mechanical lensmeters accuracy is operator dependent. If 5 people work side by side ... everyone will have to setup the lens meter every time they want to do a measurement after a colleague. And as a whole the accuracy is low, you can not reliably spot 0.06 errors.

What have they done to their manual lensometers in Bulgaria, drop them? Only manual lensometer parts that need occasional replacment are ink-related, and even they last quite a long while here in Canada.
And we don't want or need 1/12th (0.06) Dioptre accuracy with our manual lensometers. ODs and OMDs seldom provide RXs in even 1/8th (0.12) D. increments, with most RX's produced having 0.25D increments.
As for multiple-users using the same manual instrument, it takes any operator only a few seconds to adjust the eyepiece for accuracy purposes.

[tmorse]

And we don't want or need 1/12th (0.06) Dioptre accuracy with our manual lensometers. ODs and OMDs seldom provide RXs in even 1/8th (0.12) D. increments, with most RX's produced having 0.25D increments.
As for multiple-users using the same manual instrument, it takes any operator only a few seconds to adjust the eyepiece for accuracy purposes.

Opps, make that 0.06 = 1/16th accuracy.

[Nikolay Angelov]

A mechanical lens meter has moving parts.

Every moving part wears with time. Like in your car. And just like in your car, you don't replace parts every week but wear on parts does accumulate with time.

It's a principle disadvantage of measuring tools with moving parts.

And we don't want or need 1/12th (0.06) Dioptre accuracy with our manual lensometers. ODs and OMDs seldom provide RXs in even 1/8th (0.12) D. increments, with most RX's produced having 0.25D increments.

We will be introducing a 0.12D step for all RXs with individual lenses in a few weeks. Our phoropters and auto-refractometers already support the 0.12 step.
Aberometers are getting more wide spread in Europe. Rodenstock introduced their Rodenstock DNEye® Scanner at Opti 2012 in Munich.

Zeiss has the iScription and so on.

So the RX's in 0.01D step are getting more common and will soon be the norm.

Also the current POW optimized lenses have compensated values in 0.01D which we have to verify.

it takes any operator only a few seconds to adjust the eyepiece for accuracy purposes.

Measurement time for auto-lensmeter is around 0.2 seconds. How fast can you adjust the lens meter and measure an astigmatic lens?
How many times would the lens meter be adjusted daily if it's used by 7 people all day simultaneously?

This things add up, consider: Verify a batch of 15 orders (30 lenses), somebody wants to adjust his axis on a zyl frame, another colleague needs a quick printout as the other lensmeter is used by someone to measure a PAL. Now the zyl frame colleague is coming back to adjust the second lens axis...

Seconds add up quickly, and i would rather use the time for our customers and to help colleagues so we have a more relaxed and pleasant day.

[tmorse]

No disrespect intended, but just how long have you used manual lensometers?

[Nikolay Angelov]

Just long enough to pass my operating and servicing a manual lensmeter exams.

I had to use a manual lens meter during most of school as we started from grounds up (mandatory)... meaning hand edging and beveling glass lenses and using manual lensmeters.

At the final courses we got to using pattern and patternless edgers and auto lensmeters. Hello 21 century .

I have not touched a manual lensmeter since school, so i am not very fast.

But no mater the training, the amount of actions necessary to complete a measurement are more and take longer.

(i have a Zeiss manual lensmeter at home so i can do some training and speed tests )

[tmorse]

Well I don't buy it... this idea that manual lensometers wear out, so beware.. There are plenty B&L 70 and older lensometers used everyday that continue to do a very quick and accurate job. And some are older than I am.

[optilady1]

And we all know it's impossible for the electronics to fail on anything computerized

[Wes]

I have worked with several lensometers, both auto and manual. I've nearly always worked in a production environment. I am extremely fast and efficient with a manual lensometer. I am faster with an auto. However, I've been through Humphrey, Topcon, Tomey and Reichert autos, all of which have failed and needed major service, while my B&L 70 and Marco 101 have only needed ink and lightbulbs over my 18+ years of use.
For my money, I'd buy a manual. If you're buying, I'll ask for one of each.

[Wes]

Mandy, if you want an auto, either get the Nidek that Nikolay mentioned or get a Humphrey 350 or 360. Leo Hadley on here and at Vision Systems Inc. can probably provide you a quality refurbished model.

[4554lake]

A mechanical lens meter has moving parts.



So the RX's in 0.01D step are getting more common and will soon be the norm.




.

Not likely....This is well beyond the resolution of what people can distinguish......Most people are hard pressed to be consistent within .25D while being refracted....,where I work....

[tmorse]

Give it up Nikolay. Your posts have been very good up to now.

[Nikolay Angelov]

Tmorse, what are we disagreeing about !?

You think 0.01 accuracy does not make a big difference? I agree. You reduce error by just 0.06 (maximum) when compared with 0.12D step RXs.

BUT let me ask you this:

The optical next door is giving 0.01D prescriptions (with Zeiss iScription, Rodenstock, Izon or whatever), do you:
A. Try to convince people that lower accuracy is really good enough (despite what Zeiss and all say and promote).
B. Start doing 0.01D refractions.

On wear of mechanical lensmeters:
I didn't say that a mechanical lensmeter explodes after "n" lenses measured. I said that mechanical moving parts wear with time. I think we all agree on that (sharing the same planet and all that).

How much time? ... 10 - 100 years it depends. Does it matter on a tool measuring with such a low accuracy: normally not.

Now if you did work in example the Saharan desert with high quantity of sand and dust everywhere it would probably be different.

[Chris Ryser]

The good old b&l r very accurate , I don't trust auto lensometers.

I am with you..........still have my old B&L 70 I purchased in 1964, at some pointe cleaned, repainted and adjusted, still works like new. Of course you can not hire a girl and tell her to start checking lenses, you have to know what it is all about.

[4554lake]

BUT let me ask you this:

The optical next door is giving 0.01D prescriptions (with Zeiss iScription, Rodenstock, Izon or whatever), do you:
A. Try to convince people that lower accuracy is really good enough (despite what Zeiss and all say and promote).
B. Start doing 0.01D refractions.




.

Not quite....You obviously have never done a refraction.......

Zeiss will never do enough advertising to make any difference.....and most people wont pay the extra cost for specialty lenses....


This is a non issue....

[Wes]

So, Mandy, was any of this helpful?

[Sledzinator]

I personally would rather have an old Rolex than a new Casio calculator watch. Although it would make doing prentice rule a little easier.

[Mandy]

This has been helpfull, I have 2 manual lensometers that have worked well for 27 years. But as a quick check for staff which are less experienced with lensometers, I will likely look into the Nidek products, as I have experience with their products in the past.

Thanks for your insight.

Mandy

[ALLOPTIK]

In Canada you can find the Nidek at:

http://www.innovamed.com/Conventiona...Auto-Lensmeter

for those of you who love the old B+L Model 70......have a look at the:

http://www.innovamed.com/Conventiona...l-90-Lensmeter

Hope that helps

[Barry Santini]

Well I don't buy it... this idea that manual lensometers wear out, so beware.. There are plenty B&L 70 and older lensometers used everyday that continue to do a very quick and accurate job. And some are older than I am.

Quick and accurate, perhaps. Precise, errrr, no.

B