# Optical Forums > Canadian Discussion Forum >  Nikon 4 vs. Nikon Seemax vs. Essilor Fusio

## mlm

(Since this is very much personal opinion and very unscientific, I didn't think I could put this in the product review forum.)

I'm the only relatively high myope in the clinic, so I get the pleasure of trying out the various high index lenses as they come out. And since my seasonal allergies have forced me to take a contact lens holiday, I'm wearing glasses way more than usual. So, I thought I'd share my thoughts and impressions on a few lenses I've tried recently.

My usual lens of choice is the Nikon 4; I've been wearing that in various frames for the past 5 years. I've never had any issues with the optics of the lens, and while I'm not sure if my one pair that has ICE still has that coating, I've never had any problems with HCC.

In January I started wearing a pair of Nikon Seemax lenses with ICE. The most noticeable difference for me was looking down at stairs. Since I'm usually a full-time CL wearer, when I use the Nikon 4 lenses, I find I misjudge the first step in a flight of stairs. That doesn't happen with the Seemax lenses. I seem to get a much more "real" image, and I do notice a lot less peripheral distortion in the lenses.

Three weeks ago, I got a pair of the Essilor Fusio - the new 1.74 lens. While I love how thin these lenses turned out (it was the only way our optician could convince me to try a minimal arts frame), I don't like the optics as much as the Seemax. The Fusio seems to me to be like the Nikon 4: good optics, but not so great once I realise what I can really see. I do like the cleanability of the Alize coating.

Do I think Seemax is worth it? If I were a consumer, it would be very hard to convince me to spend the extra bucks without literally seeing the benefits. But as a high myope who is very picky about my vision, yes I think it is worth it.

As for the Fusio, I would recommend it to patients with higher scripts than mine, simply for the thiness factor. It probably is on par with Nikon 5, but since I haven't tried that one, I can't be entirely sure.

Well, that's my take on things.  I'll be very happy though when I can back into my contacts. ;)

----------


## For-Life

Well from my understanding the Fusio and the N5 are the exact same monomer, just different brands.

The Seemax sounds like a great lens.  I have not used it or tried it, because the Nikon reps in the past did not see like they wanted to do any business and thus never visited us.  The new Nikon rep stopped by and kind of just blew the Seemax off to talk about the W.  To me the Seemax sounds like it would be best suited for higher cyls.  So probably anyone with a -1 to -4 cyl (since I doubt the availability would go higher than a -4) could notice the difference.  I think it is a lens very similar to the Sola Vizio.

----------


## loncoa

As far as I've been able to guess, I personally feel the Fusio 1.74 IS the NL5 (cringes, waiting for Essilor and Nikon to flame). Certainly your experience has shown that at least in your type of Rx, the Seemax is king. So you've got something to go on, which is rare. I envy you in that regard. Many times new products have to be flown by the seat of the pants, so to speak, until we get enough opinions to be able to say.

----------


## For-Life

> As far as I've been able to guess, I personally feel the Fusio 1.74 IS the NL5 (cringes, waiting for Essilor and Nikon to flame). Certainly your experience has shown that at least in your type of Rx, the Seemax is king. So you've got something to go on, which is rare. I envy you in that regard. Many times new products have to be flown by the seat of the pants, so to speak, until we get enough opinions to be able to say.


from what I heard the Fusio and NL5 are the exact same.  Just one has ICE and one has Alize.  The monomer for their 1.67 is the same too.

----------


## mlm

> The Seemax sounds like a great lens. I have not used it or tried it, because the Nikon reps in the past did not see like they wanted to do any business and thus never visited us. The new Nikon rep stopped by and kind of just blew the Seemax off to talk about the W. To me the Seemax sounds like it would be best suited for higher cyls. So probably anyone with a -1 to -4 cyl (since I doubt the availability would go higher than a -4) could notice the difference. I think it is a lens very similar to the Sola Vizio.


My cyl is -1.25 and -1.75 and I still noticed the difference.  Although, I'm probably pickier than the average consumer.  I haven't had the oppotunity yet to try any Sola or Hoya product.  (Just wait till I fall in love with yet another frame I don't really need :D)

----------


## pop9999

> My cyl is -1.25 and -1.75 and I still noticed the difference. Although, I'm probably pickier than the average consumer. I haven't had the oppotunity yet to try any Sola or Hoya product. (Just wait till I fall in love with yet another frame I don't really need :D)


 

Based on moderate myopia and cyl of -1.5 and -1.75, would the Seemax give much better peripherial vision than say the NL5? 
(I am assuming the NL5 and Essilor Fusio are not equivalent :D ).

----------


## Vanessa25

hello.
I am new to the site, and new to the world of optics as well. I was just surfing the web for information on the new lens Seemax. Like mlm, I have been choosen in my office to find out what I can about this lens so that I may give it a shot.

my Rx currently sits at :
OD -2.50-2.25x128
OS -2.75-2.25x053

as of now I am wearing a TL 1.67 Alize. I must admit, when I first put my glasses on I felt there was something seriously wrong, I almost felt sick. I found it odd because I can usually adapt very quickly to anything (I'm not picky or stingy... I know it's all in my head and usually have gotten use to it). I eventually did.

now, since the news of this new lens has come out the boss felt with my Rx that we should give this a try.

being the test subject is kinda fun. we'll see how things go, eh?

It will be interesting to see how much of the distortion around the edges will be minimized.

save meh! imma blinnnndddd! jk jk

----------


## MarcE

I know what N4 and N5 and TL 1.67 and Fusio and Vizio (and even Physio) are; but what is Seemax?

Material?
Index?
Atoric?
Coating?

Thanks a bunch

----------


## For-Life

Material? I think 1.67 only
Index? 1.67
Atoric? Yes
Coating? Nikon HCC and HCC ICE

It is a single vision atoric lens.  Very similar to the Vizio

----------


## curlyclaz

As you can see I am not from Canada but I hope you don't mind me adding my opinion. Over the last few years I think I have tried most lenses including nikon lite 4 and 5, essilors fusio and the nikon seemax and I feel the seemax is by far the best optically, very little distrortion which is great when looking at door frames as they do not bend and just better vision aith these than any other lens. I have also tried the hoya bi-aspheric lens and found this to excellent aswell.
my rx is
R -7.00/+2.25X102.5
L-7.50/+2.25X92.5

I have managed to upgrade a few people to this lens from 'standard' hi-index aspherics but not many, as previously commented it is hard to explain the difference without being able to show the Px. If anybody has found a  way that works without sounding like hard sell let me now.

----------


## mlm

Vanessa25,

Welcome to Optiboard!!  I'd be interested to hear your opinion on the Seemax lens once you've tried it, so please post back.


Curlyclaz,

I still believe that my Seemax glasses are optically the best pair I have.  (It's also a very nice Mikli frame that everyone calls my "librarian about to let loose" look  :Cool: )  I'm glad to hear that the lens works well for you too.

Our opticans present Seemax to patients as a lens that's custom made to their visual needs.  Almost everyone knows the irritation of peripheral distortion, and we use real-world descriptions like the stairs or the door frame.  Now that I'm back into full-time contact lens wear again, I keep the glasses at work so patients can look at them.  (Obviously it's useless for people to look through -8.00 with cyl, but somehow holding the glasses in their hands makes people take the matter more seriously.)  As well, many of our patients are the type of people who are really into new technology of any type.

Okay enough rambling.  Basically, it's going to be a hard sell to some patients because of cost.  But, we've dispensed Seemax to a handful of patients so far, and every single one of them is happy with their choice.

----------


## MarcE

I just noticed that I am in the Canadian forum. 
Do you know if the Seemax is available in the US?
Might it be named something else?
If not, would you compare it favorably to the Vizio?

----------


## tas

Again, very unscientific, but I've been wearing both the Seemax and the TL 1.67 (in two different frames of course!), and immediately notice less peripheral distortion with the Seemax.  When I go back to the Essilor TL 1.67, I am well aware of the peripheral distortion, HOWEVER, after several minutes of wear, I adapt back and don't notice the peripheral vision as much.  I am typically a very picky lens wearer (couldn't wear aspheric designs at all 10+years ago), and my rx doesn't have a lot of cyl (OD -6.00 -0.50x020, OS -5.75).  So, my initial reaction with the Seemax was very positive and is a great lens for those people who want the very best optics in a high index SV lens.

----------


## For-Life

> Again, very unscientific, but I've been wearing both the Seemax and the TL 1.67 (in two different frames of course!), and immediately notice less peripheral distortion with the Seemax.  When I go back to the Essilor TL 1.67, I am well aware of the peripheral distortion, HOWEVER, after several minutes of wear, I adapt back and don't notice the peripheral vision as much.  I am typically a very picky lens wearer (couldn't wear aspheric designs at all 10+years ago), and my rx doesn't have a lot of cyl (OD -6.00 -0.50x020, OS -5.75).  So, my initial reaction with the Seemax was very positive and is a great lens for those people who want the very best optics in a high index SV lens.


Sounds more like other factors playing the part.  I get a similar thing switching from frame to frame with same lens.

----------


## tas

I actually don't think it has anything to do with the frames- they are very similar (similar eye size/bridge size, sit with similar vertex distance)  I got them at the same time, with the same rx.  I just asked one of our opticians to check if Hoya or Essilor has a biaspheric lens, and I'll do another very unscientific comparison.  Again, I'm a definate type A person who is pretty picky with lenses and so far the Seemax provides me with the best overall vision.:cheers:

----------


## hershy

I was thinking about trying out the Seemax Hi-Index 1.74 but am torn between that and the Essilor. My rx is OD: -11 and OS: -11.5 so I need to go with the thiniest possible lens that is also durable. It seems most people here think tyhe Seemax is the one to use (though this thread is 3 years old ;)). Any newer thoughts?

----------


## VSTAR

Seemax is optically different from the other lenses mentioned. I have a patient with a high myopic Rx, I believe approx -8.00 . kept complaining of blurred vision with Nikon Nl% AS (1.74). Used Seemax 1.74 and patient reported a noticeable improvement. Just be careful with the AR - don't let the lens come into contact with heat when adjusting - fragile AR.

----------

