# Optical Forums > Progressive Lens Discussion Forum >  wide reading area progressives?

## Sheryl

I just got my first pair of progressives today, and I'm very unhappy with them. I didn't know until I called back the optician that there were different types of progressives - she made decisions for me without asking me any questions or giving me any information. I need a better understanding of what's available, and I was wondering if I could get some advice here on what type of progressive would suit me better than what I have. I'm also looking for a new optician - I'm in New York City.

Some info...

For many years I've worn a straight-across bifocal that comes pretty high up on the lens. I read a lot, and also work at the computer a lot. I need to look through the bifocal to see the computer, so a high and wide bifocal area is important.

Recently I've started to have trouble with my middle vision. For example, if I'm talking to someone at a party, their face is blurry. That's why I thought progressives would be good.

My add for the bifocal is now +2.25. I'm myopic otherwise, so I can see close without my glasses. My myopia correction is -3.25 in my right eye and -2.25 in my left, with slight astigmatism in my left.

The progressives I have are Varilux Comfort. They are terrible for computer use. I have to tip my head back to see the computer at all, which gives me a crick in my neck, and I have virtually no near peripheral vision. If I'm reading something in the center of my vision and look to the side moving only my eyes, it's a blur. This is unacceptable for me.

I called the optician, and she said she'd fit me for Hoya ECP lenses, but again she made this decision for me without giving me any information about my options. I want to make an informed choice.

*I need a higher and wider near-vision area (but not occupational progressive lenses that I can't use for driving). What are the PALs that give the widest near vision area?*

Also, the optician gave me polycarbonite lenses, which I've been reading are not very good for optics. What should I get instead?

Lastly, I am looking for a new optician. Are any of you in New York City?

----------


## Happylady

Varilux Comfort is one of the most widely used progressives and is considered by many to be very good.  There are also many other progressives that are very good. The peripheral area in the lower part of any progressive will not be clear though some are better then others.

For your prescription polycarb is also widely used. I have an prescription similar to yours and I often wear poly. There are a few people that don't see well out of poly but most people see fine out of it.

The middle of your lens is the intermediate area. If you are raising your head to see the computer then it sounds like your computer screen is straight ahead. Is this correct? If so no standard progressive is going to work without you raising your head. You need to have your computer screen so that you look down at it slightly.

Have you considered a standard trifocal? It would give you wider areas and a clearer peripheral area. You might also give your lenses a couple of weeks and try lowering your computer screen. It often takes a couple of weeks to get used to progressives especially if you are coming from a flat top bifocal.

----------


## chip anderson

Trifocals!

----------


## rbaker

Trifocals

----------


## Sheryl

Thanks for your input!

My computer is already significantly below eye level. It's a notebook. It was below eye level to begin with, and I raised my chair so it's even more below eye level, but the narrow field of vision still really bugs me. My clear area of near vision at reading distance is only about 4-5 inches.

I've read that some types of progressives - Hoya Summit ECP being one - give wider fields of vision for intermediate and near. Is Hoya ECP the best choice, or are there others that give an especially wide area to look through?

Call me vain, but trifocals are too much for me. Those make you look REALLY old.

----------


## Happylady

If it is a notebook, why do you need to raise your head to see it? Have you tried removing your glasses and having your computer a little closer to you? You have perfect close vision.

Four or five inches wide reading area in progressives? That sounds about right. Do you know what the fitting height of your lenses are, are they very narrow? That will make your reading area smaller.

You might look at the thread titled "Outlook lenses are they any good?" There is a link that compares different progressives. You might notice that the ones that do the best at near often do worse at distance and visa versa. You will notice the lenses rated without weighing in on astigmatism and and also with it. 
Too much astigmatism makes the lenses swimmy so I always look at the lenses weighing in with astigmatism.

----------


## Sheryl

I'm not sure what "fitting height" means, but the optician said something about 21mm, and the minimum was 18 so I had more space. Not sure if that makes any sense. What's fitting height? (My glasses aren't especially small in the vertical dimension.)

Yes, I can see my computer when I take my glasses off, but then if I want to look up to see the TV it's blurry. Also, I get headaches when I read without glasses. I was given very low power bifocals at 20 years old to solve this problem.

Back to my original question... Of the different progressives out there, which would give me the widest viewing area for intermediate and near vision?

Thanks for your help.

----------


## Happylady

Fitting height is the height the "fitting cross" is from the bottom of the frame. It is usually the distance in millimeters from your pupil to the bottom of the frame. Twenty one is pretty good.

Look at the link. The ones listed with the best near and intermediate is the Sola Max, but it is one of the worst at distance.

----------


## For-Life

good job again not actually helping the consumer, but giving the consumer a million different options.

----------


## Sheryl

> Look at the link. The ones listed with the best near and intermediate is the Sola Max, but it is one of the worst at distance.


Link? What link??

Is Sola Max an occupational progressive? How does it compare with Hoya ECP?

Thanks for the help!

----------


## Happylady

> good job again not actually helping the consumer, but giving the consumer a million different options.


It is confusing, isn't it? She wanted options, I told her where to find them.

----------


## For-Life

> It is confusing, isn't it? She wanted options, I told her where to find them.


I know, but still.  We know the best option for this person cannot be satisfied from internet advice.

----------


## Sheryl

Oh, I see - link in the other thread you mentioned. I'll go look, thanks.

----------


## Sheryl

> I know, but still. We know the best option for this person cannot be satisfied from internet advice.


Since I can't learn everything I need to know from the internet, does that mean I should not be given any information on the internet? That's not logical.

----------


## Happylady

> Link? What link??
> 
> Is Sola Max an occupational progressive? How does it compare with Hoya ECP?
> 
> Thanks for the help!


Go to the thread titled "Outlook- good design?" There is a link there to a study that compares many different progressives. I don't know much about that particular Hoya lens, so I can't help you there.

Sola Max is not an occupational lens. It has one of the best near and intermediate areas but one of the worst distance areas, I don't really recommend it because of this.

----------


## Sheryl

I looked at the link, and it doesn't give me the kind of information I need. What I'd really like is a diagram of each lens - distance, intermediate, far. I've seen these for a couple lenses, but most sites don't have them.

----------


## For-Life

> Since I can't learn everything I need to know from the internet, does that mean I should not be given any information on the internet? That's not logical.


It is not you.  The thing is the problem may not be the lens.  It can be the brand, the lens type, the material, the fit, the measurements, the base curve, the prescription, ect, ect, ect.

The only way we can figure this out is to see you and the glasses in person.



So when things like this pop up many of the opticians here, each with a lot of training, and stubborn mind try to force their ideas on people so that we can win our debates against each other.

Now, not everyone in this thread has done that, so sorry if I offend some people.  But if you took the advice of OB members you would have a progressive, flat top, trifocal that is combined in 5 pairs made out of glass, plastic, and stainless steel.  Oh yes, do not forget about the frame that is the size of a Hummer vehicle.

----------


## Sheryl

Correction - actually it does give very good information. I see now that it shows the individual ratings as well as the combined. Thanks very much for this link.

----------


## Happylady

For-Life is right, it is very hard to figure out how to solve your problems over the internet. You just got these TODAY. If you don't want trifocals then you need to give them some time. You can go back to your optician and have her make sure they are fit correctly and that you understand how to use them. 

Then you need to wear them all the time for at least two weeks. Progressives are not bifocals, they are very different. In some ways they are better and in some ways they are worse. It is very normal and common to take up to a month to get comfortable with progressives especially since you have a +2.25 add. The stronger the add the narrower the areas and the more blur on the outside parts of the lenses.

----------


## Happylady

> Correction - actually it does give very good information. I see now that it shows the individual ratings as well as the combined. Thanks very much for this link.


This study is a few years old and there is a newer one, but I don't know the link to it. There are some newer lenses that are good that aren't on the older study.

----------


## chip anderson

Alternative:  Bifocal with a PC Peeker (slip-in intermediate) insert.  Works like a charm and brings that computer right in to focus with no sacrifice in width.

Will work with your old bifocals, new bifocals and cost a whole $25.00 retail.

Chip

----------


## Happylady

> Alternative: Bifocal with a PC Peeker (slip-in intermediate) insert. Works like a charm and brings that computer right in to focus with no sacrifice in width.
> 
> Will work with your old bifocals, new bifocals and cost a whole $25.00 retail.
> 
> Chip


These do work well, but they do make the distance blurry. They will adjust the distance area for up close. I have sold a few and people like them.

----------


## Happylady

Hey, I found the link to the newer study! Go to the link and at the top of the page is the word publications. Go there and then go to the progressive addition measurement and rating study dated  2006.

----------


## Sheryl

What do you think of the Hoya Summit ECP? That was the alternative my optician recommended, and I also saw a newsgroup dialog among some computer types (like me) with the same problem I have, and a couple of them said it solved the problem.

----------


## Happylady

> What do you think of the Hoya Summit ECP? That was the alternative my optician recommended, and I also saw a newsgroup dialog among some computer types (like me) with the same problem I have, and a couple of them said it solved the problem.


_I don't know much about this lens. I think you will find any progressive will take some adjustment._

----------


## Sheryl

I realize the progressive will take some adjustment - more than I realized. No one told me before I bought the glasses that there was blurriness on the intermediate and near periphery. The only complaint I'd heard was difficulty in figuring out what part of the lens to look through, and I thought I could get used to that.

Still, I think that different lens designs are better for different needs, so I'd like the one that suits me best.

My mother loves her progressives. But of course, she's very myopic and usually doesn't wear any glasses (vanity), so she's used to blurriness. :)

----------


## Sheryl

My mother insists she sees no blurriness or narrowness of focal area, and her near focus add is +3.00. Go figure.

----------


## Happylady

> My mother insists she sees no blurriness or narrowness of focal area, and her near focus add is +3.00. Go figure.


She has gotten used to them. Please, give it some time. I don't see the blurriness unless I think about it. My add is a +2.00.

----------


## Sheryl

> Hey, I found the link to the newer study! Go to the link and at the top of the page is the word publications. Go there and then go to the progressive addition measurement and rating study dated 2006.


Got it! THANKS!! :)

----------


## Fezz

Your best bet may be a Trifocal!!!!
A E/D trifocal from Sola would be a great start. Great distance, very wide intermediate, and plenty of reading! Or, how about an executive trifocal...plenty of reading there. I believe that you could still get an Ultex A, or round type trifocal.. less of a flat line. More curved, rounded,less visible. I believe the original "invisible" bifocal was a Kryptok, or round seg bifocal. Good luck


Fezz
:cheers:

----------


## Sheryl

When I see people with trifocals, I think "Geesh - s/he must be in bad shape." It's the ultimate symbol of age to me. I'm not that vain in general, but I have very bad associations with trifocals. I'd rather find the best progressive for me, and then take time to adapt to it.

I've been reading the studies that Happy Lady pointed me to. Unfortunately, Hoya lenses aren't included in the more recent study because they didn't send enough samples.

I'll keep looking into various lenses, reading info on this forum and other sites. I'm going back to the optician when my tablet PC is ready (the two stores are very close). That will be in a day or two.

Thanks again for all the input.

----------


## Sheryl

By the way, I've been trying to figure out which part of my lens I'm looking through to see the computer - intermediate or near - by slowing moving my head up and down. I seem to be using my near vision rather than intermediate - probably because it's a notebook. I think that when I had a desktop I looked at the screen from farther away, but now both my computers are notebooks, and the text is about the same size as that in a book. So I guess I need a progressive with a large near area versus intermediate, though usually a large intermediate area is recommended for computer use.

I had another question... How bad is the distance area for a lens like the SOLO One? It's at the low end of the distance rating, but it's not an occupational lens so how bad could the distance area be? Could I still drive safely with this lens?

----------


## Sheryl

I measured the distance from my lens to the monitor when I can see clearly through the intermediate area, and it's about 27 inches. Ordinarily my eyeglasses are about 17 inches from the monitor when I'm working. This is the same distance at which I tend to hold printed reading matter.

Are these distances usual for intermediate and near?

----------


## Sheryl

Here's a really good link on optimal viewing distances for different size monitors at different resolutions:

http://personalcomputing.portrait.co...whitepaper.pdf

The maximum viewing distance for a 15" monitor with 1024x768 resolution and small fonts is about 49cm or 19 inches. The notebook I'm using now has a 14" screen and a resolution of 1400x1050 with small fonts, so my preferred viewing distance of 17" is about right. My other notebook is 1024x768 with a 12" screen.

So the area I need to maximize for computer use (given the types of computers I use) is near, not intermediate.

I mention this in case you have any notebook using customers. Computer use doesn't always mean "intermediate".

----------


## Karenrp1956

what about where your computer is sitting?  Is it at eye level or higher?  Then you will have to raise your chin.  See if you can lower the screen.  You can also look into computer glasses.

P.s. I am myopic.  I wear a small frame with my distance rx, to watch tv, I wear them like half eyes.  I look at my screen with my naked eye...look up through my glasses to see tv

----------


## Sheryl

My notebook is below eye level.

I can see clearly near with no glasses, but it strains my eyes - has since I was 20, when I first got bifocals to reduce eye strain. (I'm now 49 - on the eve of my 50th birthday.) I read too much without looking up - can't remember to do it - and my eyes tend to "lock" near, giving me a headache. I'm very migraine-prone - any eye strain gives me a headache. I was given vision training for a while when I was much younger, but it made me nauseous and I didn't do the exercises consistently. In the end they gave me bifocals and that fixed the headache problem.

So half-glasses won't work for me.

----------


## Bobbi

Here's a little bit of advice.... First, make sure your computer is the right height (I know it's been mentioned already, but very important) it is ergonomically correct when you are eye level with the top of the monitor, your head is VERY slightly tilted up to hit the intermediate zone. Also, if after a reasonable adjustment period you are still having problems, go in for a frame alignment, sometimes adding a little bit of face form and pantoscopic tilt makes a huge differance...as far as the hoya lenses, I have had wonderful results with the hoya gp wide, the distance is huge, so it's good for driving, but my patients love it for all-the-time, even the ones with high adds.

----------


## Sheryl

Hi Bobbi,

As I mentioned, my computer is a NOTEBOOK, not a desktop with a separate monitor, so your advice on ergonomic adjustment doesn't apply. The top of my notebook is well below eye level, and I look at my notebook screen through my near vision zone, not intermediate zone (for the reasons described in earlier posts).

Hoya Wide looks pretty good - so does SOLO One. But I just read about Varilux Physio and WAVE technology (too new to be in either of the studies). Is this as good as the Essilor Web site says it is? Does anyone have experience with this lens?

----------


## Sheryl

Having spent all day reading about progressive lenses, I'm now enchanted with the Seiko Succeed Internal, which I believe is what I will go with. I like the C type (wide near area) with a short corridor (10mm, probably - I'm used to a very high bifocal). I called my optician, who is researching how to order them.

----------


## Happylady

I think I saw several Hoya lenses in the older study.

I really like the Sola One and use it often. My prescription is about a -2.50 in both eyes and I have a pair and see very well with them. There is some blur in the peripheral of the lens in the top when I look well to the side but it is much less then several other lenses I have tried. I really don't notice it. 

It has a decent near and intermediate area but I think that there will be an adjustment with any progressive you try. Are you wearing your new glasses and trying to adjust to them?

I also have a pair of the Varilux Physio lenses. They have an excellent distance and a very good intermediate area. The near is good but I think the Sola One is a little wider. Mine are set at 17 and while that is the minimum I would like a little more at the bottom.

----------


## Sheryl

Yes, I saw the Hoya ratings in the older study. Both the Hoya Wide and the Hoya ECP look very good.

The SOLA One and the Varilux Physio 360 are the two others I've been seriously considering, but I was so impressed with what I read on the Seiko site about the Success Internal (called the Seiko Super Proceed Internal outside the US) that I wanted to try it. Have you tried this one? There have been only a few posts about it on this site (can't remember by whom), but everything I've read about it on this forum and others has been very positive. I think it's only been available in the US since April.

----------


## Sheryl

> I think I saw several Hoya lenses in the older study.
> you wearing your new glasses and trying to adjust to them?


Well, to be honest... They give me a migraine when I'm working at the computer, plus they slow me down significantly because I can't see what I need to see half the time. I had too much work to do today to have a migraine and not be able to see, but I wore them all day yesterday, and now that I'm done with the serious work I had to do, I'll put them on again.  :Nerd:

----------


## Sheryl

Glasses have been on again for a while. I'm more-or-less okay with them as long as I don't look down and don't go near a computer. When I try to use a computer with them, I get dizzy, nauseous, and headachy - feels almost like I'm carsick.

I really want to try a different type of progressive lens with a wider near area.

----------


## dary

> Glasses have been on again for a while. I'm more-or-less okay with them as long as I don't look down and don't go near a computer. When I try to use a computer with them, I get dizzy, nauseous, and headachy - feels almost like I'm carsick.
> 
> I really want to try a different type of progressive lens with a wider near area.


I have just had a look on this thread- but why don't you try progressive lenses for computer/ office work? They are for middle and near distance? And they have wide near area.

----------


## Sheryl

> I have just had a look on this thread- but why don't you try progressive lenses for computer/ office work? They are for middle and near distance? And they have wide near area.


I don't have the money for two pairs of glasses. This one cost me $1000.

I just got a call from the optician. She called Seiko, and the Seiko Succeed Internal is not yet available in the US. They had no information on when it would be. I'm very disappointed. I read on this site it would be available in the US in April.

So I'm going to go with either SOLO One or the Varilux Physio 360. The optician recommends the Physio 360. HappyLady on this forum recommends the SOLO One. I'll read a little bit more about each of them and decide.

No Seiko Succeed Internal. So sad.

----------


## Sheryl

I'm going to go with SOLA One. Their technical white paper makes sense. The Varilux Physio 360 white paper sounds like marketing BS. The SOLA One design -based on research data, Happy Lady's experience, and their whitepaper - is just what I'm looking for.

----------


## Sheryl

P.S. (How could I forget this?) THANK YOU for all the help everyone has given me, especially HappyLady. Thanks for the information, the links, and for sharing your experience with difference lenses.

----------


## Happylady

> I'm going to go with SOLA One. Their technical white paper makes sense. The Varilux Physio 360 white paper sounds like marketing BS. The SOLA One design -based on research data, Happy Lady's experience, and their whitepaper - is just what I'm looking for.


I hope you like the Sola One. It is a really nice lens(but so is the Physio). I just hope you aren't expecting too much. I think it is a step up from the Comfort, but it isn't THAT much different or better.

My brother wears the Comfort, he didn't get them from me and is completely happy with them. The place he got them switched him to the Panamic and he hated it, had to go back to the Comfort. 

My sister in law also wears it. I recently ordered her another pair of glasses and we talked about switching lenses. We decided not to as she is also very happy with her Comforts.

Let us know how it goes with the new lenses. It will be interesting to see if it makes a difference.

----------


## Sheryl

I will certainly let you know how it goes! Thanks again for all the info.

----------


## joshy

How about the Essilor Continuum?  Its a lens that gives you intermediate on the top and reading on the bottom, great for computer use, and the reading area at the bottom is good if you need to look at small print on a paper that you are typing from.    hope this helps,sheryl.

----------


## Sheryl

> How about the Essilor Continuum? Its a lens that gives you intermediate on the top and reading on the bottom, great for computer use, and the reading area at the bottom is good if you need to look at small print on a paper that you are typing from. hope this helps,sheryl.


I don't want to get occupational lenses because I can only afford one pair. But thanks for the suggestion.

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *I have just had a look on this thread- but why don't you try progressive lenses for computer/ office work? They are for middle and near distance? And they have wide near area.*


There is NO progressive that has a wide near area. You will see the computer screen clearly , but looking down, going through the progressive channel onto the reading field you have a very restricted visual field.

Who would not want a clear reading area on a desk that is 2 feet wide ??? No progressive lens can provide that.  :finger:

----------


## Sheryl

Chris, I know this.

----------


## Sheryl

To expand... Even in the few days I've had the progressive lenses, I've started to adapt. The brain is an amazing thing. I was even able to wear the glasses working at the computer yesterday. I intuitively move my head to look through the right part of the lenses. I know that progressives will never give the viewing area of exective bifocals, but your brain does adapt to minimize the limitations.

The main problem I have with these lenses is the large amount of distortion and blur on the periphery, which apparently I'm very sensitive to. In the 2006 comparative study, the Varilux Comfort (what I'm wearing) has close to the highest distortion of any lens. The first two days I wore these, I literally felt motion sickness. I don't feel the motion sickness anymore, but I'm continuing to get daily migraines from it - not a good thing.

The lens I want to change to (SOLA One) has a wider near area and a wider intermediate area than the lens I'm currently wearing, and much less distortion on the periphery. I think I'm capable of adapting to a progressive lens, and that this lens will be among the easiest for me to adapt to since it minimizes the problems that I have with progressives. If I'm wrong and I can't adapt, then I'll go back to bifocals (or maybe trifocals).

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *The first two days I wore these, I literally felt motion sickness. I don't feel the motion sickness anymore, but I'm continuing to get daily migraines from it - not a good thing.*
> 
> *..........................If I'm wrong and I can't adapt, then I'll go back to bifocals (or maybe trifocals).*


Going from bifocals to progressives was never recommended, as these people expirience exactly what you been describing. Most probably it will not be any better with a different brand. The lateral distortion is there with all of them.

----------


## Sheryl

Chris,

Many people who have progressives used to wear bifocals. In fact, probably a good 50%, I'd wager.

I've seen your other posts. You're Mr. Negative. I think the progressives can work for me because of how quickly I'm adapting to the lenses I already have. Either way, I'll report back. :) 

- Sheryl

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *I've seen your other posts. You're Mr. Negative.*


I got myself a new qualification or tiltle.....................see above. :D 

But you are dead wrong. There are 47% of multifocal wearers that use progressive lenses in the USA. There is still a majority, 53%, NOT wearing progressives.

Progressive lenses are ideal solutions for the right people and can be a disaster for the wrong people.

*It takes the know how, the expirience and a NO greed attitude as a professional, learned, expirienced and qualified optician to judge who is and who is not a good candidate for this type of lenses.*

In the earlier days of progressive lense the original manufacturer gave courses to opticians to teach them which patients were good candidates for these lenses and which ones were not. *These days its just sell sell sell*.

----------


## hardbox_happy

> I also have a pair of the Varilux Physio lenses. They have an excellent distance and a very good intermediate area. The near is good but I think the Sola One is a little wider. Mine are set at 17 and while that is the minimum I would like a little more at the bottom.


My Rx is R-2.50 and L -0.75 Add +2.00
I got my Vx physio last monday,and i felt when i was focus on the distance that is no proble quite perfect once i try to walk around and move my eyeball to intermediate portion i felt thatmy left eye blur than my right eye.Did the Vx.physio suit for both different power patient just like Rodenstock in Multigressive 2?Before Vx.Physio i was Used SOLA One It such a good lens,but physio i was dissapointed.Can you give some comment ?

----------


## Sheryl

> *It takes the know how, the expirience and a NO greed attitude as a professional, learned, expirienced and qualified optician to judge who is and who is not a good candidate for this type of lenses.*
> 
> In the earlier days of progressive lense the original manufacturer gave courses to opticians to teach them which patients were good candidates for these lenses and which ones were not. *These days its just sell sell sell*.


Greetings, Chris. I know that your viewpoint is that most people (basically anyone with any adaptation problems at first - which is virtually everyone) should not be given progressive lenses, and apparently you put me in that group. 

I've already adapted to a great extent to the lenses I currently have - I forget I even have them on. I'm still getting daily migraines, but that's not necessarily the lenses. I tend to get migraines in batches. If it is the distortion in the lens periphery causing the migraines, then the SOLA One should help. As I said, I will report back on how I do with the new lenses when I get them.

And in case I wasn't clear... I'm not an optician. I'm just an informed layperson with bad eyesight. :)

----------


## Sheryl

And to clarify one other point... My optician didn't give me progressive lenses because she's greedy. I asked for them. If she'd said no, she'll only give me bifocals because that's what I had previously, I'd have found another optician.

----------


## Sheryl

One other example that goes against the _Rule of Chris_... My mother, who wore bifocals for years and years and has an add of +3.00, now wears progressives and loves them. She adapted quickly and with no problems. Could it be that you're not always right??

----------


## labbrat

Hi...read through your concerns/problems. 
We operate an independent wholesale optical lab in New England.  The Varilux Comfort is a popular lens in the market, but it did debut in 1994....and there are many new advanced  options out there to pick from.  
Adapting from bifocals is indeed difficult for some..they are clearly linear in design. There obviously isn't anything to adapt to
Contour plots are somewhat helpful but are generally depicted as a Plano (no rx) with a +2.00 add.  Manufacturers will show their product in the one power that will make the lens plot look best.  That's just business.  
Astigmatism radically degrades any lens design's countour plot.  The *ONLY* way to truly compensate for this is "free form" technology.  Examples include the  Physio *360*, Sola One *HD* (note bold type...not all sola one's and physios are free form ), Seiko Super Proceed Internal, Zeiss Gradal Individual, Rodenstock Multigressiv 2 to name a few.

By the way, we have been selling the Seiko Super Proceed Internal since 1999!   We have yet to see a non-adapt.

The Hoya lenses mentioned are indeed excellent.  As an independent Hoya distributor, we have a great deal of experience with their designs, and we believe that the ECP is perhaps the best conventionally surfaced design on the market.  FYI...Hoya has just released a free form design called the HoyaLux ID which could make their other designs obsolete if price was no object!! lol

----------


## Sheryl

Hi labbrat,

Thanks very much for the information - in particular that the Seiko lens is available in the US. I thought it wasn't! I'll look into that again, plus your other suggestions.

- Sheryl

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *Could it be that you're not always right??*


Of course I am not always right.........the rule of thum sometimes gets a twist.

Here are some quotes




> *The main problem I have with these lenses is the large amount of distortion and blur on the periphery, which apparently I'm very sensitive to. In the 2006 comparative study, the Varilux Comfort (what I'm wearing) has close to the highest distortion of any lens. The first two days I wore these, I literally felt motion sickness. I don't feel the motion sickness anymore, but I'm continuing to get daily migraines from it - not a good thing.*


 



> i felt when i was focus on the distance that is no proble quite perfect once *i try to walk around and move my eyeball to intermediate portion i felt thatmy left eye blur than my right eye.*





> The main problem I have with these lenses *is the large amount of distortion and blur on the periphery, which apparently I'm very sensitive to.* In the 2006 comparative study, the Varilux Comfort (what I'm wearing) has close to the highest distortion of any lens.





> I'm more-or-less okay with them *as long as I don't look down and don't go near a computer. When I try to use a computer with them, I get dizzy, nauseous, and headachy - feels almost like I'm carsick.*





> Well, to be honest... *They give me a migraine when I'm working at the computer, plus they slow me down significantly because I can't see what I need to see half the time*. I had too much work to do today to have a migraine and not be able to see,





> *I like the C type (wide near area) with a short corridor (10mm, probably - I'm used to a very high bifocal). I called my optician, who is researching how to order them.*


 
After all this suffering you still have a lot of guts to spend another $ 1000.00 for some more migraine and car dizziness. :D

----------


## Sheryl

> Of course I am not always right.........the rule of thum sometimes gets a twist.


"thum*b*" ;) 




> After all this suffering you still have a lot of guts to spend another $ 1000.00 for some more migraine and car dizziness. :D


I didn't spend "another" thousand dollars. My optician stands behind her work. I asked her before I ordered the glasses if she'd make me another pair if these didn't work for me, and she said absolutely - that is the store policy (which she then turned around and gave me in writing - it's in their brochure). She is making the new pair at no charge.

You're very argumentative.

----------


## labbrat

Good luck, SherylNeedless to say, I have access to many lens designs and like some more than others...for my taste.  I must say, however, that my very favorite for computer use is a pair of task specific lenses.  I use mine for the computer, of course, but they are also my favorite for reading, painting, sewing...anytime when my reading and intermediate ranges are most required.  You may wish to reconsider a second pair after all.  Speak with your optician...she/he will be the best informational resource based on your ongoing relationship

----------


## Sheryl

To Chris again, re the messages of mine you quoted... You left out the ones from a few days later saying that I was already adapting to the lenses - was able to wear them while working at the computer, and often forgot I was wearing them. I still think I'd prefer a pair with a wider near area and less distortion (lenses do differ on these dimensions), but I have every reason to think I can adapt to progressives based on my experience of the past week.

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *..........but I have every reason to think I can adapt to progressives based on my experience of the past week.*


I hope you will and good luck.

----------


## 66Lenses

From what i have read here im sure that you will adapt quite well.

----------


## Sheryl

> Astigmatism radically degrades any lens design's countour plot. The *ONLY* way to truly compensate for this is "free form" technology. Examples include the Physio *360*, Sola One *HD* (note bold type...not all sola one's and physios are free form ), Seiko Super Proceed Internal, Zeiss Gradal Individual, Rodenstock Multigressiv 2 to name a few.


How does free form technology compensate for the astigmatism on the periphery?




> By the way, we have been selling the Seiko Super Proceed Internal since 1999! We have yet to see a non-adapt.


The lab my optician uses has never heard of the Seiko Super Proceed Internal, and when she called Seiko, they said they'd never heard of it either and thought it probably wasn't sold in the US. I don't understand what's going on. This lens is clearly advertised on their Web site, and you (a lab in New England - USA) say you've been selling it since 1999. I can understand a specific lab not knowing about the lens, but how can the US division of Seiko not know about it if it's sold in this country? Seiko faxed their product list to the optician, and this lens was not on there.

*Where do you get the Seiko Super Proceed Internal in the US? Where can I direct my optician for information?*




> The Hoya lenses mentioned are indeed excellent. As an independent Hoya distributor, we have a great deal of experience with their designs, and we believe that the ECP is perhaps the best conventionally surfaced design on the market. FYI...Hoya has just released a free form design called the HoyaLux ID which could make their other designs obsolete if price was no object!! lol


Based on what I've read, the Hoya ECP has a large intermediate area and a smaller near area, while the Hoya GP Wide has the reverse - smaller intermediate area and larger near area. I'm not familiar with the HoyaLux ID so I don't know what the near area is like. This is a very important consideration for me, so I wouldn't buy it without knowing this. I think the SOLA lens has lower astigmatism than the Hoya and this is important for me, so on this basis alone I prefer the SOLA One.

----------


## chip anderson

Seiko not knowing is a little like when I called the Harley Davison frame line and asked: " How many of these do I have to buy to get a hogg?"  Reply: "What's a hogg sir?"

And from the wimpy preppy styles they have produced, they obviously still don't know.  Designer has never heard of Sturgis, or Daytona.  

Line could have been saved and possibly become premier if they had sent one  designer to either Sturgis or Daytona only once.

Chip

----------


## For-Life

> Seiko not knowing is a little like when I called the Harley Davison frame line and asked: " How many of these do I have to buy to get a hogg?" Reply: "What's a hogg sir?"
> 
> And from the wimpy preppy styles they have produced, they obviously still don't know. Designer has never heard of Sturgis, or Daytona. 
> 
> Line could have been saved and possibly become premier if they had sent one designer to either Sturgis or Daytona only once.
> 
> Chip


HD has smarten up.  But to be fair, most optical frame designers have no clue what their market is

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *................................., most optical frame designers have no clue what their market is*


as a matter of fact...............those frame designers which name is given to a line of frames..............have never designed a frame, have no idea of what it is all about and are also not interested at all and have never apporved a design itself.

They are corporations that sell the right to the use of their name for a license fee.

*Have ever seen any designer name toilette paper yet ?????????????????????? could be also a successfull venture. :hammer:*

----------


## Sheryl

I ordered new lenses today. The Seiko Super Proceed Internal is not available with Transitions (which I wanted), so I got Sola One HD (free form technology). These would have been about $200 more than the Varilux Comfort lenses I had, but I also got different frames that I liked better and - as luck would have it - were on sale, so there was almost no difference in price. 

It will be a two-week wait for the lenses - their lab sends to another lab or something like that. I asked my optician to use labbrat's lab, but they would not because they have an agreement with another lab that supplies the type of lens I wanted. Oh well. This optician is pretty good and they stand behind their work (which is very good), but I wish they were more flexible about labs, and that they didn't dispense Varilux Comfort lenses to all customers asking for progressives without asking any questions about how they use their eyes.

----------


## Sheryl

I've been wearing my new Solo One HD lenses for about 4 hours. These progressive lenses are so much better than the Varilux Comfort there is no comparison. I don't get motion sickness when I move my head, I can work easily at the computer, and I've already adapted - don't even know I have them on. I said I'd come back and report, so here I am. I'm a happy camper! :)

----------


## Happylady

> I've been wearing my new Solo One HD lenses for about 4 hours. These progressive lenses are so much better than the Varilux Comfort there is no comparison. I don't get motion sickness when I move my head, I can work easily at the computer, and I've already adapted - don't even know I have them on. I said I'd come back and report, so here I am. I'm a happy camper! :)


Thanks for letting us know.

----------


## Sheryl

Thanks to _you_, happylady, for all the information and advice you gave me. It was a big help. In the end, I took your recommendation and I'm very glad I did.

----------


## labbrat

Congratulations....glad all worked out well. :Cool:

----------


## Sheryl

labbrat - next time I need glasses, I'll go to an optician that will use your lab. I'm sorry I couldn't get this one to.

----------


## Chris Ryser

Congratulations.............................another case solved.

----------


## sharon m./ aboc

Switching from lined bifocals to PALs isn't always about GREED.....Sometimes it's about VANITY.  My mom switched from a lined bifocal to progressives in her late 60's and it was a SolaMax without a problem AND she has very little distance correction. ( I find those with very little distant correction have a harder time getting used to progressives They're not motivated to keep them on long enough to get used to them.)  My point is there are ALWAYS exceptions.:)

----------


## llal98@aol.com

> Switching from lined bifocals to PALs isn't always about GREED.....Sometimes it's about VANITY.


Just to add...I tried lined bifocals and couldn't stand or get used to the image jump. I wouldn't have cared how they looked, if I had been happy with my vision I would have stuck with them. I find that getting rid of the "jump" more than compensates for the disadvantages of progressives.

----------


## Sheryl

I've been wearing lined bifocals since my early 20's (due to headaches while reading) so I'm very used to them. The vanity issue for me isn't so much in people knowing that I have age-related vision problems, but how my eyes look behind the glasses. I could never looked dressed up with lined bifocals - even with eye makeup - so I'd wear contacts. These lenses are extremely thin so there is no distortion of my eyes at all, plus there is no interruption of the view of my eyes because there's no line (or worse, two lines). I can wear these glasses with eye make-up and look dressed up instead of looking like I just came out of the library.

I'm noticing something sort of amusing... These glasses are forcing me into better posture. I have a tendency to slump my shoulders forward, then tip back my chin to compensate. If my chin were aligned with my spine, I'd be looking at the ground. I think this bad posture habit originated in adolescence when I was self-conscious about growing breasts. When I stand this way with the progressive lenses, I'm looking through the wrong part of the lens. I have to put my shoulders back and chin down to look through them properly (which is exactly what my ballet teacher was always screaming at me to do).

So you see, these lenses are contributing to enhanced beauty in a number of different ways. :D

----------


## sharon m./ aboc

I find that getting rid of the "jump" more than compensates for the disadvantages of progressives.[/QUOTE]


Like I said there are always exceptions...


And, Sheryl I am very happy you found what works for you.

----------


## Sheryl

How long does it take for transitions lenses to start working properly? My optician said I had to wear them in the sun a while before they got fully dark, but how long is "a while"? I'm getting blinded in the meantime.

----------


## Happylady

> How long does it take for transitions lenses to start working properly? My optician said I had to wear them in the sun a while before they got fully dark, but how long is "a while"? I'm getting blinded in the meantime.


The should be working right from the start. If it is hot they won't get as dark. They darken more in cold weather. Also they don't change in a car. If your frame is fairly small then you might be getting a lot of light leaking in around the sides, too.

----------


## Sheryl

Several opticians at the store where I got my glasses told me that Transitions lenses get darker over time. What you're saying contradicts this. I don't know which is right. So far they haven't been getting darker, but maybe it's not enough time.

No one ever told me about the heat factor. It's so extremely hot in New York in the summer, no wonder I'm always squinting.

Also, no one ever told me they don't get dark in a car, and this really upsets me because I drive. What am I supposed to do when I'm driving??

I'm happy with the progressives, but the Transitions feature is not functioning nearly as well as I'd hoped.

----------


## Happylady

> Several opticians at the store where I got my glasses told me that Transitions lenses get darker over time. What you're saying contradicts this. I don't know which is right. So far they haven't been getting darker, but maybe it's not enough time.
> 
> No one ever told me about the heat factor. It's so extremely hot in New York in the summer, no wonder I'm always squinting.
> 
> Also, no one ever told me they don't get dark in a car, and this really upsets me because I drive. What am I supposed to do when I'm driving??
> 
> I'm happy with the progressives, but the Transitions feature is not functioning nearly as well as I'd hoped.


I have never heard that Transitions got darker over time. Glass Photogrey Extra does. In fact Transition lenses darken less after a year or two. Most people don't notice it and the AR helps with this. However, a three year old pair of Transition lenses will not darken nearly as well as a new pair.

I always always tell patients they don't darken in a car. Perhaps they forgot, or thought they had told you. For driving you need some sunglasses or a clip.

And yes, any changable lens gets darker in colder weather. Cold sunny winter days are the best!

Transisiton lenses are great but are not perfect substitutes for sunglasses.

----------


## lilchiken

"This lens is clearly advertised on their Web site, and you (a lab in New England - USA) say you've been selling it since 1999. I can understand a specific lab not knowing about the lens, but how can the US division of Seiko not know about it if it's sold in this country?" :Rolleyes:  

:drop: :D ILMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is the FUNNIEST thing I've ever read!!
I about peed my pants laughing-what retards are working @ Seiko???:bbg:

----------


## chip anderson

Sheryl:

You really thinks  "it's so extreemly hot in NY in Summer?"
Babe come down to Jackson, MS or Houston, Tx for a week in July.  Den go back to NY and enjoy the moderate temperature.  The moderate humidity for that matter.
You Yankees seem to start dying of heat stroke when we stop wearing jackets to keep warm.

Seriously, All photochromic lenses may work better after a break-in period of a day or two but over the long run, the glass ones will turn darker and have a lesser tendancy to lighten up.   The plastic ones will work best when new and go downhill from there.

Chip

----------


## labbrat

Have you tried putting the glasses in the fridge for a few minutes?  Rumor has it that the change in temp can sometimes "jump start" the photochromics.  This will not change the driving issue.  Sunclips or sunglasses are your best bet....I recommend polarized (of course).
If you do get a clip....be very careful.  If they are not fit properly to your frame, there is a very good chance your lenses will get scratched..and there is no warranty coverage for that!

----------


## Sheryl

*HappyLady wrote:*
_> I have never heard that Transitions got darker over time. Glass Photogrey Extra does. In fact Transition lenses darken less after a year or two. Most people don't notice it and the AR helps with this. However, a three year old pair of Transition lenses will not darken nearly as well as a new pair._

Sounds like they got confused. What is "AR"?

*HappyLady wrote:*
_> I always always tell patients they don't darken in a car. Perhaps they forgot, or thought they had told you. For driving you need some sunglasses or a clip._

Apparently I managed to get the one incompetent optician in the store when I came in. She was just awful - she didn't tell me anything. But the other opticians in the store are very good, and the manager has been really great about trying to make it up to me for all the other optician's incompetence. They are remaking my glasses (yet again!), this time with no transitions, and I bought a second pair of glasses - real sunglasses. The manager took $100 off the sunglasses because that's what I paid for the transitions.

*Chip Anderson wrote:*
_> You really thinks "it's so extreemly hot in NY in Summer?"_
_Babe come down to Jackson, MS or Houston, Tx for a week in July. Den go back to NY and enjoy the moderate temperature. The moderate humidity for that matter._
_You Yankees seem to start dying of heat stroke when we stop wearing jackets to keep warm._

Dude, you've clearly never been to New York City in summer. The buildings hold in the heat beyond anything natural. It doesn't even cool off at night. You've never heard the song "Summer in the City"? That wasn't about Mississippi!

*Chip Anderson wrote:*
_> All photochromic lenses may work better after a break-in period of a day or two but over the long run, the glass ones will turn darker and have a lesser tendancy to lighten up. The plastic ones will work best when new and go downhill from there._

These glasses are neither glass nor plastic. They are some exotic high tech material - forget what. Maybe that's considered plastic? In any case, I hate that they don't completely lighten up because I have circles around my eyes to begin with and so they make me look bad. I also hate the few minutes of pain it takes for them to darken on days (like today) that are not sweltering and they actually do darken. All in all, I like the idea of lenses that lighten and darken, but not the implementation. I'm going back to two pairs of glasses - clear and tinted.

*labbrat wrote:*
_> Have you tried putting the glasses in the fridge for a few minutes? Rumor has it that the change in temp can sometimes "jump start" the photochromics._ 

That's an interesting idea. I'll try that. I'm returning them in any case, but it will be interesting to know.

*labbrat wrote:*
_> This will not change the driving issue. Sunclips or sunglasses are your best bet....I recommend polarized (of course)._
_If you do get a clip....be very careful. If they are not fit properly to your frame, there is a very good chance your lenses will get scratched..and there is no warranty coverage for that!_

I went with separate sunglasses. And because I wanted polarized sunglasses, I got regular bifocal lenses instead of progressives. My optician (dealing with the manager now, not the incompetent twerp who I got stuck with at first) told me that the material used to make the Solo One HD cannot be used with polarized lenses, plus something about how it can't be made as dark as other types of materials. I need real sunglasses - I'm not fooling around!

I like the progressives for clear glasses because my eyes can be seen through them better, and the middle vision area is good for when I'm working, but I don't need them for sunglasses.

----------


## Happylady

AR= anti reflective, it's what we in the business call it most of the time.

You have high index plastic lenses.

Lots of people have Transition lenses in their regular glasses and also have sunglasses. However, if you don't like the very light tint that remains when you are inside then you might perfer clear lenses.

You can get polarized progressives but they do cost more then bifocals. Many people can switch back and forth between bifocals and progressives but some people find it difficult. Since you have worn bifocals before hopefully you won't have a problem.

----------


## Sheryl

I figured out "AR" right after I clicked "Submit". :idea: 

*HappyLady wrote:*
_> You can get polarized progressives but they do cost more then bifocals._ 

My optician said that polarized lenses were not available in the material used to make the Solo One HD (can't remember the name of it). She also said the lenses couldn't be as dark as with regular sunglasses. That's why I went with bifocals. What she told me isn't true? If she misinformed me, that would be annoying!

*HappyLady wrote:*
_> Many people can switch back and forth between bifocals and progressives but some people find it difficult. Since you have worn bifocals before hopefully you won't have a problem._

I sometimes wear contacts with reading glasses, which is pretty much the same as bifocals, and have no problem. The Solo One HD has such low distortion that it's not hard to switch between them.

In a week or so, I have an appointment to be fitted with bifocal contact lenses. My brother has those, and really likes them. My need for bifocals has become so great in the last year or two that regular contacts are impractical. I can't see anything within 3 feet.

Have you figured out yet that I'm a technophile? :bbg:

----------


## Happylady

Your glasses are 1.67 high index plastic, I believe.

You can get polarized progressives in mid index and polycarb, both of which are thinner and lighter then standard plastic. Mid index doesn't work well in rimless glasses as it is more brittle.

Do you know what material your bifocal sunglasses are? I doubt they are 1.67. I don't think bifocal polarized lenses come in 1.67 but I could be mistaken.

----------


## Sheryl

> Your glasses are 1.67 high index plastic, I believe.
> 
> You can get polarized progressives in mid index and polycarb, both of which are thinner and lighter then standard plastic. Mid index doesn't work well in rimless glasses as it is more brittle.


So my optician was right? Polarized lenses aren't available for high index plastic?




> Do you know what material your bifocal sunglasses are? I doubt they are 1.67. I don't think bifocal polarized lenses come in 1.67 but I could be mistaken.


I forgot to ask the material being used for the bifocal sunglasses. I hope I'm not unpleasantly surprised. Maybe I'll call and ask tomorrow.

----------


## Happylady

Did you get an AR coat on your sunglasses?

----------


## Sheryl

> Did you get an AR coat on your sunglasses?


I usually ask for this, but I don't know if it will have it. I have to call tomorrow. I'm not clear enough on what I ordered!

----------


## dochsml

> I usually ask for this, but I don't know if it will have it. I have to call tomorrow. I'm not clear enough on what I ordered!


Should be able to tell if you take your glasses off and look at them from an angle. Most AR appears to have a greenish hue. You can also tell if the surface of the lens is slick like a waxed car. (hydrophobic coating goes hand in hand with AR as well)

That and your eyes should be more visible if they have AR.

----------


## Sheryl

1. They're sunglasses.
2. I don't have them yet.

----------


## dochsml

> 1. They're sunglasses.
> 2. I don't have them yet.


See what happens when you read posts too fast!

----------


## dochsml

> I usually ask for this, but I don't know if it will have it. I have to call tomorrow. I'm not clear enough on what I ordered!


Since they are sunglasses, I would also ask if they AR both sides or just the back. Front side doesn't gain anything as far as AR but guarantees hydrophobic on the front. A flash mirror will also have hydrophobic.

----------


## Sheryl

"Hydrophobic"? As far as I know, hydrophobia means "fear of water". I'm not sure what you're saying here.

----------


## Ory

> "Hydrophobic"? As far as I know, hydrophobia means "fear of water". I'm not sure what you're saying here.


It does mean that.  Hydrophobic is a common term used in the scientific world for a compound or material that does not mix well with water.  A hydrophobic coating will allow water to bead right off the surface of the lens.

As far as I'm aware the Sola One HD does not come polarized at this point.  Probably too small of a market.

----------


## Sheryl

The sunglasses will be made from CR38 plastic. My optician said that she's had problems with polarized lenses becoming delaminated on higher index plastic, and thought this might especially be a problem with the type of frames I have (there's a groove in the lens for the frame).

The lenses will have an AR coating on both sides - highest end AR coating available. There is a scratch resistent coating underneath this.




> Since they are sunglasses, I would also ask if they AR both sides or just the back. Front side doesn't gain anything as far as AR but guarantees hydrophobic on the front. A flash mirror will also have hydrophobic.


What is a "flash mirror"? Mirrored sunglasses?

----------


## dochsml

> The lenses will have an AR coating on both sides - highest end AR coating available. There is a scratch resistent coating underneath this.
> 
> 
> 
> What is a "flash mirror"? Mirrored sunglasses?


If the AR is high(est) end, then it will likely have what they call an oleophobic coating or super hydrophobic which not only repels water but oil as well (ie: fingerprints)

Flash mirror is just a term for a light front side mirror (usually silver) as opposed to a full metallic mirror (think state trooper sunglasses)

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *"Hydrophobic"? As far as I know, hydrophobia means "fear of water". I'm not sure what you're saying here.*


Hydrophobic on optical lenses means 'water repellent"

----------


## plum

I am trying to find the link for "Outlook lenses are they any good?" that you mentioned.

I clicked on "search" and typed that in and can't find it. I would LOVE to read that thread and see the report. 

Help??

----------


## Chris Ryser

> *"Hydrophobic"? As far as I know, hydrophobia means "fear of water". I'm not sure what you're saying here.*


Hydrophobic is actually the wrong term for this treatment. But it has been used since 1987 on AR coated lenses.

It is actually a transparent material that fills the microscopic gaps between the crsytals of the AR coating and provides a solid surface without changing the AR properties.

As these gaps are now sealed, dirt, grease and dust can not go into the spaces that are now sealed. Therfore AR coated lenses are easy to clean by just wiping the dirt off. There is no more need for micro fiber cloth.

Some of these coatings provide ant- static properties .......they repel dust. Some others are ant-static and anti-fog as well.

Make your own choice and ask your optician which one you want.

----------


## rinselberg

> I am trying to find the link for "Outlook lenses are they any good?" that you mentioned.
> 
> I clicked on "search" and typed that in and can't find it. I would LOVE to read that thread and see the report. 
> 
> Help??


This is probably what you were looking for:
http://www.optiboard.com/forums/show...hlight=Outlook

Just search for threads that have the word "outlook" in the thread title. Make sure that your selection for "Key Word Search" is "Search Titles Only", and that your selection for "Show results as" is "Threads".

_Software geek at large ..._

----------

