Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 49 of 49

Thread: Varilux X

  1. #26
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    7,453
    Word.

    If this new Shamir/essilor thing is going to be a boon, it's going to be on patients with high adds.

  2. #27
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    7,453
    Quote Originally Posted by jefe View Post
    1.50 Adds might not constitute a good test. How does it compare with a 2.50 to 3.00 Add?
    I meant, "word" to this.

  3. #28
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Maryland
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,871
    Quote Originally Posted by drk View Post
    I meant, "word" to this.
    Are you going to try one?

  4. #29
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    PA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,066
    Anyone have a comparison of a Varilux X vs a Camber lens?

  5. #30
    OptiBoard Professional
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    usa
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by mervinek View Post
    Anyone have a comparison of a Varilux X vs a Camber lens?
    Not really a direct comparison, but I fit a few willing test patients with the X a couple month ago, did not go over well. Much like when the S series came out, the complaints from my testers consisted of vision that was OK all around but not as clear as it should be anywhere in the lens. Width of the near/intermediate didn't seem to be a problem but they all said it seemed higher than they were used to. Distance didn't have a lot of distortion side to side but also wasn't as crisp as they thought it should be. Sounds like a very soft design.

    I fit tons of patients in Camber based lenses with no issues, regardless of previous lens design. Bear in mind Camber is not a lens design, just a lens blank which multiple designs can be made on.

  6. #31
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    7,453
    My experience with the X (and Auto III that uses this same concept) is limited.

    It makes sense that some might not like it. It seems to trade clarity for depth of focus, not unlike an aspheric SCL multifocal.

    I do think head tilt reduction and any improvement possible for desktop viewing with a general purpose PAL is a worthy goal, however. I hope it works.

  7. #32
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    PA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,066
    Thanks for the information! I have one of those educated patients who knows everything about all progressives. Just wanted a few opinions.

  8. #33
    OptiBoard Novice
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Michigan
    Occupation
    Optical Laboratory Technician
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Fester View Post
    Here's a few feet of thread talking about hyperopes and progressives...

    https://www.optiboard.com/forums/sho...ecommendation?

    Welcome to OptiBoard!!!
    Thanks for the welcome, although I've had a login before, but years ago!

    Anyway, I've read that thread before. I'm a latent hyperope, myself, so I understand the mechanics.

    I meant, specifically, have people had problems with the X? I done numerous remakes on hypers, but the myopes love it. I didn't use the S at my previous practice, but it seems the experience is similar. Lately, unless their asking for the ULP, I keep them in the W3+Fit, which I've never had problems with.

    I'm +.50 OU, +1.50 add, although I upped it to +1.75, since I've had problems with progressives in the past. Distance, great! Mid range, not bad for driving, everyday use. Mid range for computer, not so much. Reading, terrible. 21 seg ht, I don't read +2.00 until 6mm below the bottom edge. I've changed corridor lengths (don't recommend!) and my reading power moved up 2-3 mm. Still unusable, IMHO, for work.

    Don't know. I've stuck with RORX for years for this reason.

    I will say, the X is the best I've seen for peripheral clarity at distance.

    Your thoughts, please.

  9. #34
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Callifornia
    Occupation
    Optical Retail
    Posts
    12
    Can anyone say these lenses are really superior to free-forms?
    The idea is interesting, but we don't do business with Essilor.

    Are they really the "best", or has anyone found something else that's clearly as good, or better?

  10. #35
    OptiBoard Professional
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    usa
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    180
    What is your definition of free-form?

  11. #36
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter rdcoach5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Rossford, Ohio
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,567
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwill212 View Post
    What is your definition of free-form?
    Seriously ?

  12. #37
    OptiBoard Professional
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    usa
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by rdcoach5 View Post
    Seriously ?

    Yes, quite seriously. Oh wait, damn, I bet I missed the memo where the optical community came to a consensus decision on terms to describe lenses. Could you forward me that memo please? I'd also like a cover sheet on your TPS reports from now on, as well. As far as I knew we were just kind of throwing out whatever terms we wanted willy nilly, free form, digital, HD, etc. Don't even get me started on "NO-Glare" lenses.

    By my definitions I would say the Varilux X is a free-form design. I think, but am not positive, the S and X series have to be made on special blanks(please correct me if I'm wrong). So maybe they aren't a FBS design, but I would still call them a free-form lens.

    D.W. asked if what I would call a free-form lens is superior to a free-from lens. So yes, seriously. Thanks for contributing such a helpful post there, really contributed to the topic.

  13. #38
    Master OptiBoarder optical24/7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tx.
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    5,240
    The industry has done a poor job of "labeling" lens designs and processes. So, because I'm always right, I'm going to now give the final word on progressive lens definitions, right here!



    Tradition designs; Molded PAL design on front, round diamond wheeled distance Rx generated on the back.

    Free Form; The entire PAL design is fabricated (almost always) on the back surface of a spherical SV blank with CNC equipment.

    Digital hybrid; A molded PAL design on the front, ( or require a particular blank with certain front surface pre-molding, aka Camber), back side surfaced using CNC equipment. Some "DH" lenses also have part of the add put on the back surface ( among these are the X and S series, Accolade freedom and certain Hoya designs. ( I'm not as familiar with Zeiss though, I've heard they have some designs done in Germany that are FF on both front and back.)

    Digital lens; This is not a design definition, but a processing definition using the CNC process.


    Note; If a lens is available in Transitions brand it is not Digitally processed on the front, (but the molds used to cast the front surface design most probably were). If you were to surface the front of any Transition lens, it would remove the Transitions layer. Don't let a rep confuse you if they tell you other wise. They know not what they speak (or are shady at best claiming such.)...

  14. #39
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Gold Supporter Judy Canty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    7,413
    Quote Originally Posted by optical24/7 View Post
    The industry has done a poor job of "labeling" lens designs and processes. So, because I'm always right, I'm going to now give the final word on progressive lens definitions, right here!



    Tradition designs; Molded PAL design on front, round diamond wheeled distance Rx generated on the back.

    Free Form; The entire PAL design is fabricated (almost always) on the back surface of a spherical SV blank with CNC equipment.

    Digital hybrid; A molded PAL design on the front, ( or require a particular blank with certain front surface pre-molding, aka Camber), back side surfaced using CNC equipment. Some "DH" lenses also have part of the add put on the back surface ( among these are the X and S series, Accolade freedom and certain Hoya designs. ( I'm not as familiar with Zeiss though, I've heard they have some designs done in Germany that are FF on both front and back.)

    Digital lens; This is not a design definition, but a processing definition using the CNC process.


    Note; If a lens is available in Transitions brand it is not Digitally processed on the front, (but the molds used to cast the front surface design most probably were). If you were to surface the front of any Transition lens, it would remove the Transitions layer. Don't let a rep confuse you if they tell you other wise. They know not what they speak (or are shady at best claiming such.)...
    Not the industry itself, but rather lens vendors who bank on no one asking for more information and just relying on slick marketing. Real ECPs, in my opinion, ask for more factual information not just a lens voucher alone.

  15. #40
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Callifornia
    Occupation
    Optical Retail
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by optical24/7 View Post
    The industry has done a poor job of "labeling" lens designs and processes. So, because I'm always right, I'm going to now give the final word on progressive lens definitions, right here!

    Tradition designs; Molded PAL design on front, round diamond wheeled distance Rx generated on the back.

    Free Form; The entire PAL design is fabricated (almost always) on the back surface of a spherical SV blank with CNC equipment.

    Digital hybrid; A molded PAL design on the front, ( or require a particular blank with certain front surface pre-molding, aka Camber), back side surfaced using CNC equipment. Some "DH" lenses also have part of the add put on the back surface ( among these are the X and S series, Accolade freedom and certain Hoya designs. ( I'm not as familiar with Zeiss though, I've heard they have some designs done in Germany that are FF on both front and back.)

    Digital lens; This is not a design definition, but a processing definition using the CNC process.


    Note; If a lens is available in Transitions brand it is not Digitally processed on the front, (but the molds used to cast the front surface design most probably were). If you were to surface the front of any Transition lens, it would remove the Transitions layer. Don't let a rep confuse you if they tell you other wise. They know not what they speak (or are shady at best claiming such.)...
    This is pretty close to what would say, but not all of it has to be on the back. In fact the first thing that comes to mind for me, when I hear "free form", are lenses digitally surfaced on both sides, from a flat puck.

  16. #41
    Master OptiBoarder optical24/7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tx.
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    5,240
    Quote Originally Posted by D.W. View Post
    This is pretty close to what would say, but not all of it has to be on the back. In fact the first thing that comes to mind for me, when I hear "free form", are lenses digitally surfaced on both sides, from a flat puck.
    Which designs would those be?

  17. #42
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    7,453
    Varipux

  18. #43
    OptiBoardaholic
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Flat Land
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    262
    Quote Originally Posted by optical24/7 View Post
    Which designs would those be?
    Google search intensifies.

  19. #44
    One eye sees, the other feels. OptiBoard Gold Supporter
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wauwatosa Wi
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    4,696
    When I see a free-form lens, I think...free-form generator.

    Quote Originally Posted by drk View Post
    Varipux
    Nice wordplay.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sledzinator View Post
    Google search intensifies.
    Lights dim ever so slightly in cities near server farms for just the smallest fraction of a second. My Magic 8-Ball says "Outlook not so good"

    Best regards,

    Robert Martellaro
    Roberts Optical Ltd.
    Wauwatosa Wi.
    www.roberts-optical.com
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. - Richard P. Feynman

  20. #45
    OptiBoardaholic
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Flat Land
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    262
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Martellaro View Post
    When I see a free-form lens, I think...free-form generator.

    Nice wordplay.

    Lights dim ever so slightly in cities near server farms for just the smallest fraction of a second. My Magic 8-Ball says "Outlook not so good"

    Best regards,

    Robert Martellaro
    Lol!

  21. #46
    Optician Extraordinaire
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Somewhere warm
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,117
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwill212 View Post
    Not really a direct comparison, but I fit a few willing test patients with the X a couple month ago, did not go over well. Much like when the S series came out, the complaints from my testers consisted of vision that was OK all around but not as clear as it should be anywhere in the lens. Width of the near/intermediate didn't seem to be a problem but they all said it seemed higher than they were used to. Distance didn't have a lot of distortion side to side but also wasn't as crisp as they thought it should be. Sounds like a very soft design.
    Interesting. I’ve had no issues with this lens yet. Personally I don’t notice my vision is less clear at all. I’ve sat and compared various progressives side by side and it’s as sharp as any. I just can’t see a difference.

    I do notice the intermediate seems higher which makes it my favorite lens for my desktop work computer. Even though the intermediate clarity is better at a higher point in the lens, it doesn’t seem to effect using the distance or get in the way when I use the distance area.

    I’m about a -1.50 myope with a diopter of astigmatism and a 2.50 add.

  22. #47
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Maryland
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,871
    Checking back in, I've mostly had a good experience with these, a few (2) people went back to the Physio W3, both hyperopes with cyl, but mostly people have liked it. One person who didn't like it turned out they needed surgery on their brain, so it wasn't the lens after all. Now they like it a lot.

  23. #48
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Callifornia
    Occupation
    Optical Retail
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by Tallboy View Post
    Checking back in, I've mostly had a good experience with these, a few (2) people went back to the Physio W3, both hyperopes with cyl, but mostly people have liked it. One person who didn't like it turned out they needed surgery on their brain, so it wasn't the lens after all. Now they like it a lot.
    How many hyperopes have you put in Varilux X, and have you noticed a difference with the design, fit and 4d versions?

  24. #49
    OptiBoard Novice
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    NEWBERG
    Occupation
    Ophthalmic Technician
    Posts
    1
    Yes there is a significant difference. It is truly flat in the reading and really noticeable for Plus Rx's. Truly easy to get use to and I have had -0- non adapts or problems in 3 yrs using it. PJ

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. varilux physio verses varilux 360
    By Ralph 5519 in forum Progressive Lens Discussion Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-22-2010, 02:26 AM
  2. Varilux Panamic vs. Varilux Physio
    By jeffsoptical in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-17-2007, 08:02 PM
  3. Varilux Computer & Varilux Openview?
    By cnet_baby in forum Progressive Lens Discussion Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-25-2006, 01:27 PM
  4. Varilux Computer & Varilux Openview?
    By cnet_baby in forum Progressive Lens Discussion Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-16-2006, 01:04 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-21-2005, 04:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
OptiBoard is proudly sponsored by:
BC College of Optics, Younger Optics and Vision Equipment