Author Topic: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly  (Read 11546 times)

nicknack

  • Hornblower
Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #25 on: 03 March, 2018, 10:48:57 pm »
They all are, these days.
There does seem to be a difference between the cheap ones and expensive ones - I have both atm, the cheap ones are years 'younger' than the others and are in crap condition.
Back in the dim and distant, when I had a proper job, part of that job was testing spectacle frames. Back then, at least, there was often little difference in quality between cheap and expensive (as in the shops - wholesale prices were often similar) frames. Mark-ups could be as much as 1000%.
There's no vibrations, but wait.

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #26 on: 03 March, 2018, 10:57:10 pm »
They all are, these days.
There does seem to be a difference between the cheap ones and expensive ones - I have both atm, the cheap ones are years 'younger' than the others and are in crap condition.

IME the difference between the cheap ones and the expensive ones seems to be that, through a combination of murphy's law and random variation, the ones that fit your face best are inevitably the expensive ones.  Unless you're barakta, who jammily managed to fit one of the children's frames best.

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #27 on: 04 March, 2018, 10:06:59 am »
They all are, these days.
There does seem to be a difference between the cheap ones and expensive ones - I have both atm, the cheap ones are years 'younger' than the others and are in crap condition.

IME the difference between the cheap ones and the expensive ones seems to be that, through a combination of murphy's law and random variation, the ones that fit your face best are inevitably the expensive ones.  Unless you're barakta, who jammily managed to fit one of the children's frames best.

That is something I found - the ones that fit my face are the expensive ones.

The problem I've found with cheaper ones is coatings failing and then the metal corroding and reacting with my skin. Also screw mountings failing. When that happens and the replacement means new multi-hundred-pound lenses, saving a bit on the frames is a false economy.
I've had the occasional problem with 'designer' frames, but raising merry hell about it has gotten me free replacements.
<i>Marmite slave</i>

Mr Larrington

  • A bit ov a lyv wyr by slof standirds
  • Custard Wallah
    • Mr Larrington's Automatic Diary
Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #28 on: 04 March, 2018, 10:30:51 am »
No specs made of Man fit my face properly due to a nose bent in a bizarre dodgem accident in Brighton in the early 1980s.  But my super-lightweight bendy Ti distance ones are better in this regard than the reading ones, and would be even better if they still had the original size lenses instead of the varifocal-sized jobs they currently sport.
External Transparent Wall Inspection Operative & Mayor of Mortagne-au-Perche
Satisfying the Bloodlust of the Masses in Peacetime

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #29 on: 04 March, 2018, 10:53:26 am »
They all are, these days.
There does seem to be a difference between the cheap ones and expensive ones - I have both atm, the cheap ones are years 'younger' than the others and are in crap condition.

Well my Specsavers ones were I think from their £20 range. Flimsy but acceptable - particularly if you’re not taking them on and off every 5 mins. The last ones lasted 5 years and I expect these to last at least as long.
We are making a New World (Paul Nash, 1918)

Wombat

  • Is it supposed to hurt this much?
Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #30 on: 08 March, 2018, 11:35:02 am »
I'm in the "varifocals have really changed my life for the better" camp.  Specsavers et al don't do my weird prescription, I get mine from a local one man band optometrist (well he used to be local, but now I've moved 200 miles away!) and I usually get frames at around £120-150, and pay a total of around £600.  He is VERY thorough, and I refuse to compromise in the hope of saving a few bob, those are the only set of eyes I have, and my life depends on them.

They have been a revelation to me, and I wear them for everything, and the learning process only took a day or so.  I drove away from the optician thinking "hey, this is good, I can see the outside world, AND the instruments!"

I actually had to wear my sunglasses ones last week, but then it was effing sunny on No2 beach in Sierra Leone!  I'm currently suffering from sunburn due to poorly applied sunscreen, in a bungalow in Wales, surrounded by snow...
Wombat

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #31 on: 09 March, 2018, 09:27:00 am »
I'm in the "I hate my varifocals" camp.  Like Wombat I paid >£500 and they fit perfectly but the style I have is not particularly deep (top to bottom) which means the area suitable for reading/close up focus is pretty tiny.  I mainly need them for driving, and they actually make reading the satnav or speedo worse than without.  Perhaps I need to spend another £300 and get the prescription changed or another £500+ and get a different frame style.  I wore them to a conference yesterday to give me a sporting chance of reading the Powerpoint presentations and after a day wearing them my brain was exploding.  I really don't seem to be able to get on with them at all.  >:(

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #32 on: 09 March, 2018, 09:35:45 am »
The opticians emphasised that I needed deeper lenses than I normally wore - by at least 10mm - to get the areas. They picked out frames that had minimum lens area needed.

There is a chance that I won't be able to get on with them - I can return them and get my money back (30 day trial period).
<i>Marmite slave</i>

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #33 on: 09 March, 2018, 09:37:14 am »
Sounds like you've had some good advice and have a fall back position. :thumbsup:  Worth a go then.

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #34 on: 22 March, 2018, 11:10:39 pm »
Finally picked these up. Mixed impressions.

Fine for walking around. Being able to see while walking around, then read a label is fantastic.

Pretty poor for computer use, the 'middle distance' sector is tiny. I paid for the best Zeiss lenses, which promised to be ground to have an expanded middle distance section (two week wait for them to be individually made in Germany). The area is minuscule, I have to move my head to read on one screen, let alone two. I'll try them out at work tomorrow, but initial impressions are really not good.
<i>Marmite slave</i>

hellymedic

  • Just do it!
Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #35 on: 22 March, 2018, 11:55:58 pm »
Get single vision 'keyboard' specs for middle distance. They're not usually very expensive.

You could consider buying online.

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #36 on: 23 March, 2018, 08:48:47 am »
Get single vision 'keyboard' specs for middle distance. They're not usually very expensive.

You could consider buying online.
I have some now - and for my scrip they cost £200 just for the lenses.

It's just disappointing as the varifocal description promised a large middle distance area. It doesn't exist on these, despite buying the expensive lenses.
<i>Marmite slave</i>

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #37 on: 23 March, 2018, 09:48:01 am »
I am having all sorts of problems with my varifocals.

We have wall mounted computers which were mounted by a jobsworth who had no idea at what height to fix them.  Therefore when i am sitting down with a patient and want to look at results or X-rays I have to look through the bottom of my glasses.

I then find that at the end of a clinic I have a painful neck which takes two days to settle!

I really need to get this sorted but am annoyed at the need to buy extra glasses when it is the hospitals fault.


Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #38 on: 23 March, 2018, 10:20:41 am »
If people think varifocal glasses are difficult to adjust to, it's nothing compared to multi-focal contact lenses (RGP in my case).  The world went dizzy for about a week, periphery vision narrowed considerably and it took about a second to focus on anything, near or far.

I persisted (with lots of support from my local Specsavers - they sent off for countless replacement lenses in a trial-an-error effort).  Finally they have settled down (brain adjustment?) and while far from perfect compromise - still takes a while to focus - it's a price worth paying IMO for not having to carry around and leave dotted about the house countless pairs of reading glasses.
The sound of one pannier flapping

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #39 on: 23 March, 2018, 11:44:25 am »
If people think varifocal glasses are difficult to adjust to, it's nothing compared to multi-focal contact lenses (RGP in my case).  The world went dizzy for about a week, periphery vision narrowed considerably and it took about a second to focus on anything, near or far.

I persisted (with lots of support from my local Specsavers - they sent off for countless replacement lenses in a trial-an-error effort).  Finally they have settled down (brain adjustment?) and while far from perfect compromise - still takes a while to focus - it's a price worth paying IMO for not having to carry around and leave dotted about the house countless pairs of reading glasses.

I tried - and failed - with those before opting to  wear varifocals after 25 years of contacts. Reason given (and this from the highly regarded Contact Lens Practice in Brum) was that my dominant eye was too dominant  ::-).
We are making a New World (Paul Nash, 1918)

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #40 on: 23 March, 2018, 01:38:28 pm »
I am having all sorts of problems with my varifocals.

We have wall mounted computers which were mounted by a jobsworth who had no idea at what height to fix them.  Therefore when i am sitting down with a patient and want to look at results or X-rays I have to look through the bottom of my glasses.

I then find that at the end of a clinic I have a painful neck which takes two days to settle!

I really need to get this sorted but am annoyed at the need to buy extra glasses when it is the hospitals fault.

Sounds like a job for occupational health.

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #41 on: 25 March, 2018, 12:04:06 pm »
not sure if of any use for those looking at progressives/ varifocals my preferred online glasses supplier has just recently sent an email promoting their new workspace progressives, I thought the visual in the middle of the article of the types progessives was very good at expaining the different options.

https://www.zennioptical.com/workspace-progressives

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #42 on: 25 March, 2018, 01:54:48 pm »
My optician mentioned that special varifocals are made for pilots, with the near vision area at the top of the specs so they can read the overhead gauges.

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #43 on: 26 March, 2018, 09:11:52 am »
not sure if of any use for those looking at progressives/ varifocals my preferred online glasses supplier has just recently sent an email promoting their new workspace progressives, I thought the visual in the middle of the article of the types progessives was very good at expaining the different options.

https://www.zennioptical.com/workspace-progressives
That's very interesting. I have something like the diagram to the right - standard progressives - but with a larger mid range.

I'd challenge their 'near range' prescription. My prescription for reading (something 30-60cm away) is very different from my prescription for computer screen (90cm away) and completely different again for over 2m away. It is why I can't use off-the-shelf reading glasses (that and astigmatism).

It has taken me a while to get used to the varifocals I have, but I'm (reluctantly) accepting that they do work for me. Yesterday I wore them as my sole glasses all day. Used computer for several hours on the train. Read phone. Obviously engaged in general life around places and people. Just taking me a while to adjust to moving my head and looking through the (more than three) 'zones' in the lenses. The prescription transitions, so I have to pick the area. I've driven a car in them now and they work for that as well.
<i>Marmite slave</i>

menthel

  • Jim is my real, actual name
Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #44 on: 26 March, 2018, 03:40:00 pm »
Having now turned 40 and my body rapidly falling apart for no discernible I ended up with varifocals for computer work and reading, having a different prescription for monitor work and reading. The glasses were fairly bog standard from Boots but have actually suited me fairly well, with a large section straight ahead for computer work and the lower portion for reading. I have noticed a difference and now get fewer headaches when working at the computer.

I just dread the day when my distance vision goes... 

hellymedic

  • Just do it!
Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #45 on: 26 March, 2018, 05:04:50 pm »
Your distance vision is unlikely to get much worse if you've passed 40 without problems.
Myopia mostly develops in young folk. Mine has actually improved a smidgin!
You might develop some astigmatism.

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #46 on: 28 March, 2018, 09:24:08 am »
I have been wearing trifocals for the last 4 years now.

First lot were from Boots at an eye watering price.

2nd and 3d lots are from ASDA at £90 for 2 and more recently £115 I think it was for two. The eye test they do includes the retina photo and the whole affair came across as very professional and there was no rushing at all.

 I am typing here wearing them so not on the floor? FFS if they are that bad take them back as they are self evidently not fit for purpose and will only be sorted if someone says something?

Further I do one job that requires ultra good vision and for £40 they made me a pair for that task which work perfectly. Namely grafting 1mm translucent grubs from a bed of white royal jelly into queen cups. As each queen is worth £40 a pop it is money very well spent. :)

Yes I rate ASDA and happy to say so.

PH
Bees do nothing invariably.

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #47 on: 28 March, 2018, 09:46:22 am »
They are actually very good - just they don't have the field of vision that was suggested on the diagrams. Given the eye-watering price I'm not impressed.

Part of the huge price is getting high-refractive lenses (pretty much obligatory for my strength of prescription; normal lenses would be over 1cm thick at the edge) and a filtering for computer use/driving. Those two added a lot to the price.
<i>Marmite slave</i>

Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #48 on: 14 April, 2018, 09:36:55 am »
I buy my varifocals from ASDA. My most recent pairs were £120 for two including one with a light tint for computer work. They are a good fit and work beautifully.

I also asked them a few years ago now to make me a pair for a very specific job which greatly intrigued the optician. The result is I can easily graft larvae into queen cups and so produce queen bees. Said larvae are smaller than this: c     are white and translucent lying on the bed of white royal jelly so pretty challenging. Delighted with the specs and the help I got from them.

Back in the day I paid over £500 to Boots. Never again am I getting ripped off like that.

PH
Bees do nothing invariably.

velosam

  • '.....you used to be an apple on a stick.'
Re: varifocals - the good, the bad and the ugly
« Reply #49 on: 09 January, 2023, 09:42:29 am »
So I thought, I would seek some advice.

I have worn varifocals for years >10. Recently I had a new pair made and while they seem to work ok, I get a dull ache in my left eye only. Optician cant work out why. They changed them for an upgraded pair of lens but the problem persists.

Oddly I had another pair made for computer use, which does not have the same problem and my old prescription is OK and does not have the same issue. Other than the prescription about (0.25 difference between old and new) my new frames are more rounder than the original square shape.

Could this be causing the issues in the single eye only?  The eye test was redone as well.

thanks for any advice

cheers

sam