# Optical Forums > Progressive Lens Discussion Forum >  Problem with Panamic

## marslatte

Lately a large number of patients have been having problems with Varilux Panamic ( a lens which we have used to fit patients for the last 2 years, with out a problem).  Now a large majority of patients are non-adapts.  I don't know why.  We have checked Rx, seg ht, PD, the common things you would think of.  

Does anyone one know if they have changed the lens in any way?

At this point I want to stop using Panamic and start using another PAL, any suggestions on which one?

Thanks!

----------


## Golfnorth

> Lately a large number of patients have been having problems with Varilux Panamic ( a lens which we have used to fit patients for the last 2 years, with out a problem).  Now a large majority of patients are non-adapts.  I don't know why.  We have checked Rx, seg ht, PD, the common things you would think of.  
> 
> Does anyone one know if they have changed the lens in any way?
> 
> At this point I want to stop using Panamic and start using another PAL, any suggestions on which one?
> 
> Thanks!


The question I would ask you is are these problem patients presently wearing Panamic or are you switching them from another PAL? If so, which PAL are they wearing presently?


Regards,
Golfnorth

----------


## marslatte

Some patients are new PAL wearers.  Others were fitted in Ovation in previous years.  I was under the impression that Panamic was a better PAL, is this incorrect?

Thanks!

----------


## apaul

As far as I am aware Panamic has not been a succesful lens:(

----------


## marslatte

> As far as I am aware Panamic has not been a succesful lens:(


In that case should I continue using ovation?  And do you have any suggestions as to good PAL that has not given you trouble?

----------


## Happylady

I suggest you stick with the Ovation. The Panamic is "supposed" to be better but for many people it isn't.

----------


## Happylady

> In that case should I continue using ovation? And do you have any suggestions as to good PAL that has not given you trouble?


Have you ever had any problems with it? If not, stick with it. Try the Ellipse or Definity Short for smaller frames.

----------


## MarcE

my opinion:  Ovation was the best lens created by Essilor (including Varilux) at any price prior to Ellipse.

Another poster on the board stated that many people don't go from Ovation to other lenses very well.  We don't know why.

My own observations (and many other agree) is that a new wearer may do OK w/ Panamic.  But it is so super soft that previous PAL wearers don't like it.  They are already used to "harder" lenses.  Going soft for them is going backwards.  Don't go softer unless the patient is asking for it.

The consensus is that Panamic will go away.  Stop dispensing it now.

----------


## Chris Ryser

Actually every time you change lenses you usually do it with an increased addition. That makes a narrower progressive area, plus a larger area of distortion. This already needs a getting used to, because there is a difference from the old lenses.

If you switch them to another type the getting used to is even increased at this stage. It be preferable to stick to the same type lens they had before.

----------


## TLG

Marslatte,
Have you checked your pupillometer for accuracy? I once discovered one that measured every right eye at 33.5. Yeah, we had some non-adapts until discovered...

----------


## Barry Santini

> Marslatte,
> Have you checked your pupillometer for accuracy? I once discovered one that measured every right eye at 33.5. Yeah, we had some non-adapts until discovered...


Ditto for me too, until I discovered it..

Barry

PS: Maybe one of the *benefits* of Panamic has 'worn off". I distinctly remember that one of the original dispenser brochures from Varilux stated that Essilor studies showed that wearers of the new Panamic progressive lens recognized objects...(_wait for it_)....

_"0.25 seconds faster"_

FWIW

Barry

----------


## apaul

> Mars latte,
> Have you checked your pupillometer for accuracy? I once discovered one that measured every right eye at 33.5. Yeah, we had some non-adapts until discovered...


On the subject of pupilometers if the nose is wonky doesn't it throw the measurements off

----------


## cocoisland58

> On the subject of pupilometers if the nose is wonky doesn't it throw the measurements off


Assuming the frame will sitting on the wanky nose when all is said and done, no. 

And now for Panamic. The lens was not what they thought it would be and it is being phased out. Haven't used it since Ellipse came out myself.

----------


## Fezz

What could possibly be wrong with Panamic?

It was designed with "Global Design Management". That alone proves it is awesome. Right?



Sarcasm Mode=OFF!

----------


## bt5050

i have found the hard way also - 
I am not a big fan of the panamic myself - 

and forget about changing folks from the comfort or others into it - i have been told this right off the bat from our varilux rep - and this is one issue she was right on - 

I have had great success using the Accolade with almost all of my pts - ( maybe not the ellipse - or free form pts ) - but almost every other one - i have tried it with - 

isn't this lens  with in the ovation line ? i may be wrong - but recall reading this somewhere here - ? 

B

----------


## Robert Martellaro

> Actually every time you change lenses you usually do it with an increased addition.


Good point. That might explain some or almost all of the OP's problems. I found the change from a 1.25 to a 1.75 just as disconcerting as the original 1.25, and had to re-learn how to use my eyes all over again, primarily due to changes in the reading depth and depth of focus, on top of the increased distortion (boundary blur and swim/motion) that you mentioned.




> On the subject of pupilometers if the nose is wonky doesn't it throw the measurements off


Sometimes it does, and it's not always the nose, sometimes it's due to unequal nasal lens thickness interfering with the pad position. I use these measurements as a starting point, marking the lenses of the selected pre-adjusted frame, confirming that what I'm measuring is realistic and absolute.

What I would like to have is a high tech (a more versatile and accurate) version of the Grolman Fitting Device.

http://www.optiboard.com/forums/atta...7&d=1055783007

----------


## chip anderson

What monocular P.D.s are for is wonky noses.  Whether taken with a pupilometer or a ruler.    If you average them out, you ain't doin' da' job.

----------


## Pell

> Ditto for me too, until I discovered it..
> 
> Barry
> 
> PS: Maybe one of the *benefits* of Panamic has 'worn off". I distinctly remember that one of the original dispenser brochures from Varilux stated that Essilor studies showed that wearers of the new Panamic progressive lens recognized objects...(_wait for it_)....
> 
> _"0.25 seconds faster"_
> 
> FWIW
> ...


I think you need one or two less dots to represent 0.25 sec.....there.:bbg:

----------


## THE MEB

I was actually invited, and attended the introduction of the Panamic lens in Tampa. Essilor knows how to market and do it up right. 3 beautiful days in a ritzy hotel with a sunset view out the hotel window, they brought this dude in for one night of entertainment that drew huge pictures upside down and sideways, he made caricatures of famous people, like jimmy hendricks. They had gourmet food every day, and got in many CE courses at their expense. Had to sit through 3 days of boring frenchmen talking of double blind studies in france and illinois, comparing the design of the panamic as opposed to the comfort having more positive comments from every quadrant of the lenses. They made every attendant a new pair of panamic, which was delivered to us on the last day, was first only available in poly, what they later called Airwear,lol Anyway, I can remember comparing the new ones to the comfort I was presently wearing, and I immediately liked my comforts better, in every quadrant of vision. Upon my return, we always start off slowly until we get responses from our patient base, and I am glad we did. The response was negative then, and I have seen nothing to improve my thoughts of them since. real downer.

----------


## Bill Mahnke

Panamic - Its time to move on.

At the time Panamic was introduced there was great deal of concern about Johnson & Johnson entering the progressive lens market.  The marketing strategy at the time was strong; the idea was to flood the market with new products in an attempt to steal the thunder from Johnson and Johnson.  As a result some products (Panamic and others) may have been rushed to the market place and introduced before their time!  Of course we all know what happened to Johnson & Johnson.

----------


## apaul

Anyone actually know why this lens didnt work that well??:(

----------


## au

Maybe due to it is a extra-soft design, either distance, intermediate and near has not enough clear area than comfort. However people who complain comfort (esp 1st time wearer) will have totally different comment on panamic.
Sometimes if the comfort fit slightly lower than normal pt wil still be ok to do the reading. However panamic at same situation will have bad result due to it's design.

:cheers:

----------


## Freedom

I ever have problem same you ... au

In my opinion ... In new wearer should to used varilux comfort more than
varilux panamic because panamic is narrow visual field than comfort in all distance ... bacause panamic is more soft than comfort

Panamic is good for who is ever used economic PALs and upgrade to
panamic ... the patient will say this lens is comfortable.

----------


## xiaowei

> I ever have problem same you ... au
> 
> In my opinion ... In new wearer should to used varilux comfort more than
> varilux panamic because panamic is narrow visual field than comfort in all distance ... bacause panamic is more soft than comfort
> 
> Panamic is good for who is ever used economic PALs and upgrade to
> panamic ... the patient will say this lens is comfortable.


Hmm, I´m a bit confused here. Isn´t Panamic meant to be the higher-end lens compared to the Comfort, hence **more expensive**? At least the naming, that reminds of "panoramic", seems to imply you get a very wide field of view.

Also, what the width on the usual visual field is, IMHO depends on the viewer. It seems that many people are not so much disturbed by already considerable amounts of surface astigmatism, but much more by image distortion ("swim") and more sudden changes of aberrations. These people would consider a _"soft design"_ a design with a *wider* usuable field of view.

If you instead are picky with the width of the almost aberration free area and can live with more aberrations and distortion outside of that (like me), you really won´t like a very soft design and condiser a _"hard design"_ as the one with a *wider* field of view. 

I thought that the reason that many new presbyopes are likely of the first kind and you want to sell more PALs early in the lifecycle is one of the reasons for going "soft" of many companies.

----------


## chip anderson

The public and yes, us super intelligent optical experts often confuse the word "new" with the word "better."  We tend to believer that words, like _new_ and _improved._ Indicate a better product.   Many believe that _more expensive_ must be better.

Perhaps some day we get educated enough to be actually *smart*.

Chip

----------


## Freedom

xiaowei

If you see contour plot of panamic ... you will see it soft and smooth.
But it narrow of clear of vision area.

Which lens have less clear vision area ... that lens is more soft and more
comfort.

which lens have wide clear vision area ... that lens is wide vision field but
more distortion.

# clear vision area : the area that no have unwant astigmatism.

exsample
hard design ... is more clear vision area But more distortion
soft design ... is less clear vision area But less distorion
Advance soft design ... is little clear vision area But more comfortable.

In news wearer ... the first thing that he feel ... the visual field and comfort of vision 
People often mention blurriness and difficult transitions from one visual zone to the next.

For first driver ... everyone is difficult when will change to left or right
he will see the front mirror and see the side mirror

for old driver .... this is bread and butter ... feel natural easy easy

If who never drive truck ... he don't known ... the sedan can is soft.
If he never drive toyota vios ... he never know ... toyota camry is soft.

----------


## Freedom

In new wearer ... the first justment for lens is ... visual field
In old wearer .... the justment is change to ... the feeling of comfort

----------


## xiaowei

> In new wearer ... the first justment for lens is ... visual field


Exactly, but what is the "metric" that defines the limit of the visual field?

I&#180;m still not fully convinced, maybe I did not make my point clear enough:

New wearer: Low addition -> Low surface astigmatism anyhow, wearer is not yet used to move the head too much but will notice distortion (walking down stairs - I had a colleague with 1st PAL who switched back to bifocals because could not handle it) -> Softer design! (It is somehow surprising what amount of asigmatism non-nerdy people can ignore and will swear their glasses are "crisp" everywhere! But otherwise PALs would have never worked)




> In old wearer .... the justment is change to ... the feeling of comfort


How do you define "comfort"? 

Experienced PAL user: used to move head, high Adds, surface astigmatisms large and critical, but user can "handle" really bad zones, is not disturbed by distortion -> hard design!


_Attached:_

HOWEVER, and here I think we fully agree, there are some people (also new time wearers) who are more critical against surface astigmatism, and those will not be happy if the design is too soft (as probably Panamic)


Just my 0.02$

----------


## apaul

Essilor showed a sort of chart which compared the Panamic against the comfort ie better distance. reading. on a scale of 1 to 10
the Pamamic beat the comfort hands down
Alan

----------


## THE MEB

Alan, on first page of this thread you will see that I said basically the same thing, listening to boring frenchmen describing double blind studies that indicated better visual areas in all paramiters. Unfortunately, better is a very subject term, better for whom? Better for essilor becase they charged more for it than comfort. But the proof is in the wearing, and hands down, our patient base, as well as lens reps telling us, that Panamic was not accepted as "better" for the patients, compared to the comfort.

----------


## Happylady

> Alan, on first page of this thread you will see that I said basically the same thing, listening to boring frenchmen describing double blind studies that indicated better visual areas in all paramiters. Unfortunately, better is a very subject term, better for whom? Better for essilor becase they charged more for it than comfort. But the proof is in the wearing, and hands down, our patient base, as well as lens reps telling us, that Panamic was not accepted as "better" for the patients, compared to the comfort.


One thing I have heard about these two progressives is that the Comfort is very forgiving if it is a little off on the PD or height. The Panamic needs to be dead on. So in studies the Panamic might come out better because in the studies they make sure it is fit perfectly. In the real world progressives aren't always fit perfectly.

----------


## au

very agree with happylady !

I tried with a patient with everything the same except different design. The add is +2.25.

Even the frame slightly deformed, the reslt is different.

:drop:

----------


## Freedom

xiaowei

The new wearer in my mean is ... first time wearer
may be have 2.00 or 2.25 or 2.50 dioptor for addition

The old wearer in my mean is ... ever used PALs before change lens
because Rx change or addition change or lens is many scratch???

I define of comfort of vision is : when wearer PALs and look around
the lens is comfortable , less distortion and feel good ... 

for old wearer ... I found everyday when my patient receive new PALs ... 
esp ... freeform PALs   Pay more But Satify ... happiness you can see 555


DON'T change varilux comfort to varilux panamic for happy varilux comfort
wearer.

----------


## FSTAB

What are you guys thinking about the problems, with ordering progressive lenses to overseas lab, which their products are FDA approved and has good quality and competitive prices.
Shipping cost would be around $20-$30 per 0.5 Kg and receiving time should be a week.
Do you think it worth to try?
Another question, is there any idea or recommendation about the most resonable and organize RX lab around the country? 
How we can figure out which brand of progressive lenses is better for pationts?
What is your suggestions for those pationts who likes to buy inexpensive progressive lenses?
Sorry for too many questions and I would be appriciated for your kind replys. Thank you.

FSTAB

----------


## xiaowei

> xiaowei
> The new wearer in my mean is ... first time wearer
> may be have 2.00 or 2.25 or 2.50 dioptor for addition


Au, I see. If you consider a "_typical_" 1st time wearer as one that starts with 2.50 add!(? :Eek: ?), then I fully agree, because we are talking about the same problems.

However, today, at least here in Germany, eyecare with usually suggest to start early with .75 or 1.00 add to get used to PALs. I think that is more likely the application where a soft design like Panamic is made for. Just my idea.

----------


## Robert Martellaro

> One thing I have heard about these two progressives is that the Comfort is very forgiving if it is a little off on the PD or height. The Panamic needs to be dead on.


Right. The Panamic design was optimized to provide particularly good binocular vision, I suspect primarily to offset the decreased FOV caused by the very soft design, not an easy task considering the moderate corridor length. The downside is that you need to fit it precisely.    




> So in studies the Panamic might come out better because in the studies they make sure it is fit perfectly. In the real world progressives aren't always fit perfectly.


In my market, I rarely see better than +/- 2mm, usually combined with poor frame positioning (high and out). If I was designing a PAL for the mass market, I would make damn sure that the design was _extremely_ forgiving.




> Hmm, I´m a bit confused here. Isn´t Panamic meant to be the higher-end lens compared to the Comfort, hence **more expensive**? At least the naming, that reminds of "panoramic", seems to imply you get a very wide field of view.


I didn't notice any remarkable differences in FOV between the two, maybe a little more distance peripheral blur with the _Panamic_. However, it sure was nice to be able to order (five years ago) a +2.50 distance +2.25 Add, competently designed, moderate length corridor PAL for a drill mount, and get it on a +5.50BC instead of the Comforts +7.50 or +8.00.

----------


## au

Xiaowei, 
the problems for those 1st time wearer with add 225 or 250, mostly they think or hear their friend say PAL is dizzy. In that case, the panamic will have a more significance result than comfort, however 1 year later they will complain the reading area is too small.  This is about the design ! 

Sometimes due to the frame deformation. The Pal become "no good". Pt always complain the reading is not good enough due to long corridor.

About this problems (prevent 1st time wearer with add 200 or over) , HOYA launch a PAL with add0.88 and ESSILOR launch anti-fatigue lens, which is suggesting the more earily to tried the PAL, better will be the result.

:cheers:

----------


## xiaowei

> Xiaowei, 
> the problems for those 1st time wearer with add 225 or 250, mostly they think or hear their friend say PAL is dizzy. In that case, the panamic will have a more significance result than comfort, however 1 year later they will complain the reading area is too small. This is about the design !


Au, I see:D, actually you are now supporting my in initial point:):)!

I personally do not think that an extra-soft design is good even for first timers, because it´s a bad compromise, but many customers will initially
prefer one, as you write too. That´s IMHO the reason why the PAL industry is "going soft". Clearly, after some adaption, a now more experienced wearer with considerable add will notice that the (relatively) distortion free area in the soft PAL is not really as crisp as it could be and complain, so he should better be fitted with a harder design from the begin on.

(If I would be a bad guy, I would say that if the complaint comes after after any "free remake period" has expired, it´s better for the industry (and the optician), because they can sell new glasses, but I wont´say that.... :Rolleyes:  :Rolleyes: )

P.S. I plan to again travel to China this August/September and this time very likely also to HK, maybe we really could 一起去玩儿，下馆子，喝啤酒，好不好？
:cheers:

----------


## Jamelina

> In that case should I continue using ovation? And do you have any suggestions as to good PAL that has not given you trouble?


I've not had very good luck with the Ovation.  The Ovation was the only PAL available at my last job and I had too many non-adapts.

I started working with the Definity and don't get any complaints from patients.

----------


## Happylady

> I've not had very good luck with the Ovation. The Ovation was the only PAL available at my last job and I had too many non-adapts.
> 
> I started working with the Definity and don't get any complaints from patients.


You must have worked at Costco, I think it is the only one they use. What did you do when someone couldn't adapt to it and had been happy with their old progressive? Did you refund or switch them to a flat top? 

I fitted a friend who has VSP with Definity Short. She wanted another pair a couple of months later but didn't want to spend the money. So I used Ovation. I fit it at 16 1/2. She likes it better then the Definity Short. I was surprised.

I haven't had any problems with Ovation but I don't use it a lot.

----------


## Jamelina

> You must have worked at Costco, I think it is the only one they use. What did you do when someone couldn't adapt to it and had been happy with their old progressive? Did you refund or switch them to a flat top? 
> 
> I fitted a friend who has VSP with Definity Short. She wanted another pair a couple of months later but didn't want to spend the money. So I used Ovation. I fit it at 16 1/2. She likes it better then the Definity Short. I was surprised.
> 
> I haven't had any problems with Ovation but I don't use it a lot.


Yea, I worked at Costco.  When we had someone who wasn't happy with it we would change them in to another lens style at no charge. Or, if they wanted a refund so they could go somewhere else to try a different PAL we did that instead.

----------


## Happylady

> Yea, I worked at Costco. When we had someone who wasn't happy with it we would change them in to another lens style at no charge. Or, if they wanted a refund so they could go somewhere else to try a different PAL we did that instead.


So you couldn't change them to another progressive if they had worn a different progressive before? Did patients get upset about that?  I would hate to only be able to fit one progressive. Costco sure sells them cheap, though.

What % would you say were non adapts?

----------


## Jamelina

> So you couldn't change them to another progressive if they had worn a different progressive before? Did patients get upset about that? I would hate to only be able to fit one progressive. Costco sure sells them cheap, though.
> 
> What % would you say were non adapts?


No we didn't have access to any other progressives.  I didn't have too many people get mad.  I think they were dissapointed though.  I just don't think it's logical to use only one-like one size fits all.  They're definitely inexpenseive...but at the same time I feel like you get what you pay for.  Not to talk bad about Costco it's a great company.  I'm really not sure what percentage we had that were non-adapts.  It wasn't the majority, but I feel like most could have been prevented with the option of different PAL's.

----------


## Happylady

> No we didn't have access to any other progressives. I just don't think it's logical to use only one-like one size fits all. They're definitely inexpenseive...but at the same time I feel like you get what you pay for. I feel like most could have been prevented with the option of different PAL's.


But the reason Costco can sell progressives for such extremely cheap prices is because they sell just one and get it in such quantities that they pay much less for it then private doctors do.

It makes it easy for the opticians, too. No thinking about which progressive to use. ;)

How is the AR they use there?

----------


## DAKIZE1969

Personally, I have never liked the Panamic. I too switched Comfort wearers into Panamic when it first arrived only to find most did not prefer their new lens.  It was only after several months after it's release did a Varilux rep tell me that we probably shouldn't be switching our patients after all.  Maybe they knew someting then, I don't know.  However fast-forward to the relaunch of Definity under Essilor, I find out that Panamic had a flaw in the design...you had to be absoulutely perfect when fitting it.  The panamic design did not allow for any error.  Definity and Physio have "human error" factor built in, meaning you can be off 1 to 1.5 mm in PD (per eye) and the patient should not know the difference.  With Panamic, however, this is not factored in and percision is a must.

----------


## Jamelina

> But the reason Costco can sell progressives for such extremely cheap prices is because they sell just one and get it in such quantities that they pay much less for it then private doctors do.
> 
> It makes it easy for the opticians, too. No thinking about which progressive to use. ;)
> 
> How is the AR they use there?


It's the old school coating.  They haven't started with Crizal or anything yet.  Right before I left we had gotten a brochure talking about how it was built into the lens, but the coating was still going bad.  It is a great place to buy childrens glasses...inexpensive because children are so much harder on glasses by nature :hammer:

----------


## Scott R

Always prefered the comfort and now the physio or ellipse. As of late I have had a lot of success with hoya products. Just wish they had more polarized options.

----------


## THE MEB

Hoya products are the best overall, IMO  But your discussion about costco only having one progressive reminded me of when I managed a chain store 28 years ago. They had only one progressive as well, which we didn't know which one it was for years. Turned out it was the EZ2VU blended bifocal,lol Glad I have been with an independant doc for over 20 years now. they allow us to decide which progressive to sell to the patient.

----------


## calirider07

I am not a fan of the panamic at all! It (in my opinion) is very sensitive to vertex dist. and panto....You almost have to hit it right in the head. Panamic is actually older technology. We have substituted it for the Physio and it is having pretty good results. Also, the Hoya ECP is a good one. As far as a good older style, We use the Sola Percepta 85% of the time with very few remakes!

----------


## MarcE

> No we didn't have access to any other progressives. I didn't have too many people get mad. I think they were dissapointed though. I just don't think it's logical to use only one-like one size fits all. They're definitely inexpenseive...but at the same time I feel like you get what you pay for.


Many non-adapts and dissappointments.  At $99 or whatever Costco charges, how many others out there do you suppose didn't bother complaining?  In a small town like mine this is a good way to destroy your business in 2 yrs. - regardless of what you charge.  Guess that's why there is no Cosco around here.  There's only a limited number of patients to "disappoint"

Take the patient out of an XL into ovation = problems
Fit an ovation at 15mm = problems
take the hyperope out of VIP glass into poly ovation = problems
The way I fit ovations every day = no problems

----------


## specs4you

Unless a pt. is happy.....and I usually question in my mind if they are just happy people in general, I won't go down the road of Panamic anymore.
I prefer Definity.  Course that was when I was employed till 4 sad weeks ago!  Anyone know of any work in the S.F. Bay area?  Help!!!! I am "the" only breadwinner, now my bread is moldy..... :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:

----------


## mahmoud.hamza

> Lately a large number of patients have been having problems with Varilux Panamic ( a lens which we have used to fit patients for the last 2 years, with out a problem).  Now a large majority of patients are non-adapts.  I don't know why.  We have checked Rx, seg ht, PD, the common things you would think of.  
> 
> Does anyone one know if they have changed the lens in any way?
> 
> At this point I want to stop using Panamic and start using another PAL, any suggestions on which one?
> 
> Thanks!


In our comtry Tunisia essilor stopped selling panamic because Of the bad feed bac Of this lens .

----------


## chip anderson

I recently (two weeks ago) attended an Essilor sponsored continueing education class.  Not once in 4 hours did they mention panamic unless asked.  The constantly referred to the comfort as being the best progressive ever designed.  New lenses are being called comfort improvements.
Appearentlly even Essilor doesn't think much of the Panamic design anymore.  I wish some of thier very high index materials were available in comfort.

Chip

----------


## THE MEB

is  1.67 not high enough for ya? I am pretty sure I have made comforts in 1.67 before.

----------


## vallieo

I ALSO HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH PANAMIC, AND HAVE LEARNED IF A 
PATIENT COMES IN WEARING OVATION-I LEAVE THEM IN AN OVATION. :Eek:

----------


## Bobie

After I have been fitting many thousand pairs of Panamic from 2000 to 2004 , my conclusion are at below ;

1. Panamic is dynamic PALs that working good for wearer who are more active and move their head more than their eyes when looking at pheripheral. But if wearer have eyes movement more than head movement , Comfort will work better.
2. Panamic is soft design PALs that working good for hyperope up to SPH. +2.00D ADD +2.00

3. Panamic is not recommended for happy Comfort's wearer http://www.pinnacleoptical.com/docum...luxPanamic.pdf

4. Panamic is working quite good for anisometropia less than 1.00D

5. Panamic and Comfort are about the same for overall performance , some presciption Comfort better and some Panamic better , but if Panamic more expensive , Comfort will be much more value if compare about US$ per overall performance.

6. Panamic working quite poor for wearer who have VA less than 20/25

7. Panamic working better in day time and performance will drop in night time , especially in case that pupil smaller than 3 mm.

8. Every free form PALs are much better than Panamic in any presciption.

9. Panamic have flatter base curve than Comfort about 1 D and completely differenct design and work differently.

10. Comfort have total better quality of vision than Panamic at all distance.

11. Panamic have total better comfortable of vision than Comfort.

12. Panamic is suitable for sport more than Comfort.

13. If you sell Panamic more expensive than Comfort to Comfort wearer, do not give any guaranteed that Panamic better than Comfort.

----------

