 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / December 2006What general-purpose progressives does everybody like?
I'm about -6.00D, and it's time for new glasses. My current brand of progressive lens is Essilor Natural. Is there any significant difference among the various brands? Is there one in particular that seems to work better than the others? This would be for general-purpose tooling around - driving, TV, reading the paper. One thing I should mention. I got new frames last time, and they are the smaller frames that everybody seems to like. But they are only 37mm top to bottom, versus the 45mm of my old Polos. And it seems like some of the near-vision part at the bottom may be cut off. So I wondered if there were progressives intended specifically for these vertically narrow frames. I like the hoya cd, (compact design) progressive, which I wear. You're right about narrow frames needing more compact designs. The Natural is an old, lower cost lens meant for deep shaped frames. Your myopia decrease at your age is pretty common, really almost standard. It will not continue. The double vision at near is usually a weakness in convergence ability, but can be caused by incorrect Rx, misaligned segs, etc. w.stacy, o.d. > I'm about -6.00D, and it's time for new glasses. My current brand > of progressive lens is Essilor Natural. Is there any significant [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > off. So I wondered if there were progressives intended specifically > for these vertically narrow frames. i concur about the cd, great results in general, low % redos. William Statcy, O.D. wrote: > I like the hoya cd, (compact design) progressive, which I wear. > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > > off. So I wondered if there were progressives intended specifically > > for these vertically narrow frames. > I'm about -6.00D, and it's time for new glasses. My current brand > of progressive lens is Essilor Natural. Is there any significant [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > off. So I wondered if there were progressives intended specifically > for these vertically narrow frames. Premium lens designs are generally considered to be superior than cheaper designs, especially for someone with a high power Rx. Essilor has a premium brand called Varilux that is superior to the regular Essilor progressive line (Natural and Ovation). Within the Varilux brand, the Physio360 is generally considered to be their most sophisticated design, although they have some other good designs also. If you want a premium lens design, just stay away from store-brands that are sold by chains and make sure you know what the real brand name is (Sola, Rodenstock, Zeiss, Varilux, Hoya, etc). Also important to the thickness of your lens and the quality of your vision is the type of material used (almost all designs are available in several different lens index materials). Unfortunately, the thinner the lens for a given Rx (higher the index), usually it is the case that the quality of the optics will be lower. Some lenses are specifically designed for short frames. Almost all lens brands have at least one design that is made for very short frames, although I don't know for sure if your frame would have a problem with just about any modern progressive lens design. The important measurement is the fitting height to the bottom of the lens (not the entire height of the lens), and this depends somewhat on how the frames sit on your face. You are correct that a short frame will reduce the size of reading area on your lens, even to some extent on lenses that are designed for very short frames. >I'm about -6.00D, and it's time for new glasses. My current brand >of progressive lens is Essilor Natural. Is there any significant >difference among the various brands? Is there one in particular >that seems to work better than the others? IMHO, the Hoya ID and Zeiss Individual are one-two in aberration control and real world optical quality. >One thing I should mention. I got new frames last time, and they >are the smaller frames that everybody seems to like. But they are >only 37mm top to bottom, Typo? A "B" (vertical dimension) of 37mm is large by todays standards. Any progressive will achieve full add power with that dimension if they're fit properly. >versus the 45mm of my old Polos. >And it >seems like some of the near-vision part at the bottom may be cut >off. You might need a "short corridor" design, even if the frame has a generous vertical dimension, and/or they need to be positioned with more precision and know-how. Robert Martellaro ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Optician/Owner Roberts Optical Wauwatosa Wi. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field." - Niels Bohr > IMHO, the Hoya ID and Zeiss Individual are one-two in aberration control > and > real world optical quality. > > Robert Martellaro Robert, How do the Hoya ID and Zeiss Individual compare to the Varilux Physio360? Have you had any experience with Physio360? >> IMHO, the Hoya ID and Zeiss Individual are one-two in aberration control >> and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >How do the Hoya ID and Zeiss Individual compare to the Varilux Physio360? >Have you had any experience with Physio360? The Physio 360 is based on the Phsyio design, the progressive is on the front surface, the back surface uses direct-to-surface free-form technology. Most of these types of lenses are atoric, may be optimized for position of wear, and use varying techniques to improve binocular vision, and to minimize skew distortion and other aberrations. Regards, Robert Martellaro ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Optician/Owner Roberts Optical Wauwatosa Wi. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field." - Niels Bohr > The Physio 360 is based on the Phsyio design, the progressive is on the > front [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Robert Martellaro What lenses would be on your recommended list (best of breed) for a +4.75 -1.00 x90 with +2.25 add? Amblyopia in right eye (so fancy designs that measure and optimize binocular vision might be wasted expense?). Good/wide intermediate vision fairly important. Currently wearing Varilux Panamic and reasonably satisfied with them. >> The Physio 360 is based on the Phsyio design, the progressive is on the >> front [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >What lenses would be on your recommended list (best of breed) for a >+4.75 -1.00 x90 with +2.25 add? Mark, This Rx will be thinner and lighter with less magnification if the lens is fully aspheric, allowing the use of flatter base curves (the front curve). Panamic is one lens that has this feature, although it probably won't be as flat as the Hoya lenses. >Amblyopia in right eye (so fancy designs >that measure and optimize binocular vision might be wasted expense?). Not necessarily, although it might be best to concentrate on providing the widest field of vision at the distance that's most important to you. >Good/wide intermediate vision fairly important. If you widen the intermediate, the corridor has to be longer or the distance field has to become narrower. For instance, the Hoya Summit CD and Zeiss Brevity have larger intermediate zones and relatively short corridors, but the distance field is very small. On the other hand, the Zeiss Gradal Top and Hoya ECP have larger intermediates and very good distance fields but have very long corridors. It's like a sand pile, you push down in one area and the sand has to pile up somewhere else. >Currently wearing Varilux >Panamic and reasonably satisfied with them. The Panamic is a good compromise- medium corridor length with an average intermediate and distance. However, if your not performing a lot of close tasks, and the frame has decent vertical depth, I'd give the nod to the Hoya ECP- you can get Trivex, a very flat curve (probably around +5.00), with very good intermediate and distance utility. If the near performance is unsatisfactory (posturing to get the full add power) you could try readers or multifocal computer/task specific glasses to supplement the every day glasses. Or, you could try FT trifocals for the ultimate in visual acuity and field of vision. If you do try a different design make sure the optician will put you back in the tried and true Panamic at no added expense. Make sure the optics are spot on, and use a frame that gets the back of the lens as close as possible the eyes without "lash crash" (technical jargon for eyelashes hitting the lens). Regards, Robert Martellaro ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Optician/Owner Roberts Optical Wauwatosa Wi. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field." - Niels Bohr While Robert is right in saying the hoya lenses are good, I think ou will find that the Physio 360 1.67 is the best lens for you. Firstly, you are wearing panamics, and the physio is a panamic upgrade (although a big improvement). It has a significantly wider reading and intermediate zone, clearer distance optics than panamic (which were good anyway) and a smoother transition from distance to near. The 1.67 is a bit more expensive, but well worth it. In my dollars (Aus) 1.5MC = $320.00 1.67MC = $420.00. The additional $100.00 gives much thinner and lighter glasses and is what I have my mum in, and she is +6.75D. One thing to remember here is that all retailers ally themselves with a lab based on some reason, whether it be price, proximity, friendship, service, product lines etc. The products they sell are often the ones they find work best from the product line they have available. Independent retailers like Robert can ally themselves with anyone they like and will push (recommend) products they find work best for them. This is not to say they are that much better than anything else, but that design works for them and they understand the nuances of the design. As an example, I can't work out Sola lenses. Every time they bring something out, I tried it, had problems and gave up, going back to tried and trusted designs. The SolaOne was great, but every one I ever sold came back after 6-12 months with the multicoat coming off, so NO MORE Sola One's - EVER. What your OD will recommend (as long as he is ethical and independent) is what works for him. Chains on the other hand sell what they can get cheap. It is the margin that counts, and while the staff may be great, they are often hamstrung by what is available, not being able to order premium designs. Also, how amblyopic are you? If you do not use the amblyopic eye, them put a single vision lens in that eye. It will reduce the cost and you won't notice the difference. The binocular design is still worthwhile for you as it is designed to work with how your eyes work when turning in, which you do anyway when you read. good luck. dr grant > While Robert is right in saying the hoya lenses are good, I think ou > will find that the Physio 360 1.67 is the best lens for you. Firstly, [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > dr grant Thanks for the info. Varilux Physio 360 is available in 1.60 in the US according to Varilux website. I have Panamic 1.60 right now, so I was thinking that there is no real reason for me to go to 1.67 (the plus lenses are already quite thin at the edges). In theory I should get a little better optics with the 1.60 compared to 1.67. My right eye is very amblyopic, and I certainly can't read with it. The right eye is pretty much relegated to peripheral vision. I guess the main consideration for the OD prescribing the same Rx in the right eye is for aesthetic reasons (so the lenses look the same). But I will ask the OD about this to be sure. One advantage of the Varilux is the Crizal Alize AR coating. I have not had AR in the past because of my concern about scratching/cleaning, but I am tempted to try the Crizal Alize. I am well aware of the problems with optical chains and the mediocre products they sell. There is also a problem with the opticians who work in chain stores, unless you happen to be dealing with the head optician for that store. I have found the same problem with independents and even optical shops in OD offices (the OD is usually to busy to spend time with an patient and has a low paid optician try and do most of the work). But even with the best opticians like Robert and with knowledgeable Dr's like yourself, there are so many new products out there that it is probably difficult for any one person to know about all of them in detail. And of course, there are often differences in how someone with a high plus Rx responds to a particular design compared to a different person with a high minus Rx.. But the Physio360 does sound like something that I should seriously consider for my next pair of progressives. > Thanks for the info. Varilux Physio 360 is available in 1.60 in the US > according to Varilux website. I have Panamic 1.60 right now, so I was [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > high minus Rx.. But the Physio360 does sound like something that I should > seriously consider for my next pair of progressives. Oops. Maybe Physio360 is not as good as some claim. At the very least, some dispensers have had problems with it: http://www.optiboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20591&page=1 Trying to find the best progressive is once again becoming a project of serious magnitude. Considering the cost the premium lenses these days, one cannot afford to make a mistake. BTW, some of the vendors (including Essilor rep) mention on OptiBoard how their products excel in binocular vision. And since I am amblyopic, I don't want to spend more money on technology than I need to, especially if it does me no good. On the other hand, with a +4.75 -1.00 x90 with +2.25 add, that is fairly difficult Rx for a progressive, so a premium design is definitely warranted. >> Thanks for the info. Varilux Physio 360 is available in 1.60 in the US >> according to Varilux website. I have Panamic 1.60 right now, so I was [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> aesthetic reasons (so the lenses look the same). But I will ask the OD >> about this to be sure. Mark, Make sure that the optician takes a near PD. If your vision is very poor in your amblyopic eye, there may be less convergence in the good eye. If so, the inset needs to be adjusted to align the corridor and near point with the eye. Most moderate plus PALs have insets in the 2.5mm to 4.5mm range. I would strongly recommend having this measured before you decide on the lens design. >> One advantage of the Varilux is the Crizal Alize AR coating. I have not >> had AR in the past because of my concern about scratching/cleaning, but I >> am tempted to try the Crizal Alize. Hoya's Super Hi-Vision and Zeiss's Advantage are just as good as the Alize. Even some of the off brands are just as good if the AR goes on naked (no scratch coat) product. <snipped> >Oops. Maybe Physio360 is not as good as some claim. At the very least, some >dispensers have had problems with it: > >http://www.optiboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20591&page=1 There are a few folks there who have a beef with Essilor; some of their concerns are valid but a lot of it is clearly irrational. That said, I don't believe you will see any difference between the Panamic and Physio, and very little improvement with the 360. If you're considering an upgrade to a lens that uses free-form technology, you'll probably see more of an improvement with the Zeiss lens, which is priced similarly to the 360 (Zeiss 1.6 compared to 360 at 1.67). >Trying to find the best progressive is once again becoming a project of >serious magnitude. Considering the cost the premium lenses these days, one >cannot afford to make a mistake. No kidding. Just keep us informed (near task frequency, computer position and height, hobbies, old and new Rx, etc.) and don't leave out anything. >BTW, some of the vendors (including Essilor rep) mention on OptiBoard how >their products excel in binocular vision. And since I am amblyopic, I don't >want to spend more money on technology than I need to, especially if it does >me no good. On the other hand, with a +4.75 -1.00 x90 with +2.25 add, that >is fairly difficult Rx for a progressive, so a premium design is definitely >warranted. True, but sometimes trying to get it all in one package is just not possible. Why are you so concerned about the size of the intermediate? This portion of a PAL offers limited utility even in the best case. If you are performing frequent visual tasks at an intermediate distance we should probably be talking about separate glasses that are optimized for such use. Regards, Robert Martellaro ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Optician/Owner Roberts Optical Wauwatosa Wi. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field." - Niels Bohr > <snip> > Why are you so concerned about the size of the intermediate? This portion [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Regards, > Robert Martellaro Currently I wear Panamic and frequently use a computer for my job (I work in IT). I have thought about computer lenses, but I am relatively satisfied now with the reading and computer distance viewing (I learned to move my head and it does not bother me). Since I will be getting new lenses soon, I just want to make an intelligent decision and get the best available product, even if I am relatively satisfied right now. >> <snip> >> Why are you so concerned about the size of the intermediate? This portion [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >with the reading and computer distance viewing (I learned to move my head >and it does not bother me). Mark, I've had clients say the same thing. I put them about 25" in front of my monitor and place a few plus trial lenses over their glasses- jaw drops, eyes open, computer glasses sold. >Since I will be getting new lenses soon, I just want to make an intelligent >decision and get the best available product, even if I am relatively >satisfied right now. Sometimes it takes me a half hour or so to come up with the best lens choice for my clients. At some point your going to have to trust your optician to make the best recommendation based on their experience and knowledge. Don't hesitate to bend my ear if you need further advice. Regards, Robert Martellaro ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Optician/Owner Roberts Optical Wauwatosa Wi. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field." - Niels Bohr Robert Martellaro says... >> I'm about -6.00D, and it's time for new glasses. My >> current brand of progressive lens is Essilor Natural. >> Is there any significant difference among the various >> brands? Is there one in particular that seems to work >> better than the others? > IMHO, the Hoya ID and Zeiss Individual are one-two in > aberration control and real world optical quality. Ok, but aren't we talking real money with those? Like $400 or so? If so, that's out of my league. Can we get under $200, or do you only get coke bottles at that price? >> One thing I should mention. I got new frames last >> time, and they are the smaller frames that everybody >> seems to like. But they are only 37mm top to bottom, > Typo? A "B" (vertical dimension) of 37mm is large by > todays standards. Any progressive will achieve full add > power with that dimension if they're fit properly. No, that's the right number. I guess I was just comparing them to the old Polos, which had lots of room at the bottom. Sherman says... > >> One thing I should mention. I got new frames last > >> time, and they are the smaller frames that everybody > >> seems to like. But they are only 37mm top to bottom, > > Typo? A "B" (vertical dimension) of 37mm is large by > > todays standards. Any progressive will achieve full > > add power with that dimension if they're fit properly. > No, that's the right number. I guess I was just > comparing them to the old Polos, which had lots of room > at the bottom. Well, in fact the frames are Safilo #7027, and the size is 50-20. > Well, in fact the frames are Safilo #7027, and the size is > 50-20. 50 is the width of each lens, and 20 is bridge size. >Robert Martellaro says... > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Ok, but aren't we talking real money with those? Like $400 >or so? Closer to five to six hundred. Price includes the AR coat. Manufacturing is done in Germany. >If so, that's out of my league. Can we get under $200, or >do you only get coke bottles at that price? Shop for quality and service. Some of the older designs (Sola Vip Gold) might be a good choice and will be priced lower than the newer lens designs. I still use this lens in higher minus Rxs with very good results. Should be priced close to your budget (without AR). Hope this helps, Robert Martellaro ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Optician/Owner Roberts Optical Wauwatosa Wi. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field." - Niels Bohr Sherman says... > I'm about -6.00D, and it's time for new glasses. My > current brand of progressive lens is Essilor Natural. > Is there any significant difference among the various > brands? Is there one in particular that seems to work > better than the others? > This would be for general-purpose tooling around - > driving, TV, reading the paper. This may be the wrong place to ask about this, but since I'll have the new prescription and all of the fitting details from last time, and will be using the same frames, can I order progressives online and save significant money? > This may be the wrong place to ask about this, but since > I'll have the new prescription and all of the fitting > details from last time, and will be using the same frames, > can I order progressives online and save significant money? The fitting height is measured with the frames on your face, so it would be difficult. The on-line retailer would have to make an assumption that the center of the lens was at your pupil height for those frames on your face (allowing for a standard offset of a few mm). The PD (distance of pupil to center of nose) is probably ok from last time. > Sherman says... > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > details from last time, and will be using the same frames, > can I order progressives online and save significant money? you can save money, but the results will be awful. find a good practitioner... |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.