# Optical Forums > Progressive Lens Discussion Forum >  Seiko Supercede vs Succeed Internal Free-Form

## susu_k

Had anyone fit the Supercede and Succeed Lenses?  They are both Internal Free-Form Lenses, but why is there price different?  If I am fitting for a 20mm seg ht., which lenses should I go for?  Would Supercede better?

----------


## Fezz

Does Supercede, Proceed the Succeed?


:D

----------


## susu_k

The only different I know is that...

Superced Internal Free-Form has minimum fitting height of 14mm

Succeed Internal Free-From has minimum fitting height of 17mm

----------


## AWTECH

Fezz said:


> Does Supercede, Proceed the Succeed?


I think the difference has a great deal to do with the Seiko Optical marketing plans.  The Supercede is only available in Canada at this time.

It is presented a different lens design.  Differences in coridor lengths in the designs (approx. 1mm).  The way the add power is addressed.

When so few opticians know anything about one freeform design from a company it is very confusing to have multiple designs.

To work with individualized lenses you need to find a provider who can answer your questions about their designs so that they are properly fitted.  As with any PAL, poor fitting causes major problems.

----------


## Excalibur

We routinely use both designs, and they work very well. Supercede has a shorter minimum fitting ht.

----------


## Golfnorth

> Fezz said:
> 
> I think the difference has a great deal to do with the Seiko Optical marketing plans.  The Supercede is only available in Canada at this time.
> 
> It is presented a different lens design.  Differences in coridor lengths in the designs (approx. 1mm).  The way the add power is addressed.
> 
> When so few opticians know anything about one freeform design from a company it is very confusing to have multiple designs.
> 
> To work with individualized lenses you need to find a provider who can answer your questions about their designs so that they are properly fitted.  As with any PAL, poor fitting causes major problems.


I wear and use the Succeed lens....it is the best progressive lens that I've ever worn. Previously I have worn Panamic, Physio and Physio 360.
I have been told that the Superceed is even better than the Succeed. Apparently it's like having an extra +.25 add in your reading area it is so clear. 
I plan to have a pair to trial in the next few weeks.

Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## lensman2007

While Succeed is an excellent lens Supercede is absolute state of the art. Supercede has a totally compensated aspheric reading and intermediate area. It might be the best progressive lens in the market today.

----------


## Metronome

Delete this post.

----------


## lensman2007

Yes Succed is good, but Supercede is definately better. The reading and intermediate is vastily improved. Physio is a very good lens but not as good as Supercede, not even close. Because of the Seiko patent Essilor has to split the progressive between the front and back side. When the progressive is put strictly on the back the lens is far superior. That is why Seiko patented this technology about 15 years ago

----------


## drk

Yeah, Seiko's got the patent for back-side, Shamir's got the patent for the back-side, Rodenstock has the patent for the back side...I've heard them all.

----------


## lensman2007

But only Seiko is made in Canada. Im wearing Supercede and it is the best progreessive I have ever worn.

----------


## Metronome

Delete this post.

----------


## lensman2007

I am not sure about in the US but both designs are available in Canada. While Supercede is the best I have ever worn, Succeed is definately better than any conventional front side progressive. Succeed is less expensive so that would probably be the reason some dispensers use it.

----------


## AWTECH

Lensman2007 said:[QUOTE][That is why Seiko patented this technology about 15 years ago/QUOTE]

The US patent was issued in February of 2000, and Seiko-Epson filed for the US patent in 1997.

The patent still has a good deal of life left in it.  It is not 15 years old.  Seiko-Epson has been producing backside designed lenses for about 12 to 15 years.

drk said:


> Yeah, Seiko's got the patent for back-side, Shamir's got the patent for the back-side, Rodenstock has the patent for the back side...I've heard them all.


The fact is the Shamir patent is different than the Seiko-Epson patent and it was issued in 2003 I believe.

The First Issued US patent related to backside PALs with spherical front surfaces was granted to Seiko-Epson in 2000.  
drk- "Heard them all." And actually looking them up on at www.uspto.gov are two different methods of obtaining information.  A sales rep is probably relating what he has been told by his marketing department.

----------


## lensman2007

Being from Canada I am not aware of the US patent situation. But I am pretty sure that Seiko developed this technology in Japan in the early 1990's. Regardless, I have worn countless designs and these are far and above the best lenses I have ever worn.

----------


## AWTECH

lensman2007 said:


> Being from Canada I am not aware of the US patent situation.


You are correct, to my knowledge there are no patent problems with backside designs in Canada.  I guess large multi-national companies think in terms of protecting the largest markets and assume may of the smaller markets like Canada will follow.

----------


## susu_k

Doesn't back-side design affect the edges thickness of the lenses?

----------


## AWTECH

susu_k said:


> Doesn't back-side design affect the edges thickness of the lenses?


A good backside designed freeform lens does effect the edge thickness when compared to a traditional cast frontside lens.

Also of note to properly produce a freeform lens you must know how to manage the data that is used to make the calculations.  This means two labs offering the same freeform products could actually produces lenses with different edge thicknesses, but with the same basic lens design.

----------


## C-10

I see that seiko is supply by a indepent lab here in Canada but my question is What RF coating can you use on it?

----------


## Golfnorth

> I see that seiko is supply by a indepent lab here in Canada but my question is What RF coating can you use on it?


Any coating that you want although Plastic Plus has an ABE policy in place so they will recommend UTMC product....oh ABE = Anything But Essilor. lol

Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## For-Life

> Any coating that you want although Plastic Plus has an ABE policy in place so they will recommend UTMC product....oh ABE = Anything But Essilor. lol
> 
> Regards,
> Golfnorth


See that is the problem.  I have used UTMC and I have used CHC (as another lab we may know of pushes hard) and they do not stand up in the way that Crizal or Super Hi-Vision does.

It may be a good lens, but if I cannot trust the coating then it is worthless.

----------


## Golfnorth

> See that is the problem.  I have used UTMC and I have used CHC (as another lab we may know of pushes hard) and they do not stand up in the way that Crizal or Super Hi-Vision does.
> 
> It may be a good lens, but if I cannot trust the coating then it is worthless.


Please re-read my post. You can get ANY AR coating on the Seiko progressives. If asked for a recommendation Plastic Plus may mention the UTMC product first but that doesn't mean that you cannot get an Essilor coating. Plastic Plus' order forms have AR caotings listed from ALL companies Essilor included.
I hope this clarifies my earlier post.

Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## C-10

if plastic plus offers UMTC on the the lenses will they warranty a essilor coating on the lens

----------


## AutumN

I have been approached by one of our labs to an introductory deal for the seiko succeed. They are apparently purchasing the equipment to process the succeed on site and are offering a deal to a few opticals to introduce the lens. We have to commit to a min. of 10 prs a month and in return they will comp us back 50&#37;. While this is a yummy deal on the outside, it's not worth having 10 people a month coming back with issues. So, from what I'm hearing here, it sounds like the lens is worth the gamble, right?  Another thing I liked about it was that while it comes with AR, we can request it without.

----------


## lensman2007

It is a no brainer. You are being offered a state of the art lens with a huge discount. You will have virtually no dissatisfied patients with Seiko.

----------


## Golfnorth

> if plastic plus offers UMTC on the the lenses will they warranty a essilor coating on the lens


Yes of course they will warranty ANY coating on their lenses wether it's a flat-top or a free-form. Essilor, Nikon, UTMC....it doesn't matter....they will all be warranted. Do you have any other reservations?

Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## Golfnorth

> I have been approached by one of our labs to an introductory deal for the seiko succeed. They are apparently purchasing the equipment to process the succeed on site and are offering a deal to a few opticals to introduce the lens. We have to commit to a min. of 10 prs a month and in return they will comp us back 50&#37;. While this is a yummy deal on the outside, it's not worth having 10 people a month coming back with issues. So, from what I'm hearing here, it sounds like the lens is worth the gamble, right?  Another thing I liked about it was that while it comes with AR, we can request it without.


I agree with lensman...it really is a no-brainer. Switch all your Comfort and Panamic wearers and they will thank you and you will have your 10 per month no problem. There is no gamble here....get in on the ground floor!

Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## AutumN

Thanks guys, I'll be going for it.

----------


## fistkuen

Anyone please let me know. I am confused with the models.

Seiko Supercede = P-1EM ??
Seiko Succeed    = P-1SY ??
Seiko Proceed     = P-1G or P-1W ??

Many thanks

----------


## lensman2007

All products begining with "P" are available only in the Japanese domestic market. They are different than the products offered in North America. Hope this helps.

----------


## Digitaleye

Seiko has positioned the Supercede at a premium over Succeed because it provides a greater near area via a compensated power in the reading zone. It will fit down to a 15mm height and really shines in either short or high add power fits.

With a 20mm fit and a sub 3.00 add I would suggest Succeed. We have had a lot of success..no pun intended.

----------


## Golfnorth

> if plastic plus offers UMTC on the the lenses will they warranty a essilor coating on the lens


Yes they will warranty it.

Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## Golfnorth

> Seiko has positioned the Supercede at a premium over Succeed because it provides a greater near area via a compensated power in the reading zone. It will fit down to a 15mm height and really shines in either short or high add power fits.
> 
> With a 20mm fit and a sub 3.00 add I would suggest Succeed. We have had a lot of success..no pun intended.


I've got a 2.00 add and a height of 18 and 19 and was fitted with Supercede after wearing Succeeds. I like the Supercede's better. Great optics all around and a pleasure to wear.

Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## Digitaleye

Hello,

 I read an earlier post from you about positive experience with the Succeed. Can you characterise how the Supercede performs better? We manufacture Succeed and are currently in testing on some next generation designs. Share your patient feedback if possible and how you position the different designs to your customers. I thank you in advance for your feedback.

----------


## TLG

> Does Supercede, Proceed the Succeed?
> :D


Fezz,
I know this is an old post. I just came across it while researching the "*ceeds" to add to my site. REALLY FUNNY - even funnier that a couple of posts quoted it apparently without catching it - hilarious! :cheers:

----------


## Fezz

> Fezz,
> I know this is an old post. I just came across it while researching the "*ceeds" to add to my site. REALLY FUNNY - even funnier that a couple of posts quoted it apparently without catching it - hilarious! :cheers:




Thanks TLG!

Looks like my poor attempt at humor is finally appreciated!!!


:cheers::cheers::cheers:

----------


## Cherry Optical

> Essilor has to split the progressive between the front and back side.


I get a bit confussed as to exactly what Essilor/Varilux is doing with their Digital Direct Surfacing.  It is my understanding that they are simply using a semi-finished Physio (and now Ellipse) on a Schneider generator and polisher to create 360s.  The Schneider is producing extremly accurate sphere/cylinder/axis curves that requires very litte polishing but is doing nothing to create a truely 'free-form' progressive lens as the design has already been molded into the semi-finished blank.

There are only a few designs out there that actually cut the progressive design and Rx into the backside of a single vision semi-finished blank.

I may be wrong, but I believe the HOYA iD cuts on both sides of the lens... Am I wrong here?  Do any other lenses actually cut on both sides of the lens?

Anyone else have any thoughts?

Adam

----------


## AWTECH

You are correct the Hoya ID does cut both sides of the blank.  This does not in itself make it a better lens design than a backsurface design.

With surfacing both side you must surface one side first then align that first surface side in the exactly correct location to surface the other side and have them match.  If this is not controlled you will not have a lens produced as designed.  With back surface technology you get a lens design that is matched to the spherical front without any chance of surface blocking error.

Controlling the off axis errors is one key to a good design.

We choose backside PAL designs for a number of reasons, one of which was to be able to have a spherical front curve to match the frame in 90% of the Rx's produced.  This makes the best cosmetic solution. (no add sticking out at the bottom to deal with when edging.)

----------

