# Optical Forums > Progressive Lens Discussion Forum >  Computer Lenses?

## tconrad

What computer lenses are you having the most success with? We have tried the Sola Access, Zeiss Business and RD, and a couple of others and have had limited sucess. Is it just better to split the add and put them in a regular progressive?

----------


## Fezz

I have been using SV or FTs with great success!

----------


## au

Maybe the position of the computer and chair will have significance effect on the wearers, a proper way should works, the monitors + higher chair ?

I use shamir office for heavy computer workers, intermediate + near use hoya Tact, they both ok.

:cheers:

----------


## Happylady

I have had good success with Sola Access.

----------


## rbaker

> I have been using SV or FTs with great success!


To which I would add Executives.

----------


## HarryChiling

And of course we shoud free form those FT and Execs. :D

----------


## Refractingoptician.com

> And of course we shoud free form those FT and Execs. :D


Yes, but only the edges at the bottom for near vision or the temporal edges for peripheral enhancement of the ellipsoid .

----------


## Freedom

*You can used ... every brand of same product type.*

*If you understand ...*

*1. your customer need*

*2. your product*
*    2.1 degression of power ... for each product*
*    2.2 minimum fitting high ... for each product*
*    2.3 Power range ... for each product*

----------


## Robert Martellaro

> What computer lenses are you having the most success with? We have tried the Sola Access, Zeiss Business and RD, and a couple of others and have had limited sucess. Is it just better to split the add and put them in a regular progressive?


My clients prefer the latter if it's for frequent use on a large screen desktop monitor, at a distance of at least 22", with the center of the screen at or about ten degrees below eye level. The field of clear and stable vision will be better at the screen distance, and you will be able to adjust the power to exactly match the wearer's work distances. 

Segmented multifocals provide the largest fields, especially for the desktop distance. However, most existing PAL wearers find the line disruptive, and will prefer the PAL design, including many if not most of those who have near work spread out across the entire width of the desk!

----------


## drk

> The field of clear and stable vision will be better at the screen distance


I'm always interested in what's going on in your head, Robert.

I think you are saying that in some NVF lenses, the power changes in the visual zones are significant enough that they become "touchy"...tilt your head a little and a half-diopter of plus can come or go.

Some of the NVFs seem to be like giant progressive corridors running the length of the lens...extra long and extra wide, but never the same power anywhere.

I think this comes from the design flaw of trying to "do too much", that is, trying to regress/progress from 40 cm to 10 M or more. 

That's why I use the Sola Access...it's beautifully Neanderthal...large computer zone, large near zone...can't see for squat outside your cubicle.

Robert, which overplussed progressive have you utilized for these computer jobs? Solamax?  It has a lot of good qualities...cheap, wide, soft.

----------


## THE MEB

I bet the Sola XL, or its called The Boss at half the price at 3 Rivers, would be a great computer lens too. I say that because I did a lot of research to find out what lens would be best to use for someone who reads a lot of Japanese, that's up and down reading for the unknowing. Anway, I had her in a comfort and 2 other progressives through the years unsuccessfully, until I came across the XL. I put the centers about 2mm above center of pupil, and she does fantastic.
   BTW, I too wear the sola access to do lab work,including putting jobs on the computer, and have to switch over to my gt2's when I go into the dispensary.

----------


## Robert Martellaro

> I'm always interested in what's going on in your head, Robert.


Well, thanks. It sure is nice to have a forum where so many different ideas can be exchanged, or as Rod Serling would say- "submitted for your approval". 




> I think you are saying that in some NVF lenses, the power changes in the visual zones are significant enough that they become "touchy"...tilt your head a little and a half-diopter of plus can come or go.


Right, both up and down as well as right and left. 12" monitors twenty degrees down have been replaced with wide screen 24" monitors at eye level, somtimes with two monitors side by side. 




> Some of the NVFs seem to be like giant progressive corridors running the length of the lens...extra long and extra wide, but never the same power anywhere.


They're not extra wide where it counts-  at, or slightly below eye level. Moreover, they're usually too strong at this height (sometimes too weak) for the typical 24" to 26" monitor distance.




> I think this comes from the design flaw of trying to "do too much", that is, trying to regress/progress from 40 cm to 10 M or more.


Some even have distance vision, the best being Hoya's Tact and AO's Technica. Short of using a 60% trifocal (if you can still get them), these lenses are the only solution if you have a monitor on your desk, _and_ need to see distance, albeit with a slight drop of the chin.





> That's why I use the Sola Access...it's beautifully Neanderthal...large computer zone, large near zone...can't see for squat outside your cubicle.


The Access ("The optics of occupational progressive lenses" -Sheedy and Hardy) has a very wide near, about 45mm wide with a +2.50 Add (.50 DC limits) at 15mm below the straight ahead gaze, but only 6mm wide on-axis and 7mm at 5mm below. Moreover, the intermediate power of +2.00 and 2.25 respectively, is _much too strong_, unless the monitor is a very close 19" or so.  




> Robert, which overplussed progressive have you utilized for these computer jobs? Solamax? It has a lot of good qualities...cheap, wide, soft.


Most any PAL that has a generous distance zone. I like the Genesis, but if I need a .75 Add instead of a +1.00 Add, or a flatter curve, I'll use the ECP from Hoya.

----------


## Ginster

is my lens of choice never have had anyone come back, my Husband loves them as well, His job puts him on a computer all 8 Hr's of his work day. he say's the Access is ok but he notices a more wider field of midrange with the Office Lens.vme:)

----------


## calirider07

My office uses the Shamir Office with great success! I even use a blended 28 for some patients and they have reported that it works well also...just dont forget  the panto!

----------


## gvincent8

We have had good luck with access and RD (when it's not on b/o) also Nexyma by Rodenstock. There is a 40 and an 80. 40cm distance focus and 80cm distance focus. Hoya TACT is really nice too. I personally like the idea of SV when feasible.

----------


## THE MEB

the rd is the one that has worked for us the LEAST. Speaking of Rodenstock though, I ordered an old rodenstock design uncut lens we used to sell, the life c, and the lab told me that they had heard rodenstock was going under. Anyone heard that rumor? As it turned out, rodenstock no longer makes molded lenses -,ie: life c, so I called rodenstock and they told me a lens of theirs that was interchangable. I didn't ask them if they were going out of business.

----------


## optigrrl

> the rd is the one that has worked for us the LEAST. Speaking of Rodenstock though, I ordered an old rodenstock design uncut lens we used to sell, the life c, and the lab told me that they had heard rodenstock was going under. Anyone heard that rumor? As it turned out, rodenstock no longer makes molded lenses -,ie: life c, so I called rodenstock and they told me a lens of theirs that was interchangable. I didn't ask them if they were going out of business.


Friend of mine just accepted a position there and said that they are breathing new life into Rodenstock. I think you will see more of a presence from them than there has been in a long time.

As for computer lenses, Shamir Office was never a success for me - maybe I just didn't understand the product well enough. Sola Access was good and I mostly used the Varilux Liberty and split the add because of the wide vision above and below the 180. I typically asked those patients who spent great amounts of time on a computer to measure the distance between themselves and the monitor before getting a refraction and then had them position my laptop about where their computer was so I could see the angle they were viewing the screen from before measuring the seg.

----------


## Andrew Weiss

I've used FTs, Shamir Office and Zeiss RD all with reasonable success.  The RD has a very long corridor and is sometimes easier for the computer user than the Office.  If you know how to manipulate the add/digression, you can get either lens to work for either desk-work (4 feet out max) or office-work (10 feet out max).  To work properly, the RD needs a very deep frame, at least 25mm down from center pupil.  The Office can get away with 18mm down from center pupil and 13mm up.  

I like Robert's suggestion to use a general-use progressive and may try that.

----------


## MarcE

> I like Robert's suggestion to use a general-use progressive and may try that.


If you are going to use a progressive, many are priced quite a bit higher than the computer lenses.  You also need one with a wide intermediate.  SolaMax and XL were mentioned and I think those are good choices.  But still more expensive than computer lenses (except the Boss at TRO).

I think many clients just don't get the computer lens concept.  I enjoyed mine.  I think it is a better choice for the full presbyope (>2.00 add) to use a computer lens as opposed to a FT because there are multiple focal lengths.

----------


## gvincent8

We sell a decent amount of their Life2 and LifeXs, along with the Nexyma. They are distributed through Optical Distribution Copr., out of Ohio. They have a free from called MyView as well.  I have not heard anything about them going out of business.

----------


## Robert Martellaro

> If you are going to use a progressive, many are priced quite a bit higher than the computer lenses. You also need one with a wide intermediate


Mark,

The intermediate is of little consequence; the distance portion of the PAL is powered to provide the best vision for the screen distance. 

Andrew,

Here's a tip- set the FC no higher than the middle of the bottom third of the screen.

----------


## Andrew Weiss

> Andrew,
> 
> Here's a tip- set the FC no higher than the middle of the bottom third of the screen.


Thank you. :)

----------


## vallieo

I Use Sv Or Shamir Office Only!!! For 2 Years With No Problems!

----------


## AdmiralKnight

I'm not a fan of any office lens personally. I don't like that they use modified prescriptions. Modified in a way that I have no idea how to check the rx. So I don't bother with them. If the person really wants a PAL, I'll just use a short corridor lens with the intermediate on top.

----------


## fvc2020

> I'm not a fan of any office lens personally. I don't like that they use modified prescriptions. Modified in a way that I have no idea how to check the rx. So I don't bother with them. If the person really wants a PAL, I'll just use a short corridor lens with the intermediate on top.


 
The office lens is very easy to check in.  All you do is read the reading.  Those are shamirs instructions.  It's a shame that you gave up so easily.  We do alot of this lens and in almost five years I have had only one non adapt.

christina

----------


## AdmiralKnight

Sure you can tell what the reading is, and that'd be fine if they were reading glasses. They're not though. Maybe I'd trust them more if I understood, or even KNEW the formula they use to figure out the intermediate portion, but I don't. I don't like having that many unknowns when it comes to what I dispense.

----------


## THE MEB

we started off with sola/zeiss rd's for computer lens, but we have found that the office and access work better, and you don't have to have minumum 24 seg hieght, like on rd. Also, the designs of the office and access are much simpler, and subsequently more effective more often than the rd.

----------


## chip anderson

Admiral:  Formula:  1/2 the add power works fine every time.

----------


## AdmiralKnight

Then every single office lens I've used has been wrong, because that's not what we get. That's my problem with them. The reading will be fine, but If I check the intermediate portion the same way I would as if I made them (half the add, added to the distance) It's not the same. I've seen them off by three quarters of a Diopter! No thanks.

----------


## THE MEB

like they said previously, the only way you can properly check an office lens is by checking the total reading power at the bottom of the lens. everywhere else on the lens there is no exact formula to check the proper power. Office is not alone in that regard, there are several, including the sola access that is the same as far as checking power is concerned.

----------


## AdmiralKnight

That's my point. There should be no reason you can't check the intermediate power. As far as I know, half the add, added onto the distance is pretty much the norm when making intermediate specs. And more often than not, this is the area people are going to be looking through the most, so why can't you check the power? Why is every single lens using a different formula? I don't like trusting the companies to the point where I'll just assume they're right.

----------


## Robert Martellaro

> That's my point. There should be no reason you can't check the intermediate power. As far as I know, half the add, added onto the distance is pretty much the norm when making intermediate specs.


Closer to 60% for the average desktop monitor distance.




> And more often than not, this is the area people are going to be looking through the most, so why can't you check the power? Why is every single lens using a different formula?


 There's no formula per se, but they do specify the degression/power shift (the power shift is close to or equal to the Add power in some designs). The problem here is that the power shift is over the entire vertical field, or Xmm above and below the pupil, and as you have stated, there is no way to know what the power will be where it's most important- when looking at the monitor.

----------


## NOVUS2

I've used sola access for years and haven't had any complaints.
Only disadvantages over a lined bifocal are the minimum fit ht (15), and only 2 add's are available .75 and 1.25

I've tried gradal rd but seem to have problems with getting an accurate rx from the lab??

----------


## Christosfer

I have had to do some searching on several occassions in regards to computer lenses. I have done well with access and office. 

Access has done well. Continuum seems to be the aspheric eqivalent.
Office will give a little more range.
RD is better for someone who needs to see across the conference table.

----------


## KStraker

> *You can used ... every brand of same product type.*
> 
> *If you understand ...*
> 
> *1. your customer need*
> 
> *2. your product*
> *    2.1 degression of power ... for each product*
> *    2.2 minimum fitting high ... for each product*
> *    2.3 Power range ... for each product*


I agree 100%. We use Concord Desktop.

Standard formula for surfacing should be:1. Use bifocal from standard Rx to choose appropriate degression. 2. Add sphere power to bifocal power to find total near power. 3. Subtract the degression from the total near power. 4. Surface this power as you would a sv lens. (the lens design does the rest)

If I'm wrong,I'm sure someone will chime in.

----------


## Bobie

Hi, everyone
After I have been fitting more than 500 pairs of Impression 80 , I dare to said that , if your customer ever try Individual Free Form Super Computer Lenses like Rodenstock Impression 80 , they will not like any other computer lenses anymore.

The only one weak point of Impression 80 is available only in CR-39. 

I have a lot of customers who would like to pay 3,500 US$ for Impression 80 in index of 1.76.

----------


## Bill Mahnke

No modified prescriptions... 

That's one of the nice things about the (HOYA) TACT.  It's available in 9 add powers (+1.00 to +3.00), so you get the power you want.

----------


## Bobie

Impression 40 and Impression 80 is a individual free form of 40,000 million designs occupational PALs that design by addition 0.25D step from ADD 1.25D up to ADD 3.00D and design by corneal vertex distance 0.01D step.

Hoyalux TACT are semi-finish occupational PALs that have only one design and the widest zone of TACT is even narrow than the narrowest of Impression 40 and 80.

The happy TACT wearer will be very happy on Impression 40 and Impression 80 , but Impression 40 / 80 wearer are unhappy with TACT.

Advance Progressive Addition Lenses Club has been testing with many thousands of wearer on trial frames and we have more than 100 different design trial sets of PALs and Occupational PALs that one wearer can test 100 different designs of PALs and Occupational PALs in their own prescription to compare page by page , second by second , screen by screen.

For professional dispensing optician or OD who would like to learn how to set up trail PALs , we will charge 5,000 US$ per day.


From : 
*The optics of occupational progressive lenses*
*James E. Sheedy, O.D., Ph.D. and Raymond F. Hardy, B.S.*

----------


## MarySue

I have heard alot about Shamir - that's a Younger lens is it not?  I don't think it's available here in New Zealand, however I'd love to look at the specifications of the lens.  

I currently use the Hoya ID Cliard, Rodenstock Impression series, and the occassional Nikon Webb when required.  

I find that the key in working with an occupational is to sell it to the client in it's true form, and not try to give distance vision by manipulating the shift or add powers.  

Perfect world - Progs, Occupationals, and RX Sunnies - contacts for the weekend, and hey - throw in a back up of each!

:cheers:



> My office uses the Shamir Office with great success! I even use a blended 28 for some patients and they have reported that it works well also...just dont forget the panto!

----------


## au

Hi Marysue, check this up,

http://www.shamirlens.com/

hope this help !

:cheers:

----------


## chip anderson

Are computers know'd to emit any form of radiation that UV would protect against?  Or was the good doctor just trying to make another 20 bucks when he checked UV on an Rx for a pair of SV computer lenses?

Chip

----------


## MarySue

Thanks - I've sent them an email to see if they sell in New Zealand (can't really see where they do, but someone may have a relationship with the company here.

----------


## Laurie

Hello,

I am in communication with the people at Shamir as an education consultant...while I am not involved with their day-to-day activities, I will also forward the post to their headquarters in San Diego.

: )

Laurie

----------


## Caree

I am a natural mono vision,go figure. My ONLY vision need is my computer distance. I have a 19" LCD about 30" away. I LOVE my Business 10. I can see all my insurance notes along my countertop edge and look over them for outside the window. It is comfortable walking around indoors,as in I don't feel I'm blind,just a little blurry. I have remade Shamir Office wearers into this lens,and they all feel the entire top is clear,not aware of any "corridor" and swear it is a SV lens that they can see 36"-12" with, which we all know, ain't so. 'Tis my lens of choice, I only wish there were more DP's to choose from like the Office lens.

----------


## Bobie

LENSES DESIGNED FOR VDU/OFFICE USEPeter Sanders examines the variety of dispensing roles for these lenses.
From : http://www.abdo.org.uk/pdfs/CET%2010.pdf
Download PDF : lenses_designed_for_VDU-Office_use.pdf ( 90 KB )

----------


## au

Bobie, good post, we are doing the right jobs, to make people feel easier and happier in their life !

:cheers:

----------


## adirondackeye

We use the Nikon Online, no problems.

----------


## THE MEB

has anyone used the Zeiss Business lens. a patient who lives 3 hours away has the gradal rd. he is convinced the opthamologist told him he needed a zeiss lens. We have a zeiss chart that shows the usable area of different lenses ie: progressives, gradal rd, zeiss business, and ft28. Anyway, the chart indicates the Business lens has a much wider channel of usable vision than the gradal rd. Is this the case? He has a +3.00 add with a sphere stength of +.75 which means if he goes with the Business lens he would need to go with the business 15 instead of the 10.

----------


## Bobie

The world best hi-end individual free form computer lenses for SPH. + 0.75D ADD 3.00D = Impression 80 at retail price 800 US$The world thinest hi-end free form computer lenses for SPH. + 0.75D ADD 3.00D  = TOKAI BS LARGO Type 1 plastic 1.71 ABBE 34 at retail price 1,400 US$ per pair.I am waiting for Impression 80 plastic 1.71 at retail price 2,200 US$ per pair.:bbg:

----------


## THE MEB

that all sounds very impressive, but it's not going to help me any. I need to find out about the zeiss business lens, thank you.

----------


## DragonLensmanWV

> Are computers know'd to emit any form of radiation that UV would protect against?  Or was the good doctor just trying to make another 20 bucks when he checked UV on an Rx for a pair of SV computer lenses?
> 
> Chip



There was a scare going around years ago about monitors and UV. People were saying that because they spent all day in front of a monitor and they had headaches and eyestrain, there must be Evil Radiation coming from the monitors. Trouble was, objective tests showed no more UV than any fluorescent light, indeed not as much as most. Turns out these people were having problems because they had around 30,000 more eye movements a day than others not in front of the monitors. Of course, LED monitors emit zero UV.
And we don't charge extra for UV, as it's inherent in any lens we now sell.Of course that doesn't stop one practice in town here charging $50 each for UV filter and hard coat on Transitions. They probably do the same on poly. :Mad:

----------


## Metronome

> that all sounds very impressive, but it's not going to help me any. I need to find out about the zeiss business lens, thank you.


Delete..

----------


## Metronome

> That's my point. There should be no reason you can't check the intermediate power. As far as I know, half the add, added onto the distance is pretty much the norm when making intermediate specs. And more often than not, this is the area people are going to be looking through the most, so why can't you check the power? Why is every single lens using a different formula? I don't like trusting the companies to the point where I'll just assume they're right.


Delete.

----------


## KStraker

> I agree 100%. We use Concord Desktop.
> 
> Standard formula for surfacing should be:1. Use bifocal from standard Rx to choose appropriate degression. 2. Add sphere power to bifocal power to find total near power. 3. Subtract the degression from the total near power. 4. Surface this power as you would a sv lens. (the lens design does the rest)
> 
> If I'm wrong,I'm sure someone will chime in.



Someone sent me a PM about how this is done, but I must have deleted it accidently. Here's an example: First, I look at my chart and see which degression is recomended for the patient's add power. The chart also shows the max useable distance vision of the lens(considering the degression). For a+2.25, the chart says to use an office lens with degression of 1.25 and that this will give clear distance with a max of 2 meters. 

Original Rx: +.50 -.25 X180
                +.75 -.25 X180
                +2.25 add

Near Rx: +2.75 -.25 X180
            +3.00 -.25 X180

Now I subtract the degression to give the compensated Rx:
            +1.50 -.25 X180
            +1.75 -.25 X180
I surface the above Rx as a SV lens and do not use a prism ring. 

There is one variable: not every lens manufacturer says to subtract the full power of the degression. Rodenstock suggests that for a 1.75 degression you should only subtract 1.25. This would decrease the max viewing distance.

----------


## AdmiralKnight

> Actually, half the add can no longer be called the norm for computer work, because it translates to a working distance of 32 inches, and most people are working at a distance of 27 inches, so 60% is the correct figure.


That's a fair point, but still doesn't change the fact that you can't check it. 60% of a +2.50 add works out to be a +1.50, VS a +1.25 at 50%. As I've previously stated, when checking some of these computer lenses, I've seen some that are more than three quarters of a diopter different than what I would get at 50% add (ex the lens reading +2.75 when it would be a +2.00 if I made them). This is WAY off, and I can't fatham why it's so different.

----------


## Happylady

For those patients that don't want to have a separate pair of computer glasses or for those that need to be able to see distance while working on their computer I have personally found the Definity Short works VERY well. 

Of course the screen needs to be in the proper place and not straight ahead, but when I wear this lens I can see the computer very comfortably and also see distance well. This lens is extremely easy to wear, even with a +2.25 add I am rarely aware I am wearing a progressive, it is very unswimmy.

Another plus, this lens comes in Trivex. The only negative to this lens is that the near area is not huge but I can use it with no problems.

----------


## LadyDie

I personaly own 5 pairs of Shamir Office.  I love it and so do our patients.  We do a lot of that lens.
Our lab (essilor owned) rep even told me don't use any essilor lens stay with the Office it is much better!

----------


## motelska

> I'm not a fan of any office lens personally. I don't like that they use modified prescriptions. Modified in a way that I have no idea how to check the rx. So I don't bother with them. If the person really wants a PAL, I'll just use a short corridor lens with the intermediate on top.


Personally, I've had a lot of success with the Zeiss Bussiness. To fully understand the Bussiness, you first have to realize that's it's a reverse add bifocal and to measure the RX when you recieve it from the lab, you simply measure the reading portion. This is because the lens begins with the reading power and the power changes as you move UP the lens (Not down, like a progressive). Thusly allowing the patient to have more usable area in the peripheral of the lens. When explaining it to the patient, it's more of a cubible lens... 3-4 feet out and up to 12 inches close... with a side to side range of about 2-3 feet so the patient can see almost their entire desk at once. Just remember to Always order them with the Full distance and add power. Let the lab's computer do the calculations for you. I can't tell you how many times the Dr insisted on using their own VDT Rx, only to have to redo it using the original Full Rx.  :Nerd:

----------


## MarySue

> That's a fair point, but still doesn't change the fact that you can't check it. 60% of a +2.50 add works out to be a +1.50, VS a +1.25 at 50%. As I've previously stated, when checking some of these computer lenses, I've seen some that are more than three quarters of a diopter different than what I would get at 50% add (ex the lens reading +2.75 when it would be a +2.00 if I made them). This is WAY off, and I can't fatham why it's so different.


Ask your lens reps to explain the strength at eye point, that way you can check the lens at eye point and near, and understand.  Almost all of the lenses have that information on hand.   Then mark up all your lenses at eye point, and the ref point required by the manufacture for ordering. 
:cheers:

----------


## Lee H

I received a pair of Office Autographs about three weeks ago and I am very, very happy with the results. I wear progressives for general purpose throughout the day but when I plan on doing much reading or computer work, I immediately go to my Ofiice lenses. They are so comfortable for reading.  Not only the width but the smooth vertical vision without the constant head movement.  I have not tried any of the other VFL's but I LOVE these!

----------

