>I have strong myopia (about -6.00) and "moderate" astigmatism (sorry, I
>can't remember the number). By choosing small frames and 1.7 high-index
>lenses, I've been able to wear glasses that look good. Any other type
>of lens, including polycarbonate, results in Coke-bottle lenses.
Matt,
They should have been the same thickness because the glass lenses, if made in
the US, must have a center thickness (CT) of about 2mm whereas poly is available
off the shelve as thin as 1mm. Using an atoric poly like Optima's Resolution
would have actually been slightly thinner than 1.7 index with the FDA mandated
2mm CT. The poly lenses were either ground too thick and/or the frame size was
different.
>I'm very pleased with my current glasses... I was amazed when the
>optician first presented them to me... but I'm interested in seeing
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>So I'm looking for an unbiased opinion: are 1.8 or 1.9 glass high-index
>lenses worthwhile for someone around -6.00?
Compared to 1.7index with 2mm centers, 1.8 will be about 10% thinner and 1.9
about 20% thinner. If the 1.7 lenses have an edge thickness of 4mm, 1.8 will be
roughly 3.6mm and 3.2 for 1.8 index. If they are made outside of the US (Zeiss
1.9 index is no longer available in the US) all of the above lenses will be
another 1mm thinner.
>And if the answer is yes, does U.S. Customs give returning residents a
>hard time about bringing back these lenses? I've heard of an optical
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>Pepsi, or the cardboard box and information sheet from my Canadian flu
>shot during last winter's crisis.
My guess is that it's perfectly legal for consumers to purchase non-tempered
glass lenses with thin centers outside of the US for use in the US.
>Thanks,
>
>Matt
Your welcome.
Robert Martellaro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Optician/Owner
Roberts Optical
robopt@execpc.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field."
- Niels Bohr