# Optical Forums > General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum >  Transitions Vantage first impressions: the good, the bad, and the ugly.

## AngeHamm

We just got our first set of Transitions Vantage lenses in the office today! SV poly set in a Rudy Project Spyllo frame, so it's my first experience with both frame and lens product. (The Spyllo is fabulous, by the way. Fab. U. Lous.) My observations on Vantage fall into three categories:

*The Good:* I've never seen a photochromic lens darken so swiftly. Wow. Twice as fast as the Transitions VI lenses I was wearing outside while checking out the Vantage. And it is legitimately cool to look at car windshields through the lens as it darkens, watching the lens get dark and the reflections on the windows fade.

*The Bad:* Dang, this is an expensive lens. We charge $95 for standard Transitions and XTRActive, and the lab cost for Vantage is so high that we're going to have to charge $150 for it. The only lens add-ons of comparable price for me are hyper-high-index lenses and Crizal Saphire. This is definitely a luxury item.

*The Ugly:* I've also never seen a photochromic lens lighten so slowly. Ugh. 1980s-era PGX was faster. 10 minutes after coming back inside, it's still showing about a 30% tint. This is going to be the dealbreaker for many potential buyers, and pretty much eliminates everyday-wear as an option for this lens, in my opinion. For an athletic frame, and for people with multiple pairs, yes. As a one-and-only pair, the slow lightening is a potentially major inconvenience.

I'll be getting myself a pair when my lab can get it in 1.67 SV next month (in a Rudy Project Maya Sport Utility Frame, so for a primarily outdoor athletic function), and I'm sure my opinion will be refined by personal use. But my previous enthusiasm for this product has been seriously tempered by the slow lightening factor. I hope the eventual Transitions Vantage II will show some improvement in that area, as well as in the cost. Lower the price and speed up the lightening and this product will become a game-changer. Right now, it's not quite there yet.

I'm very interested in hearing other opinions.

----------


## Barry Santini

$55 more tha Reg Trans, and that's alot for am pair of eyewear used every day for 2-3 years.

RECALIBRATE>>>>>>!

B

----------


## EyeManFla

$55.00 more for a polarized transition????  I want to see a pair in action first. The sample don't cut it. Like all new photocromatic technology...I want to see what id does six months out.

----------


## AngeHamm

The $55 addition is commensurate with the correspondingly higher lab cost. If I could sell them for less, I would.

----------


## gatorbait

I figure to price it a bit less than drivewear as it is a polarized photocromatic. We sell Transitions VI and photofusion for $95. I was thinking $200 but I haven't seen a cost yet since I cant get my hands on them. Unfortunately Zeiss doesn't have it available yet. This makes me sad since I am DYING to get a pair for myself. I never thought to put them in my Rudy's though... Thanks for that idea!

----------


## SharonB

I have my first pair on order - Comfort DRx with a Crizal AR - Hubby and I want them for fishing and kayaking - it would be nice to have something lighten up at the end of the day, and maybe have a little bit of polarization. We know they won't be fully polarized, but we're hoping they'll be better than having two pairs fall in the drink ( which will send us into 3 drinks back home).  :cry:   Trout & Walleye seasons are open here, so we're hoping for a fast turn-around on these. I'll do a review after we get them.

----------


## shannon

We are just getting around to offering this lens.  I almost choked on my lunch when I compared our two labs price lists...pricey but one lab was literally over a 100.00 more on the exact same PAL & material than the other...crazy.  Guess I know who I will be ordering it from...(unless it's a VSP order) :(

----------


## optilady1

> I have my first pair on order - Comfort DRx with a Crizal AR - Hubby and I want them for fishing and kayaking - it would be nice to have something lighten up at the end of the day, and maybe have a little bit of polarization. We know they won't be fully polarized, but we're hoping they'll be better than having two pairs fall in the drink ( which will send us into 3 drinks back home).  Trout & Walleye seasons are open here, so we're hoping for a fast turn-around on these. I'll do a review after we get them.


I've considered this for myself as well, the problem is that I wear hat's most of the time, so they won't work for that application.  I guess it'll just be good for camping in general.

----------


## mdeimler

Pricing here seems to be about 60% more than regular transitions.

----------


## AngeHamm

The $150 upcharge for Vantage is a bit less than our extant $160 for DriveWear. I can at least tell my patients, "It's photochromic and polarized, and costs more than either but less than both."

But this is a little off-topic. I threw in the cost for context; the main purpose of the thread was to get people's impressions of the lens's FUNCTION, not its cost. Can I maybe get some feedback from others who have seen it?

----------


## Fezz

I have not seen it yet. I am a lot less eager to try it now.

I am very upset to hear that the fading time is so long. I think that you are right is saying that it will be the deal breaker.

----------


## AngeHamm

> I figure to price it a bit less than drivewear as it is a polarized photocromatic. We sell Transitions VI and photofusion for $95. I was thinking $200 but I haven't seen a cost yet since I cant get my hands on them. Unfortunately Zeiss doesn't have it available yet. This makes me sad since I am DYING to get a pair for myself. I never thought to put them in my Rudy's though... Thanks for that idea!


It's going to be available in a TON of Zeiss designs in a month or so.

Also somewhat disappointing is the fact that it's only available in the DRx Varilux lenses, again raising the cost.

----------


## OIC

There should be a LOT of concern about the lenses lightenening so slowly and staying dark. Consumer research has shown that a primary concern of wearers is that photochromic lenses need to lighten quickly (this actually was a larger concern than the lenses darkening quickly). There is a safety factor, particularly with older wearers, of coming from outside into a room with less than ideal lighting conditions and possibly mis-stepping or tripping. I know that these are supposed to be positioned for outdoor wear, but we all know that people that hear "they get darker outside" are going to be thinking they can be used indoors as well. Plus, do these change behind the windshield of a car? 

I'm still struggling to see the advantage over a regular polarized lens. Considering the cost factor and the fact there are still a ton of Rx wearers not wearing polarized, shouldn't we be trying to get people into a good pair of polarized, which not only are awesome lenses outside (99% or better polarizing efficiency) and that also work behind a windshield, instead of something that seems to me to be a small niche-type lens? I'm not at retail so perhaps I'm missing something and can be enlightened?

----------


## chip anderson

While lightening in a room may be of some importance, lightening when driving into a tunnel (This is why cars don't have auto darkening windscreens) can be of a much greater concern.

Of course full time shades, polarized or not don't lighten here either.    

Just a thought, we don't have many if any tunnels in Mississippi.

Chip

----------


## jspayneii

> Also somewhat disappointing is the fact that it's only available in the DRx Varilux lenses, again raising the cost.


Vantage is primarily available in digital progressive designs.  You should check out the house digital lenses if you are looking for lower cost.  We have it available in our house branded Legacy lenses.  It is also available in the Shamir Autograph II and Spectrum, and Essilor Ideal designs.  As for traditional molded designs, it is currently available in the Essilor Accolade in Polycarbonate, as well as the Hoya Summit ECP and Hoya Summit CD in Trivex.

----------


## AngeHamm

The lenses don't change behind the windshield, so unless you're driving a convertible this is a negligible issue.

Having just been to a seminar launching the product last week, I can tell you that Transitions is *not* specifically marketing this as an outdoor-specialty lens. They are positioning it in much the same way as the Transitions VI, as a clear-to-tinted lens for all-purpose use, but with the added performance of variable polarization. *I,* however, will *definitely* be talking it up to my patients as a primarily outdoor-use lens if further samples prove to lighten as slowly.

As for the digital designs, my practice prefers to use the Comfort 2, Comfort 2 DRx, and Comfort 2 Enhanced for most patients. I'm less annoyed that it isn't available in the less-expensive Comfort 2 than I am that it isn't available in the top-of-the-line Enhanced. Many patients willing to pay the premium for a more advanced photochromic lens would also be willing to embrace the more advanced technology of the Enhanced. I just find it baffling that it would only be available in the mid-grade of the 3 Varilux designs, and with no apparent timetable to expand.

----------


## AngeHamm

Oh, and of *course* a pair of dedicated polarized sunglasses is superior to this product. Transitions insists as much, and I tell all of my patients the same.

----------


## optical24/7

> It's going to be available in a TON of Zeiss designs in a month or so.
> 
> Also somewhat disappointing is the fact that it's only available in the DRx Varilux lenses, again raising the cost.


It's available in Accolade and Accolade Freedom as well. (cr and poly only).

My 1st impressions (simular to Andy's)

* Very slow fade rate. ( Gray #1 still at 8-10 mins in.)

* I would estimate it's polarizing effect at about 80-85% ( When cross polarizing with a dedicated gray 3 polar sunlens)

* I did not get the swift darkening stage as Andy did. At best, the same as Trans VI.

I've already dispensed 2 pair, but will be cautious in future recommendations.

----------


## AngeHamm

I took the Vantage lens outside and held it in one hand, my own Trans VI in the other. Vantage darkened twice as quickly.

----------


## sharpstick777

Thanks for the great feedback!  Prices will drop quickly as availbility expands, and its available in finished SV in a few months.  Companies are price gouging because its new, limited and in high demand.

All Seiko progressives will be available June 1st.

----------


## Happylady

The slow fade time is a huge concern.

----------


## AngeHamm

> Thanks for the great feedback!  Prices will drop quickly as availbility expands, and its available in finished SV in a few months.  Companies are price gouging because its new, limited and in high demand.


That is *great* to hear. I do like this product a lot in theory; the slow fade limits my ability to dispense it as an everyday lens. I'm looking forward to trying it in a few weeks.

----------


## optical24/7

> I took the Vantage lens outside and held it in one hand, my own Trans VI in the other. Vantage darkened twice as quickly.


\

Maybe the Va. sun isn't as bright as Texas'.  :Tongue: 

Andy, how old are your personal Trans? Anyway, the above comment sent me back outside with brand new Trans VI, Trans Extra Active and Trans Vantage. All were placed on a white piece of paper. Full Sun, 88 degrees.

Trans VI darkened WAY faster and got way darker than the vantage.

Extra Active got darkest, but not much darker than the VI (though the Extra was a more true gray color.)

The Vantage was the lightest of all. ( and had the same blue/gray color of the VI.)

7 mins. inside, there was little difference in the colors between the VI and Vantage ( I was surprised!)

The Extra was the darkest still at 7 mins.

Now 15 mins after being inside the VI and vantage apear the same light gray with the Extra having some more residual color.

Your mileage may vary depending on location and UV exposure.

----------


## sharpstick777

> The slow fade time is a huge concern.


For us all Happylady, for us all.

----------


## Fezz

> \
> 
> Maybe the Va. sun isn't as bright as Texas'. 
> 
> Andy, how old are your personal Trans? Anyway, the above comment sent me back outside with brand new Trans VI, Trans Extra Active and Trans Vantage. All were placed on a white piece of paper. Full Sun, 88 degrees.
> 
> Trans VI darkened WAY faster and got way darker than the vantage.
> 
> Extra Active got darkest, but not much darker than the VI (though the Extra was a more true gray color.)
> ...



Thanks for the experiment and swift report of the findings!

I remain pessimistic, but hopeful!

Your complimentary adult libation will be in the mail to compensate you for your efforts!

----------


## optical24/7

> ...Your complimentary adult libation will be in the mail to compensate you for your efforts!


Fezz, I'll need that by 8:00 am 5/20/2012. ( Another classified experiment  :Wink: )

----------


## optical24/7

I'll add that all test lenses were poly w/AR

----------


## AngeHamm

Awesome science experiment!

My lenses are about a year old, Transitions VI Brown in 1.67 with Avance. I'll perform more experiments as more Vantage product crosses my desk.

----------


## Sledzinator

I just sold my first pairs to a couple. Both Trivex w/AR I will keep let you know how they like them after dispense!

----------


## Happylady

Trivex? My lab told me plastic and poly with 1.67 coming next month.

----------


## Pogu

Two lenses held at 90* darkened maybe 50%, even if they were polarized to a useful degree they're not dark enough in the sun and completely clear in the car (10 minutes after you've walked though the sun anyway). I can not for the life of me determine what the point is.

I saw it available in "Aris" and "Phoenix" on opticom.

----------


## edKENdance

Have a pair of Phoenix  on order for our Doc to wear in a pair of Hilco Bling goggles which are specific to riding her scooter.  Can't possibly think of a better use.

----------


## jspayneii

> Trivex? My lab told me plastic and poly with 1.67 coming next month.


Vantage is available in Plastic, Poly, and Trivex.  Hoya currently offers the Summit ECP and Summit CD in Trivex.  It is also available in the Shamir Spectrum and Autograph II. 

The 1.67 is set to be released on June 5th.  I believe this will be released in the Essilor Ideal, Comfort DRX and Physio DRX, as well as Shamir Spectrum and Autograph II.

James

----------


## Barry Santini

> Two lenses held at 90* darkened maybe 50%, even if they were polarized to a useful degree they're not dark enough in the sun and completely clear in the car (10 minutes after you've walked though the sun anyway). I can not for the life of me determine what the point is.
> 
> I saw it available in "Aris" and "Phoenix" on opticom.


Honestly, this opinion smacks so much of the same sour-grapes we hear from clients who decline Transitions because "they don't get (fully) dark in the car" and "they aren't (absolutely) clear indoors)".

Sheesh.

B

----------


## Happylady

> Vantage is available in Plastic, Poly, and Trivex.  Hoya currently offers the Summit ECP and Summit CD in Trivex.  It is also available in the Shamir Spectrum and Autograph II.


Okay, that's what I figured, Hoya offers it in Trivex but not Essilor and our main lab is an Essilor lab. Before I started working here the main lab was Hoya but they started having a lot of issues with the lab and switched.

----------


## edKENdance

We just got our first pair back in Phoenix.  Honestly can't distinguish it from my own pair of transitions in terms of how clear it is in office.

----------


## AngeHamm

> Two lenses held at 90* darkened maybe 50%, even if they were polarized to a useful degree they're not dark enough in the sun and completely clear in the car (10 minutes after you've walked though the sun anyway). I can not for the life of me determine what the point is.


The point is identical to the point of polarized sunglasses versus non-polarized.

----------


## misterindependent

> Okay, that's what I figured, Hoya offers it in Trivex but not Essilor and our main lab is an Essilor lab. Before I started working here the main lab was Hoya but they started having a lot of issues with the lab and switched.


Should you ever have a desire to try an independent lab that manufactures Hoya, Essilor, Zeiss, and private label feeform PAL's in-house, please let me know and I will provide you with a couple of premium labs.

----------


## n711

> Trivex? My lab told me plastic and poly with 1.67 coming next month.




YES Trivex!  Hmm.. I thought the West Coast was always the last to get all the 'cool' stuff... Learn something new EVERYDAY!!!!

----------


## GokhanSF

When will the opticians and optometrists will stop thinking about their patients budget and start recommending the best product available to their patients? You are not an accountant... You are an eyecare professional who should offer the best for the patient related to their needs.

----------


## jspayneii

> When will the opticians and optometrists will stop thinking about their patients budget and start recommending the best product available to their patients? You are not an accountant... You are an eyecare professional who should offer the best for the patient related to their needs.


I don't believe that their intention is to not recommend the product.  I believe they are trying to identify who the target patient is.  I know I am trying to figure it out so that we can better help our ECPs.

----------


## GokhanSF

> I don't believe that their intention is to not recommend the product. I believe they are trying to identify who the target patient is. I know I am trying to figure it out so that we can better help our ECPs.


If I believe it is the best product for my patient I will offer it doesn't matter if they can afford it or not. Pair of lenses help you see the world you are living in and the quality of that lens determines how well you see all the good things in life. To me that is priceless. If you show your patient you are looking out for their best interest they will buy it.

----------


## AngeHamm

I *always* recommend the best products for my patient, and they very frequently take my recommendations. But $150 is inarguably a very premium price for a lens add-on, particularly one that takes 10+ minutes to lighten up. I tell my patients the benefits and drawbacks of all my products, then tell them the price and let them decide.

----------


## SharonB

Finally got mine! They were for a VERY specific use - fishing/kayaking late in the afternoon into the evening. They work very well for this purpose. They do _not_ replace my favorites (DriveWear, BTW), but I can drive home with relatively clear glasses, and still have the polarization earlier when the light was brighter and coming from the west. They do exactly what I wanted them to do. However - I have glasses that are task specific for almost everything, and these could be a hard sell for the average consumer. My main concern is what will they "do" 6 mos. from now - spoken from a veteran of the first edition Transitions.

----------


## chip anderson

Would this "best product" really be a better product for the patient than a pair if clear lenses and a good pair of polarised Rx glasses.  Or a pair of regular transitions and a serious pair of polarized suns?
Does being more profitable make it the "best" product for the patient?

Chip

----------


## SharonB

> Trivex? My lab told me plastic and poly with 1.67 coming next month.


Mine are Trivex - I hate Poly!

----------


## SharonB

> Would this "best product" really be a better product for the patient than a pair if clear lenses and a good pair of polarised Rx glasses.  Or a pair of regular transitions and a serious pair of polarized suns?
> Does being more profitable make it the "best" product for the patient?
> 
> Chip


The only thing I have against clip-ons is that there is more for the patient to misplace or lose. Second pairs are a big plus, but I was looking for something more specialized that would eliminate a second pair for a unique purpose. I will present these to patients with all of the caveats etc. I am sure there is a niche market for these.

----------


## AngeHamm

> Would this "best product" really be a better product for the patient than a pair if clear lenses and a good pair of polarised Rx glasses.  Or a pair of regular transitions and a serious pair of polarized suns?
> Does being more profitable make it the "best" product for the patient?
> 
> Chip


I am putting them into a Rudy Project Maya. It is an absolutely perfect lens for the athletic functions I'm going to use them for.

Many of my Transitions patients also buy polarized sunglasses. We make it very clear that Transitions is not a sunglass product, it's an eyeglass product.

----------


## GokhanSF

> Would this "best product" really be a better product for the patient than a pair if clear lenses and a good pair of polarised Rx glasses. Or a pair of regular transitions and a serious pair of polarized suns?
> Does being more profitable make it the "best" product for the patient?
> 
> Chip


I didn't say it is the best product. If it is the best product for the patient I will recommend it but if I think there are better options I will recommend those. I don't know how you work but for me it is all about what is best for the patient. I don't care what is more profitable.

----------


## doctorjmjb

> Should you ever have a desire to try an independent lab that manufactures Hoya, Essilor, Zeiss, and private label feeform PAL's in-house, please let me know and I will provide you with a couple of premium labs.


My main lab was an independant and they did a great job. Then they were bought by the evil empire and have slowly been going down hill ever since.   Not to mention that we can no longer get competitor's products.  I'm definately ready to try someone else (also looking for a stock lens supplier).  Who would you recommend for all the major brands?

----------


## Robert_S

This product hasn't arrived in the UK yet. It sounds as though for the majority of people a separate pair of sunglasses will still be the best choice. In fact, I'm struggling to think of a scenario where it would be advantageous over separate pairs. Anybody think of one??

But once they improve the reaction speed it should replace regular transitions completely.

----------


## chip anderson

Would be advantageous for people that can't keep up with two pair of glasses.  Also for patient with AR who can't leave thier clear glasses in the hot car when fishing in sunglasses.
Also keeps patient down to the cost of only one frame, probably less lens expense also.

Having said this, one good pair of clear glasses and one good pair of polarized glasses is a much better solution.


Chip

----------


## Robert_S

Well the most significant problem I would forsee would be that almost no ophthalmic frame, unless the Px wants to look ridiculous, would provide anywhere near as good coverage as a decent sunglass could. Most ophthalmic frames aren't very wrapped, and there's not much point in lenses which eliminate glare if light can still get in at the top or bottom of the frame, or the periphery. 

Having said that, if they matched the quality of regular transtions but incorporated polarization, I would recommend them all day long... but apparently, they don't.

----------


## austicati0n

> Well the most significant problem I would forsee would be that almost no ophthalmic frame, unless the Px wants to look ridiculous, would provide anywhere near as good coverage as a decent sunglass could. Most ophthalmic frames aren't very wrapped, and there's not much point in lenses which eliminate glare if light can still get in at the top or bottom of the frame, or the periphery. 
> 
> Having said that, if they matched the quality of regular transtions but incorporated polarization, I would recommend them all day long... but apparently, they don't.



Funny, we have people come in all the time getting wrap Ray-ban and Oakley in transitions. They love them. Most of our customers are international though.

----------


## Robert_S

> Funny, we have people come in all the time getting wrap Ray-ban and Oakley in transitions. They love them. Most of our customers are international though.


We do too, in our Nike ophthalmic range for example, but even then they tend not to be big enough at the top or bottom to function as a proper sunglass would.

----------


## sharpstick777

On the first few Vantage I have seen come through, the AR stacks have a slightly different residual color, a little more yellow on the green AR's.  Anyone else notice this?

----------


## RT

sharpstick777:  I'm not sure what the mechanism would be for a different residual color.  The Vantage process uses exactly the same hard coats as other Transitions technology, and the AR coats are run in the same cycle as other products of the same base material.  Is what you are seeing a result of the slight residual tint in the unactivated state?

----------


## Matthew

They work... first of its kind...

----------


## austicati0n

I'm talking about actual Sunglass frames they will get Transitions in.  A popular one is people getting Transitions in a Flak Jacket or Jawbone. I think it looks hideous, but they love it. All that matters..

----------


## AngeHamm

> They work... first of its kind...


Must admit that, yes. Mine are delayed three weeks, sadly. Again, the problem with being the first of its kind... I'm sure I'll have a ton to say after I get mine and take them out cycling.

----------


## edKENdance

I got the kit from Transitions that I ordered through a link I got on here.  It's pretty cool.  I find it more effective to use the activated lens with a Maui Jim polage that we have compared to the one that Transitions sent.

----------


## sharpstick777

> sharpstick777:  I'm not sure what the mechanism would be for a different residual color.  The Vantage process uses exactly the same hard coats as other Transitions technology, and the AR coats are run in the same cycle as other products of the same base material.  Is what you are seeing a result of the slight residual tint in the unactivated state?


No, its not a residual issue.  Its very slight, no patients and most opticians won't notice, but the residual color in some AR's is slighty different.  I have only compared a few, but yes it should be the same.

----------


## rachel42486

I've fit my first patient into them, and he's already returned them. With Crizal AR in a Comfort DRx, they had an irridescent purple sheen to them and they don't get dark enough or light enough, not to mention the time it takes to transition, and for him they aren't even close to polarized enough. We're refitting him into a Comfort Enhanced with Transitions XtraActive and a second pair of polarized lenses.

----------


## AngeHamm

I've fit three and they're all delighted. But they all knew what they were getting, and two of them also have prescription sunglasses.

No transitions product is a substitute for dedicated sunglasses, and any optician who markets them as such is doing their patients a serious disservice.

----------


## ldyflsh

I just fit two patients with the Vantage yesterday. Made sure they knew it's not a substitute for sunglasses. Keeping my fingers crossed!

----------


## Robert_S

> No transitions product is a substitute for dedicated sunglasses, and any optician who markets them as such is doing their patients a serious disservice.



Agreed.

How frustrating is it, though, when a patient comes in wearing a photochromic lens (usually not a decent one either), and you bring up sunglasses, and they say very proudly, "I don't need sunglasses; I have these!".

----------


## sharpstick777

> ...., they had an irridescent purple sheen to them .....


Welcome Rachel42486 to Optiboard.
Some one else who's see's the AR's coming out slightly different?  Thanks for sharing.

----------


## kittyeyes

I must say I'm disapointed in the Vantage. I have two jobs from two different labs and both have the same residual indoor tint like the Extra. I wear Transitions VI and there's a significant darker indoor tint to the Vantage. This could be another deal breaker like the long fade back time.

----------


## mdeimler

My Vantage lenses are not too dark indoors but they do not get very dark outside.  Maybe it's too hot right now.  They may work better this fall/winter !

----------


## Happylady

> My Vantage lenses are not too dark indoors but they do not get very dark outside.  Maybe it's too hot right now.  They may work better this fall/winter !


Do they seem too light looking through them? I went to a talk Transition did and they say it is a bit lighter but since it is polarized it seems darker looking through it. 

I have a pair of Drivewear glasses and they usually aren't real dark but they work great.

----------


## mdeimler

> Do they seem too light looking through them? I went to a talk Transition did and they say it is a bit lighter but since it is polarized it seems darker looking through it. 
> 
> I have a pair of Drivewear glasses and they usually aren't real dark but they work great.


Yes, they are not dark enough to look through.  The polarization seems to be MAYBE around a grey A.  THey don't seem any better than Trans VI.

----------


## chip anderson

If the Vantage isn't a substitute for sunglasses, what is it?
Something like the early colored photochromics where we were supposed to say: "This not a sunglass, these are _fashion tints?"   

_Are we supposed to sell it so that in a few generations the Mfg. can afford to develop it to the point where it is a substitute for sunglasses?

Chip

----------


## AngeHamm

> If the Vantage isn't a substitute for sunglasses, what is it? Something like the early colored photochromics where we were supposed to say: "This not a sunglass, these are _fashion tints?"   
> 
> _Are we supposed to sell it so that in a few generations the Mfg. can afford to develop it to the point where it is a substitute for sunglasses?
> 
> Chip


If we wait for a product to work so well it's indistinguishable from magic, we will be putting our patients in non-AR CR-39 single vision and flat top bifocals for many more years. Also, manufacturers will have no financial incentive to continue to work out the kinks in new products if there are no early adopters. As long as we are transparent with our patients about the functions, advantages, and drawbacks of every product we are dispensing to them, they will see it as technology, not as something that just kind of happens to their vision. This, I believe, is the strongest argument against such dumbed-down terminology as "no-glare" and "invisible bifocals."

I tell my patients, "Transitions aren't a sunglass product. They are an eyeglass product, a convenience product, an eye health product." As a result, I sell a crapton of both Transitions and polarized sunglasses. Expecting Transitions to take the place of dedicated sunglasses is like expecting progressives to take the place of dedicated computer lenses. Sure, it does most of what the specialty lens in question does, but the specialty lens does it twice as well.

As long as Transitions are UV-activated (the only practical way to make the technology work), they will not work in a car, and will not replace sunglasses. As long as Transitions don't go from nearly-100%-transparent indoors to 70-80% polarized outdoors, they will not replace sunglasses.

It seems to me that the next step is something like the emPower lens: swipe the temple and you activate the tint.

----------


## optilady1

> If we wait for a product to work so well it's indistinguishable from magic, we will be putting our patients in non-AR CR-39 single vision and flat top bifocals for many more years. Also, manufacturers will have no financial incentive to continue to work out the kinks in new products if there are no early adopters. As long as we are transparent with our patients about the functions, advantages, and drawbacks of every product we are dispensing to them, they will see it as technology, not as something that just kind of happens to their vision. This, I believe, is the strongest argument against such dumbed-down terminology as "no-glare" and "invisible bifocals."
> 
> I tell my patients, "Transitions aren't a sunglass product. They are an eyeglass product, a convenience product, an eye health product." As a result, I sell a crapton of both Transitions and polarized sunglasses. Expecting Transitions to take the place of dedicated sunglasses is like expecting progressives to take the place of dedicated computer lenses. Sure, it does most of what the specialty lens in question does, but the specialty lens does it twice as well.
> 
> As long as Transitions are UV-activated (the only practical way to make the technology work), they will not work in a car, and will not replace sunglasses. As long as Transitions don't go from nearly-100%-transparent indoors to 70-80% polarized outdoors, they will not replace sunglasses.
> 
> It seems to me that the next step is something like the emPower lens: swipe the temple and you activate the tint.


Were you sitting in on our Vantage lunch and learn?   :Smile:   Couldn't say it better.  WE just rolled them out and I think we've done 4 so far this week.  I'm thinking they are going to be perfect for camping.  (Cuz who wants to switch clear and sunglasses when one's had too many drinks?)

----------


## AngeHamm

> Were you sitting in on our Vantage lunch and learn?    Couldn't say it better.  WE just rolled them out and I think we've done 4 so far this week.  I'm thinking they are going to be perfect for camping.  (Cuz who wants to switch clear and sunglasses when one's had too many drinks?)


I'm getting them for exclusively outdoor use. They're going to rule for hiking, camping, cycling, and running. You know, when the 1.67 SV finally arrives...

Educated patients with reasonable expectations = happy patients = profitable patients.

----------


## Robert_S

Why not Drivewear, then? Excellent in all conditions, except for at night, with the amber hue aiding contrast. I know which I would rather wear if it started to rain.

I'm not against Vantage by the way, I would just be interested in your reply.

----------


## AngeHamm

> Why not Drivewear, then? Excellent in all conditions, except for at night, with the amber hue aiding contrast. I know which I would rather wear if it started to rain.
> 
> I'm not against Vantage by the way, I would just be interested in your reply.


Drivewear isn't available in 1.67 (which I need), and as you mentioned is no good at night. I'm looking to get lenses for a rugged pair of outdoorsy Rudy Project glasses, and I need the wind shield feature for potential night cycling.

----------


## AngeHamm

I do love DriveWear, though. Great product. If I could get it in my RX I would.

----------


## Robert_S

Why would you need your lenses to be thin rather than strong (i.e. poly) in rugged outdoor glasses?

Again, I'm genuinely interested!

The night thing, of course, is a valid point, but to a patient who may not want too many pairs of glasses, surely Drivewear will be more versatile, since it is full sunwear and a driving lens as well.

----------


## AngeHamm

> Why would you need your lenses to be thin rather than strong (i.e. poly) in rugged outdoor glasses?
> 
> Again, I'm genuinely interested!
> 
> The night thing, of course, is a valid point, but to a patient who may not want too many pairs of glasses, surely Drivewear will be more versatile, since it is full sunwear and a driving lens as well.


1.67 *is* strong, as well as thin. The activities I'm using them for are non-impact; if I was getting sport goggles for baseball or football I might choose differently, or at least get safety thickness. And my -9.25 lenses would be intolerable to look through with poly's low clarity.

DriveWear's color is a turn-off for a lot of my patients. Most opt for Transitions in their everyday glasses and polarized suns.

----------


## mdeimler

[QUOTE=Robert_S;428720]Why not Drivewear, then? Excellent in all conditions, except for at night, with the amber hue aiding contrast. I know which I would rather wear if it started to rain.
QUOTE]
Actually, I am already noticing that I wear my drivewear more, especially during the rainy drive home.

----------


## chip anderson

I have had a number of patients get drivewear lately and tell me that they are light enough to wear inside and to drive in at night.   No I did not advise them to drive wearing them at night.

Chip

----------


## Robert_S

> 1.67 *is* strong, as well as thin. The activities I'm using them for are non-impact; if I was getting sport goggles for baseball or football I might choose differently, or at least get safety thickness. And my -9.25 lenses would be intolerable to look through with poly's low clarity.
> 
> DriveWear's color is a turn-off for a lot of my patients. Most opt for Transitions in their everyday glasses and polarized suns.


I agree, absolutely, that most people would choose regular polarized lenses; drivewear is a relatively niche product, but then so is vantage, by the sounds of things. 

My lab uses a lot of trivex, so I am certainly no fan of poly, but I would challenge that you could notice a difference in abbe of 32 (1.67) from 30 (poly). Having said that, with everything else you've said, I agree that 1.67 is probably best.

----------


## anthonyf1509

You know, when the 1.67 SV finally arrives...


It is available

----------


## mdeimler

> I have had a number of patients get drivewear lately and tell me that they are light enough to wear inside and to drive in at night.   No I did not advise them to drive wearing them at night.
> 
> Chip


Actually, they are correct.  I don't ADVISE this either, however it can easily be done.  They are great lenses.

----------


## Happylady

I really love my Drivewear but their lightest color is still a light sunglasses tint. And yeah, the lightest color is kinda ugly. I think they look fine when darker.

----------


## Craig

I am just returning from a 2 week vacation- longest ever- in Alaska and the Vantage were made for the trip; love em!
I have extractive with me and my brown polarized transitions, but almost always wore the Vantage lenses.
The are not sunglasses, but they do a great job as a dark transitions and the polarization is a definite advantage over the Xtractive.
They do not work in a rental car with no tint and I wanted to confirm that because my cars in FLorida have tinted windows even on the windshield( yes it is legal and blocks the heat, not the light).

Other than in the car and if you wear a hat, they would satisfy most of the world while outdoors.  It is a much nicer product in my opinion than the Drivewear.  I have a pair in the drawer and never wear them.

It is expensive and I charge $200 over clear trivex in a progressive with $150 on SV.

Craig

----------


## Dan Clinton

Anyone have a Transition vantage display willing to sell? I think it is an exciting rooduct but waiting 6 weeks to recieve?

----------


## Fezz

> Anyone have a Transition vantage display willing to sell? I think it is an exciting rooduct but waiting 6 weeks to recieve?



I have one!

I am only about 40 minutes away from you and could deliver it.

----------


## AngeHamm

> I am just returning from a 2 week vacation- longest ever- in Alaska and the Vantage were made for the trip; love em!
> I have extractive with me and my brown polarized transitions, but almost always wore the Vantage lenses.
> The are not sunglasses, but they do a great job as a dark transitions and the polarization is a definite advantage over the Xtractive.
> They do not work in a rental car with no tint and I wanted to confirm that because my cars in FLorida have tinted windows even on the windshield( yes it is legal and blocks the heat, not the light).
> 
> Other than in the car and if you wear a hat, they would satisfy most of the world while outdoors.  It is a much nicer product in my opinion than the Drivewear.  I have a pair in the drawer and never wear them.
> 
> It is expensive and I charge $200 over clear trivex in a progressive with $150 on SV.
> 
> Craig


That's great to hear. I can't wait to get mine.

----------


## FVCCHRIS

Playing around with a sample today and finding it quite dark outside here(patchy clouds and 68 degrees) Slow fade time and I would describe it's polarized quality as "fair". More work and reading to do.  :Smile:

----------


## bless1above

Have sold this to several customers, who actually love it!  We do alot of insurances so actually works fine.  Did the Transition class on line about the different transitions including the Vantage.  They stated it is inbetween the Transition VI and the Extra Active as far as change in darkness and lightening.  And they recommend it for certain people not all.  Very interesting.  And funny how Essilor has it in Poly and Zeiss doesn't.

----------


## nicksims

Have tested my Vantage lenses for about a week. My opinions here are just  from my observations without any influence from the few patients we've  had wear this (the Vantage specifically).

I'm remaking them without Transitions. Now I am very careful to whom I sell these and so am very lucky not to need to take advantage of the Transitions guarantee. But I've never been interested for myself and wanted to try this.

The color indoors was a little darker than expected (oh and these are SV, Poly with Avance) and frankly, I did not enjoy looking through the tint. In fact, the color had a little green to it. (Not exactly similar, but I kept thinking of Drive-wear.)

It did get dark reasonable quickly outside. I can see why many would like the outdoor color. Coming inside though to lighten, as said in some comments, took quite some time- 5 to 10 minutes. And still, the indoor color. No thank you.

Polarization? Yes, it works. Maybe even a little beneficial. But not that much. Reflection reduction was OK at best. 
I live where it is bright sun most of the time, and this past week we've even had some rain. So I've tried the lenses in very different weather/lighting conditions. And HOT as well so I've taken that into consideration.

I think that in much the same as Transitions and the XtraActive, the Vantage can be good for the right patient. We have patients that are well educated about the pro's and con's of this style of lens. I'll continue to promote this to the right patient, but only to the right patient. 

As long as I don't have to wear it! I promise, I really did try to keep an open mind when testing this- it's just not for me.  :Wink:

----------


## AngeHamm

Good stuff!

----------


## basecurved

I have tested these at several offices. After 20 minutes direct exposure in sunlight, I am only able to get about 20-30% effective polarization when compared to/ cross polarized with a traditional Grey C polarized sunlens. It may be an enhanced version of transitions technology, but calling it polarized seems to be a stretch.

----------


## CohensExec

I sell about 10-15 pairs a week. It's a great lens and from my personal experience the optics at night are great. Should be sold as a front line product offered in all daily wear glasses.

----------


## Crazy-bout-Optics

Have had mine for a week now. SV poly with Purecoat. 

General observations:

Slight tint indoors: I love it. It is similar to the XtraActive indoors. Just a shade lighter than a Grey 1. I like it because it dims the glare from the computer screen. We have very bright fluorescent lighting at work and I love the residual tint for this reason. 

Tint outdoors: gets to a Grey 2 pretty quickly. Can see it block a little glare as far as polarization goes, but no where close to a standard polarized lens. 

Fade time: while they turn dark quickly I agree with others comments that it takes a few minutes to get clear. About 6-7 minutes. While this doesn't bother me personally, I can see how others may not like it so much.  

Final thoughts: While I have separate pairs of sunglasses for driving, I have enjoyed these lenses thus far. I find the most use out of them around 5 or 6  when it's still light out but the suns setting in an hour or two and I don't wanna swap between clear and sunglasses if I'm somewhere going in and out of buildings (outdoor shopping mall). 

-Crazy

----------


## alanmushnick

Do the Vantage lenses have a tint indoors? Do they really take longer to get untinted than the Transitions VI? Do transitions lenses "wear out"?
thanks

----------


## Huffam

last week i was actually comp'd a set of Vantage lenses. my chief complaint is how slow they darken/lighten in very cold temperatures. i saw something on this thread about it taking more than 10 minutes clear up? try living in Alaska where its cold as hell right now. i have been in my office for 30 minutes and im still at about 25% darkness.... as far as them darkening when you step outside it takes about 10 minutes to actually darken in the cold here. the temperature factor will definitely discourage many potential "frozen north" customers. the polarization is nice, but i am about to just go back to wearing contacts and my really nice plano's over them. this summer my opinion may change, but these are not the greatest for low temperatures.

----------


## Uilleann

> last week i was actually comp'd a set of Vantage lenses. my chief complaint is how slow they darken/lighten in very cold temperatures. i saw something on this thread about it taking more than 10 minutes clear up? try living in Alaska where its cold as hell right now. i have been in my office for 30 minutes and im still at about 25% darkness.... as far as them darkening when you step outside it takes about 10 minutes to actually darken in the cold here. the temperature factor will definitely discourage many potential "frozen north" customers. the polarization is nice, but i am about to just go back to wearing contacts and my really nice plano's over them. this summer my opinion may change, but these are not the greatest for low temperatures.


Interesting.  Cold actually increases both the density and rate of darkening of a photochromic molecule.  I'm wondering if you somehow ended up with a defective set?  While we haven't sold this lens by the hundreds as yet, we have had a few who have used them in some pretty extreme temp and environmental conditions.  So far, no one we've talked to has had any problems or complaints with the product to date.  Remember it's not a sunglass, and it certainly isn't the right tech for everyone.  But there are many who are getting on with this lens quite well.

----------


## Huffam

maybe they are a defective set? all i know is i was splitting wood for 3 hours this weekend in direct sunlight and it took forever to transition

----------


## rinselberg

Huffam..in Homer, Alaska..? My first thought was that maybe it was because your latitude is farther north and therefore you were not being exposed to as  much UV. But I really don't know. I found this very technical white paper on "Factors affecting surface ultraviolet radiation levels in the Arctic", but I don't see that it explains why your Vantage lenses "took forever to transition" even in "direct sunlight".

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Facto..._in_the_Arctic

----------


## theGross1

Uncut: Poly Transition VI
Center: LifeRX 
Bottom: Poly Vantage

----------

