Hello All!
I discovered this group as I was doing some on-line research this afternoon.
If you all can stand it, here's another question as to what might be the
best lenses for a new pair of glasses.
I'm 49 years old and have worn glasses since I was 18 months old. <gotta
love the lighter lenses we have now!> About 5-6 years ago, I crossed the
line into progressive lenses to give me adequate reading/close viewing
ability.
About the only change in scrip since then has been an increase in the add
for reading.
Current scrip:
+3.25 +0.50 046 degree +2.00 for reading
+3.00 +0.75 042 degree +2.00 for reading
I'd prefer relatively small glasses, say less than 1.5" tall.
I've had two pairs of progressive lenses so far and I understand the trade
offs they have. My second pair gave better views than the first pair.
Hopefully the 3rd set will be better again! My research was to see what new
lenses/technologies are out there before going to have glasses made. I'd
love to have a bigger middle view area so I was looking at the Panamic
lenses. After a lot of reading, I'm somewhat confused now.
My viewing needs are so diverse that I thought I'd ask the learned souls
here what might be good. I'd prefer to stay with a single pair of glasses
but will understand if the time has come to "specialize" with individual
sets of glasses for different pursuits.
A big desire is to have very good correction for infinity viewing since
astronomy is my main hobby. This need is also good, I suppose, for my
driving needs. At work I'm at a computer a lot and reading hard copy and
detailed plans/drawings a lot. Toss in the need to see small wires and
connectors in dark places and I have a tough set of eyes to correct. The
astronomy needs, for example, require a good to very good infinity view but
also need decent near correction to see charts and labeling on eyepieces.
Having separate glasses for looking at the sky and for reading charts would
be unwieldly. One set to do both would be best.
The middle distance question for computer viewing is not as critical but
from a comfort standpoint is important. I'd like a wider "sweet spot" but
can live with a limited side to side FOV since I'm used to that already.
Sorry to be so long but I'd greatly appreciate any thoughts the group might
have on lenses that might be good for me.
Sooo....can I get by with a good set of progressives and if so, are the
Panamics okay? Would I be better off with regular bi or trifocals? Should I
split my needs and get glasses just for use at the computer?
Thanks for reading if you've made it this far!
Take care,
BB
Robert Martellaro - 03 Jan 2005 19:30 GMT
>Hello All!
>I discovered this group as I was doing some on-line research this afternoon.
[quoted text clipped - 49 lines]
> Take care,
> BB
Bill,
One pair for everything? Depends on distance to the monitor, the monitors height
relative to the eyes, and frequency of use. If it's a desktop, closer than 28",
and used frequently you will be more comfortable with separate computer glasses.
Use your regular glasses for stargazing if you are comfortable with the clarity,
(small pupil diameter is a plus) the degree of flaring/starbursting and/or
haloes. If not, I would use a ST28 bifocal. Lenses should be coated
(anti-reflection) of course.
The Panamic is a very good general purpose lens and must be fit accurately,
maybe more so than other PALs. Note...the only lightweight/low density lens
material available for the Panamic is polycarbonate. Your Rx is almost strong
enough for chroma to be a concern in the reading zone. If you are using poly now
you should be ok.
Hope this helps
Robert Martellaro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Optician/Owner
Roberts Optical
robopt@execpc.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself."
- Richard Feynman
Greg Beaulieu - 09 Jan 2005 02:35 GMT
: A big desire is to have very good correction for infinity viewing since
: astronomy is my main hobby. This need is also good, I suppose, for my
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
: Having separate glasses for looking at the sky and for reading charts would
: be unwieldly. One set to do both would be best.
: The middle distance question for computer viewing is not as critical but
: from a comfort standpoint is important. I'd like a wider "sweet spot" but
: can live with a limited side to side FOV since I'm used to that already.
Can't really answer the astronomy-related questions, but having researched
this quite a bit I have read that the Panamics are a bit of a trade-off:
they increase the mid-distance viewing corridor in exchange for some
peripheral distance blur. I haven't tried them myself.
--
Greg Beaulieu ab348@chebucto.ns.ca Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
Jkumar167 - 15 Jan 2005 15:47 GMT
>Sooo....can I get by with a good set of progressives and if so, are the
>Panamics okay? Would I be better off with regular bi or trifocals? Should I
>split my needs and get glasses just for use at the computer?
> Thanks for reading if you've made it this far!
> Take care,
> BB
Bob: everyone is different. The answer may be one only you can give, and may
be one only you can discover yourself over time. In other words, what works
for your personality may not work for someone elses....and I can't totally
answer because I don't know YOU.
That being said: I find that astronomers tend to be pretty fussy about the
distance vision...and many find the peripheral distortions of the progressive
annoying. Those that spend a lot of time on the computer often find a pair
just for the computer to be best.
One problem you have is your desire for a relatively small frame. That makes
any progressive you get more of a compromise...you'll either have the reading
set low or the distortions higher.
If you can afford it, get the Panamic and see how it works for you....then try
some of those other choices....