I got a new pair of glasses three weeks ago. My distance vision is a bit worse, my astigmatism is a bit worse and, oh the humanity, I needed bifocals.
Vanity won and I got fancy progressive lenses. I set them in nice titanium frames, got the fancy Crizal no-scratch coating (which has already scratched). The receipt says I bought “Polycarb Bifocal ST 28” lenses.
I hate them. I’m constantly washing them because the they seem permanently dirty. It’s not that they are, it’s just, except for the very center, the rest of the world seems smeared. My edges are all fuzz now. I’ve had them adjusted twice and still the world is fuzzy.
I talked with the office’s tech again today and he consulted with his “lens guru” and said I have three choices:
Live with it
Get lined bifocals
Get these new fancier progressive lenses. I don’t remember the brand but they include “360” in their name. The difference, he says, is that rather than being ground to shape, these are actually computer machined to a focal length instead. He says it’s supposed to give clearer edges than these ones I have (which, he says, aren’t as good for high-index, high-correction lenses like I use).
If I act in the next week (before 30 days from my pickup date), they’ll switch them out for the difference in the lens cost but it’s another $120.
$120 !!
…on top of the $350 I’ve dropped on the these?
So - opinions, opinions. Anybody know what I’m talking about and have you tried them?
I’m very worried that this is just good money after bad.
Close to 20 years of bifocal experience here. My two cents worth: Do not give up on progressive lenses because of one pair that doesn’t work. There are a variety of different templates that can be used. I’ve had some that were terrible, others that were good, and a pair now that I like so much I had a duplicate made. The difference is not the perscription itself, but the way the basic lens is set up to handle the transitions. Think of your lens as a circle with an “X” in the middle. The X divides the lense into four “triangular areas”. The top triangle will be your distance; the bottom triangle is your close area. The sides and the middle are a mess of transitions. Now these transition areas can be very useful for middle vision, but set that aside for a moment. How much you like your particular glasses depends a LOT on whether you have a tall skinny X or a short fat X separating the lens. I’m exagerating the shapes a bit, but the shape matters–and it is most definitely not one-size fits all. Different opticians tend to prefer one template. And some templates are less expensive than others. I’d suggest working with a high-end optician if you are having these types of difficulties.
Belrix – I had the same problem with a pair of non-bifocal glasses I bought in Korea, then with the last pair of glasses I bought in the US. In Korea I had a very thin lense, and I could only see clearly through the center of the lenses. They changed me to a regular lense and all was well. When I had the same experience with a new pair of glasses I got in the US, the tech there told me that for some reason, a small percentage of people can’t seem to see correctly with the polycarbonate lenses. They changed my lenses for a a cheaper plastic lense and my vision was clear over the entire lense.
From what I’ve learned about optics, there should be no optical reason why one person could see clearly through polycarb and another couldn’t. I think it comes down to some people being more demanding about crystal clear vision than others. I think the polycarbs function the same way for everyone, it is just that most people either don’t notice or don’t care.
I would ask your optician to try a non-polycarb lense first. It should be cheaper and may cure your issues, which seem to be identical to my experience.
I switched suddenly to progressive lenses when I was 32 and had cataract surgery in both eyes. I opted for a focal length of 30cm so I could read without glasses and deal with my babies in the middle of the night. I have three prescriptions in the glasses l I wear.
I found the ultra-thin ones were no good and I simply could not get used to them. I switched to still thin but slightly thicker ones and was fine.
However the adjustment period was rather rough - getting up and down the stairs as they waved about like they were on the high seas was a bit nauseating. Then finding the right bit of lens to look through at the right time had me “looking like a chicken” as my husband so kindly pointed out. It took about two weeks and then I didn’t notice any annoyances any more.
And I had my revenge on my husband last year who at 46 got his first varifocal lenses the traditional way, because he’s OOOOOOLLLLLD!!! and he did the chicken imitation for a few days, too.
I could never get the hang of the progressive lenses. My first pair the lower “reading” part was not prescription because my eyes were not that bad for close up but I still had problems trying to read with them. Now I have to have a rx for reading, too, and it’s even harder. In fact I think my eyes have gotten worse since I got these glasses and I may just need to get my eyes checked again for reading and just get a pair of reading glasses and my usual prescription for nearsightedness and astigmatism without mixing the two. That way I could also get the cute small frames I’d like to try.
Belrix you have my sympathy, loss of confidence with your glasses/contact lenses is a pain. Like Ellen I had no problem when I started with varifocals (progressive lenses) but I only wear them when I’m not wearing my contacts.
The store tech suggested the problems stems from the high-index poly-carb material versus my strong prescription. Something about the high degree of refraction and the angle I’m seeing through them.
However, I kinda need the high-index stuff; if I get these glasses in regular plastic or glass, I have coke-bottle-bottom lenses.
He says I have to learn to turn my head and look straight through them.
>The difference, he says, is that rather than being ground to shape, these are actually computer machined to a focal length instead.
This is a bit off, I think. In optics in general, lenses are often ground to give them the properly shaped surfaces to refract rays as needed. But in the context of eyeglasses, when they say “ground”, they are referring to the edges, which are sort of sanded into shape to fit the frame. The optical surfaces are molded. The molds are machined, I think. There are also lenses and mirrors that are machined, often with diamond cutting tools, but for various obscure reasons which never include wearing them. At least, this is how I understand it all, having studied optics and been interested in eyeglasses.
Progressive lenses cannot possibly form clear images off to the side of the transition area. It’s mathematically impossible. Lined bifocals, though, can, subject to various limitations of optical design. I go with lined bifocals every time.
The tech has a good point about needing to look pretty much straight ahead. The peripheral vision gets distorted very quickly. When I read a book, for example, I center each page while I’m reading it, rather than centering the spine of the book. If I’m using a wide screen monitor on my computer, I sometimes have to shift my head rather than my eyes to get a clear view. BUT after years of bifocals, it’s pretty much automatic.
If it helps, I have pretty awful eyes (-5.50 with -.75 cylinder 110 axis), 2.50 bifocal magnification for my normal reading bifocal glasses and 3.25 magnification for my special stitching bifocals that I use for detail work.
Re: the smearing – what are you cleaning them with? I found that the “lens cleaner” smeared things around. I just wash mine with water and a drop of dish detergent.
It took me about a week to get used to progressive lenses, but I only had regular lenses before that. I think that if you grow used to regular bifocals, the adjustment is harder.
Whatever you do, I recommend that you don’t just do nothing, trying to live with them. Maximizing how well you can see is, IMHO, one of the most important things you can do for yourself.
As someone has already said, not everybody can live with the super-thin lenses. I adapted to them quickly, and can’t go back - other kinds just don’t work at all for me anymore. Not to mention that even with plastic lenses, the extra weight gives me a headache. It’s the main reason I decided to get them in the first place. Between the cost of my lenses, and the cost of frames that work for me (I have a very wide field of vision - both side to side and top to bottom - and the teeny tiny lenses that are fashionable now drive me nuts. I have to buy “designer” frames with the largest possible lenses.).
If it really matters to you to not have the thick lenses, bite the bullet (or whatever) and pay out the extra $$$$$. If not, maybe you should go back to the heavier lenses. But in any case, remember that being able to see, and see clearly, is really, really important.