your best best is the new Essilor Ellipse. Claim 14-15mm height with a tradition Varilux style design. Cant go wrong. Ive tried it successfully on adds upto +200, with vdu users even claiming good results. sometimes helps to up the panto tilt tho.
your best best is the new Essilor Ellipse. Claim 14-15mm height with a tradition Varilux style design. Cant go wrong. Ive tried it successfully on adds upto +200, with vdu users even claiming good results. sometimes helps to up the panto tilt tho.
Model: Birmingham optical's new 'compact' PAL design!
Try a 275 add and see what happens at 14 hi!!!
I have been using the Zeiss Brevity for many Rx's and have found it to be excellent (tolerance) The Rodenstock XS is a very good choice as well. But I would have to agree with Pete, short corridors really arent the best solution for presbyopes. It is kind of like a staircase. I you need to get from one level to the next, you can build "comfortable" steps or you can build steps which are either too long or too short.
The levels of the "floors" dont actually change, only the "height or number" of the steps.
well obviously a higher add will shorten the corridor, but I consider +2.00 the limit for this height and lens for most people, but as always with prog dispenses visual task analysis and accurate wearing history and symptoms is vital.
I have had very good luck with Zeiss Brevity and Image fitting at 16.
Jediron1 quoted and then said:ripper said:
Regardless of style used, we are saying goodbye to the intermediatte!
That is the point we have been trying to get across, along with not having enough room for the reading area. Finally the point is getting across to some people. We who have been preaching the
short corridor disaster are pleased.:bbg: :D
You guys keep selling those low seg heights becuase I love the business you are generating for me right now. Can't tell you how many low fitting progressive's
I have refit to no lower than 17mm and the patient then tells me I can read again. So guys keep up your work in selling those low fit segs and I will keep reaping the rewards!
Even that is low, the patient can read again through 5-6mm of space, how beautiful...................at keast something if not much.Originally Posted by jediron1
Why dont all you guy's and girl go back to the basics and start learning about progressives the generic way..................which means.............not from the sales reps of the different lens makers.................but available literature and learn the proper theory on these type of lenses.
There must be at least $ 1,000,000 worth of progressives sold per day,
in the USA , through which people can't read no way.
Last edited by Chris Ryser; 11-14-2004 at 11:53 AM.
Chris you are 100% correct. Could not agree more!
Why dont all you guy's and girl go back to the basics and start learning .
:finger:
Hey John's who makes you the know it all of optical? :hammer:Wow couple years in the business and now I know it ALL!:drop:
Jediron,
The last post was a quote from Chris Ryser. I just didn't present it correctly. It reminded me of a teacher admonishing her pupils,thus the :finger: . The part of the statement struck me as a kind of "know it all statement", but I wasn't the author.
Johns! Then why the finger wagging? Seems strange for someone who does not agree.:hammer:
I did a study for ESSILOR in Canada in 1963 to find out if they should start selling Varilux lenses within the next year or two on this side of the Atlantic, way ahead of the USA.
The funniest part of it was interviewing opticians throughout the country, all of which had never heard of a progressive lens. Each physically checked a Varilux lens in my presence and 100% of them declared the particular item as a bad lens full of distortion that could never be sold by any decent optician..
We have gone a long way since. Just over 30 years ago, a time I was already very familiar with progressive lenses and today I still see opticians squabbling on the Optiboard about technicalities of progressive lenses they still do NOT understand or do not want to understand, maybe because of greed.
:finger:
Chris I could not agree more. I see all the time people fitting progressives at 14mm, 15mm, 16mm, and 17mm with most of them failing. But most of the time these same dispensers ( and I use that word loosely ) are on this board saying oh ya we can fit progressives at this height and that and say they have no problem, while thier patients are screaming " I CAN"T READ, I HAVE TO PICK MY GLASSES UP TO SEE".
As has been pointed out before on this board, go back and reread your basic physics principles in relation to how progressives are made. Once you understand that, you would realize that fitting heights as low as 17mm are extremely hard to realize a good reading height.
jediron1, True story. The little old lady, personal friend asked me my opinion in reference to progressive lenses.
She wanted one of those little square frames 28mm high with a pair of progressives
I gave her my opinion, I guess everybody knows it by now, and told her that she would not be able to read the newspaper nor see the fine art work she is doing.
She said all her friends were wearing them and I was off my rocker. My answer was that she would not find any good optician that would fit her with such a job.
The first one she went to sold her a pair, exactly as she wanted in exchange for $ 475.00 including the frame.
She came back to me and showed me the job which was fitted at 12mm from the bottom edge. She was totally happy and said it was fantastic.
I gave her something to read.................she put the right hand on the glasses lifted them up .........and read, also moving her head to the right and to the left while doing it.
Maybe we are talking to the Optiwallers instead the Optiboarders.
Jediron,
I guess you had to be there...;)
Johns
Johns: Whattttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt! I had to be there! Where?:hammer:
Jediron,
You had to be...
In my second grade class!! Sister Philomean used to wag her finger at us when she was reprimanding us (which was quite often). That's all...That's it! The statement reminded me of someone talking down to a group of people. The wagging finger fit.
What I believe Chris was saying in post 157 was that you need at least 5mm from the bottom of the lens to get into the full reading area ( usually 5mm is considered additque to start with). If you fit a lens at 14mm and take into account the 5mm for the reading your only left with 9mm. Now that also assumes that your using 5mm. If you want more reading area you will have to compensate from 5mm on up. The more reading room you can give someone the more comfortable they will be in reading through there lenses.
You guys are too much. I am going to sell a 14 hi seg ht tomorrow, in celebration of you!
I'll celebrate by selling a SV, giving them a subscription to Reader's Digest Large Print Edition, and telling them it's the "no wave" progressive.
mrba...........dont see you wearing a low fit p;) air on your picture
Tomarrow I am delivering a 10 seg.ht. Of course, I had sense enough to use a flat top.
Chip
Chip good reply
What johns and mrba should do is go back and reread some of Darryl Meister's
postings on this subject. He gives you theoretical aspects as to why fitting at
18mm and lower is impractical.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks