I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism) but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which is
important if your kids have allergies).

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?


Only had them for 2 days - but they are fine for driving and have
relatively little distortion and "swim" effect. The worst I've noticed
is my phone goes a bit "parallelogram" at certain angles.

But there is a limit to what can be done with passive optics.


My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high - more or less on the horizontal axis. I reckon it should be about
15-20 degrees below before it starts transitioning from far sight power
to mid sight and reading. If I drop them to the end on my nose, that
actually works quite well.

If I have a laptop on my knees on the train, it's in the near-sight zone
whilst being at a mid-sight distance.

Same with the TV - my TV is below horizontal and my sofa tends to lean
you back as they do.


Now, it's not a huge problem as the lens manufacturer offers a money
back satisfaction guarantee within the first month.

However, the dispensing optician is not raising my confidence levels
hugely. She says she can have a go at adjusting the frames in a couple
of weeks (to give it a fair chance) but I'm not sure how you could
adjust 15 degrees in. her answer to the TV is turn my head down. Well, I
do know varifocals need head movement - but I've tried it and I get a
crick in my neck because I have to look down so far.


Anyone with experience - am I being impatient? For the cost (not cheap)
I'm not really prepared to put up with something highly suboptimal.


Cheers,

Tim

On 16/04/15 18:21, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Tim Watts
wrote:

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

I've never worn anything else, and it didn't take me long at all.

My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high - more or less on the horizontal axis. I reckon it should be
about 15-20 degrees below before it starts transitioning from far
sight power to mid sight and reading. If I drop them to the end on my
nose, that actually works quite well.

Weren't you asked where you wanted it?

No not really. She did take a lot of car measuring things, but seh
seemed to be working to a stock layout rather than spending much time
making sure the zones would suit me.

That did make me wonder. I described the work I did and using laptops on
trains. But she didn't ask me explicitly how I'd like the zones laid out.

Trouble is there's no way to dry run these things because if I knew them
what I know now, I would have told her exactly how I wanted them.

In practice, I'd be happier with a very small reading zone right in teh
bottom centre and even far power over the rest of the field. Something
like bifocals, but with a soft transition rather than this very wide
transition over half the lens.


Now, it's not a huge problem as the lens manufacturer offers a money
back satisfaction guarantee within the first month.

However, the dispensing optician is not raising my confidence levels
hugely.

I'd go back and ask that the boundary be moved.


To be fair, I'll give it the full 2 weeks - but I will certainly insist
on that - or take the refund and go and visit some other dispensing
opticians until I find one that offers more consultation.

I would have thought they'd have had something a little more scientific
to assess these things...

Tim Watts wrote:

My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high

I wonder whether opticians fully appreciate the distances and angles at
which people view screens (whether on desks, with or without monitor
arms, or actually on laps)?

I was first prescribed varifocals a couple of years ago, I was a bit
reluctant, but did get a pair made, I didn't like them and went back to
an even older pair for a while (as the ones I was using up to that point
had really buggered up coatings) and I quite happily put up occasionally
having to take off glasses to read small print on stuff.

The other week, I was doing various jobs that meant I was constantly
taking off/putting on glasses and it was too much, so I dug out the
varifocals and I have to say I get on with them better now, still a few
annoyances, such as glancing at the centre display in the car is
noticeably blurry, when turning the head slightly it's fine, and it
annoys me not to be able to glance up/down, instead having to nod up and
down.

There are some situationsz where you're just looking in the wrong
direction (e.g. looking up at something close such as when wiring a
ceiling rose where they just don't work at all, or looking down to avoid
obstacles on stairs).

On 16/04/15 19:33, Andy Burns wrote:
Tim Watts wrote:

My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high

I wonder whether opticians fully appreciate the distances and angles at
which people view screens (whether on desks, with or without monitor
arms, or actually on laps)?

Trouble is the lenses are so damn expensive by the time they're made up
with the coatings and stuff (guarantee noted but that is by no means
universal).

I think they need to be able to mill out a throwaway trial pair of
lenses out of soft plastic with no coatings so the user can test the
visual areas.




I was first prescribed varifocals a couple of years ago, I was a bit
reluctant, but did get a pair made, I didn't like them and went back to
an even older pair for a while (as the ones I was using up to that point
had really buggered up coatings) and I quite happily put up occasionally
having to take off glasses to read small print on stuff.

The other week, I was doing various jobs that meant I was constantly
taking off/putting on glasses and it was too much, so I dug out the
varifocals and I have to say I get on with them better now, still a few
annoyances, such as glancing at the centre display in the car is
noticeably blurry, when turning the head slightly it's fine, and it
annoys me not to be able to glance up/down, instead having to nod up and
down.

There are some situationsz where you're just looking in the wrong
direction (e.g. looking up at something close such as when wiring a
ceiling rose where they just don't work at all, or looking down to avoid
obstacles on stairs).


Indeed. One accepts the limitations, but I'd certainly hope my majority
use scenarios were catered for.

Driving seems fine and it has not messed up my depth perception (much)
but I am finding having all of the ground fuzzy is a bit dodgy.

On 16/04/2015 18:17, Tim Watts wrote:

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

I don't have any answers, but would just comment that this is an
interesting thread, being a similar age, I had been having similar over
whether it was time to take the plunge with vari or bi focals. I got a
pair of prescription reading glasses a while back, which are very good
when I use them - but the main limitation is not usually having them
when I need them!



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 16/04/15 19:48, Tim Watts wrote:

On a side note - I notice that you can even buy varifocal lenses online
- I cannot think of anything less suitable to do an online purchase of.

On 16/04/15 19:49, John Rumm wrote:
On 16/04/2015 18:17, Tim Watts wrote:

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

I don't have any answers, but would just comment that this is an
interesting thread, being a similar age, I had been having similar over
whether it was time to take the plunge with vari or bi focals. I got a
pair of prescription reading glasses a while back, which are very good
when I use them - but the main limitation is not usually having them
when I need them!

It's probably fair to say I won't say too much more until the 2 weeks is
up - better give it a chance...

But then I'll make a decision one way or another. My fallback plan is of
course to reglaze with single vision lenses and maybe revisit in a few
years.

At the moment I feel bifocals would actually work better - at least the
reading portion would be small and well defined and I'd have long
distance everywhere else. I'd just totally look like a grandad.

On 16/04/2015 18:17, Tim Watts wrote:
I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism) but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which is
important if your kids have allergies).

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them?

It varies for different people.
In my case it was minutes.
The wife took a day or so.
I know some that have never got used to them.

And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

I went to collect a pair and I couldn't see through them.
They had put the cylinder 90 degrees out.



Only had them for 2 days - but they are fine for driving and have
relatively little distortion and "swim" effect. The worst I've noticed
is my phone goes a bit "parallelogram" at certain angles.

That's the astigmatism.


But there is a limit to what can be done with passive optics.


My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high - more or less on the horizontal axis. I reckon it should be about
15-20 degrees below before it starts transitioning from far sight power
to mid sight and reading. If I drop them to the end on my nose, that
actually works quite well.

If I have a laptop on my knees on the train, it's in the near-sight zone
whilst being at a mid-sight distance.

Same with the TV - my TV is below horizontal and my sofa tends to lean
you back as they do.


Now, it's not a huge problem as the lens manufacturer offers a money
back satisfaction guarantee within the first month.

However, the dispensing optician is not raising my confidence levels
hugely. She says she can have a go at adjusting the frames in a couple
of weeks (to give it a fair chance) but I'm not sure how you could
adjust 15 degrees in. her answer to the TV is turn my head down. Well, I
do know varifocals need head movement - but I've tried it and I get a
crick in my neck because I have to look down so far.


Anyone with experience - am I being impatient? For the cost (not cheap)
I'm not really prepared to put up with something highly suboptimal.

Varifocals are cheap, you can get two pairs for less than £159 including
fitting in a shop without going online.
That includes high index lenses if your prescription is high and multi
coating.

I hope they told you about the different types of varifocals you can
get, the main difference being the width of the reading channel.

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism)

I'm at -6 and -7, no astig.

but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which is
important if your kids have allergies).

I just read stuff like without the glasses.

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to wonder
if my prescription is actually not correct?


Only had them for 2 days - but they are fine for driving and have
relatively little distortion and "swim" effect. The worst I've noticed is
my phone goes a bit "parallelogram" at certain angles.

But there is a limit to what can be done with passive optics.


My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high - more or less on the horizontal axis. I reckon it should be about
15-20 degrees below before it starts transitioning from far sight power to
mid sight and reading. If I drop them to the end on my nose, that actually
works quite well.

If I have a laptop on my knees on the train, it's in the near-sight zone
whilst being at a mid-sight distance.

Same with the TV - my TV is below horizontal and my sofa tends to lean you
back as they do.


Now, it's not a huge problem as the lens manufacturer offers a money back
satisfaction guarantee within the first month.

However, the dispensing optician is not raising my confidence levels
hugely. She says she can have a go at adjusting the frames in a couple of
weeks (to give it a fair chance) but I'm not sure how you could adjust 15
degrees in. her answer to the TV is turn my head down. Well, I do know
varifocals need head movement - but I've tried it and I get a crick in my
neck because I have to look down so far.


Anyone with experience - am I being impatient? For the cost (not cheap)
I'm not really prepared to put up with something highly suboptimal.


Cheers,

Tim

On 16/04/2015 19:48, Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/04/15 19:33, Andy Burns wrote:
Tim Watts wrote:

My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high

I wonder whether opticians fully appreciate the distances and angles at
which people view screens (whether on desks, with or without monitor
arms, or actually on laps)?

Trouble is the lenses are so damn expensive by the time they're made up
with the coatings and stuff (guarantee noted but that is by no means
universal).

I think they need to be able to mill out a throwaway trial pair of
lenses out of soft plastic with no coatings so the user can test the
visual areas.

Every optician I have used will replace the varifocals if you can't use
them.

On 16/04/2015 19:49, Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/04/15 19:48, Tim Watts wrote:

On a side note - I notice that you can even buy varifocal lenses online
- I cannot think of anything less suitable to do an online purchase of.

I looked at a few online sites and they are more expensive than using a
normal shop. In one case they were double the price and you don't get a
fitting either. You need to make measurements yourself or take photos
and let them measure the photos.

On 16/04/2015 20:12, john james wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism)

I'm at -6 and -7, no astig.

but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which
is important if your kids have allergies).

I just read stuff like without the glasses.

If its too small I use the camera on the phone, it may as well get some use.

In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:

....

At the moment I feel bifocals would actually work better - at least the
reading portion would be small and well defined and I'd have long
distance everywhere else. I'd just totally look like a grandad.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Looks to be a typing malfunction. You obviously meant to write
"mature, urbane and sophisticated".

Can't help you much, although I've been wearing varifocals for
several years. Got used to them very quickly, although I usually
start wearing new glasses the next day I get them. In the probably
misguided belief that it's easier on the eyes to avoid switching
prescriptions during the day.

I believe some have trouble adjusting to varifocals. In which case
they may be better off with bifocals or separate reading glasses.
A friend who holds a HGV licence stated he wasn't allowed to wear
varifocals whilst working because of the distortion at the edges.

Got my varifocals from a national high street chain. Had my eyes
tested by them last December and thought the optician doing the
testing was very capable and professional.
--
Dennis Davis

On 16/04/15 19:59, Dennis@home wrote:
On 16/04/2015 18:17, Tim Watts wrote:

How long does it take to get used to them?

It varies for different people.
In my case it was minutes.
The wife took a day or so.
I know some that have never got used to them.

Hmm - that is not encouraging... Been nearly 3 full days and I've not
been naughty in going back to my old pair...

And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

I went to collect a pair and I couldn't see through them.
They had put the cylinder 90 degrees out.



Only had them for 2 days - but they are fine for driving and have
relatively little distortion and "swim" effect. The worst I've noticed
is my phone goes a bit "parallelogram" at certain angles.

That's the astigmatism.

Didn't have that with my single focus lenses - worse problem was slight
bending of lines at the periphery - just made it a bit harder to choose
the one straight bit of wood in B&Q.


Anyone with experience - am I being impatient? For the cost (not cheap)
I'm not really prepared to put up with something highly suboptimal.

Varifocals are cheap, you can get two pairs for less than £159 including
fitting in a shop without going online.
That includes high index lenses if your prescription is high and multi
coating.

I'm in the South East which never helps...

I hope they told you about the different types of varifocals you can
get, the main difference being the width of the reading channel.

On 16/04/15 20:12, john james wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism)

I'm at -6 and -7, no astig.

I'm going backwards - was -3.75

but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which
is important if your kids have allergies).

I just read stuff like without the glasses.


It was getting annoying, but I might just go back to that...

"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 16/04/2015 19:49, Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/04/15 19:48, Tim Watts wrote:

On a side note - I notice that you can even buy varifocal lenses online
- I cannot think of anything less suitable to do an online purchase of.

I looked at a few online sites

You ****ed that up then.

and they are more expensive than using a normal shop.

The one I use is much cheaper.

In one case they were double the price

Mine can be a tenth of the price of the normal shop.

and you don't get a fitting either.

Sure, but you dont with sunglasses either,
hardly the end of civilisation as we know it.

You need to make measurements yourself

There is just one measurement and its trivial
to do that and isn't that critical either.

or take photos and let them measure the photos.

On 16/04/15 20:30, Dennis@home wrote:
On 16/04/2015 19:48, Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/04/15 19:33, Andy Burns wrote:
Tim Watts wrote:

My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high

I wonder whether opticians fully appreciate the distances and angles at
which people view screens (whether on desks, with or without monitor
arms, or actually on laps)?

Trouble is the lenses are so damn expensive by the time they're made up
with the coatings and stuff (guarantee noted but that is by no means
universal).

I think they need to be able to mill out a throwaway trial pair of
lenses out of soft plastic with no coatings so the user can test the
visual areas.

Every optician I have used will replace the varifocals if you can't use
them.



Here there's even less debate as the manufacturer has a "non adaption
guarantee" so I'm not expecting too much argument, even if it hurts her
pride...

On 16/04/15 20:33, Dennis@home wrote:
On 16/04/2015 19:49, Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/04/15 19:48, Tim Watts wrote:

On a side note - I notice that you can even buy varifocal lenses online
- I cannot think of anything less suitable to do an online purchase of.

I looked at a few online sites and they are more expensive than using a
normal shop. In one case they were double the price and you don't get a
fitting either. You need to make measurements yourself or take photos
and let them measure the photos.

That'll be for the pupil distance - I know mine because I hear her say
them (there are two, one for near and one for far).

I'd have no problems with online for single focus, because, apart from
fitting, there's not much can go wrong with a recent prescription. But
as progressives need various other measurements I reckon they just knock
out a generic template.

"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 16/04/2015 20:12, john james wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism)

I'm at -6 and -7, no astig.

but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which
is important if your kids have allergies).

I just read stuff like without the glasses.

If its too small I use the camera on the phone,

Yeah, I have done that with really tiny stuff like the text on a nano sim.

And to take a pic of stuff that I can't get my face close enough
to to read without my glasses like the model number plate on
a fridge or freezer etc inside the compressor area.

it may as well get some use.

I use it for taking notes of the price of stuff when
checking the price of stuff that isn't available online.

And for the odo reading in the car when filling up
with petrol for the records etc.

On 16/04/2015 20:40, Dennis@home wrote:
On 16/04/2015 20:12, john james wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism)

I'm at -6 and -7, no astig.

but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which
is important if your kids have allergies).

I just read stuff like without the glasses.

If its too small I use the camera on the phone, it may as well get some
use.

I have to do that with every PC I setup - just so I can read the new
dinky windows CoAs!


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 16/04/15 21:22, Dennis Davis wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:

...

At the moment I feel bifocals would actually work better - at least the
reading portion would be small and well defined and I'd have long
distance everywhere else. I'd just totally look like a grandad.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Looks to be a typing malfunction. You obviously meant to write
"mature, urbane and sophisticated".

Thank you - but I was more thinking "old crunchy ****** with poor taste
in clothes"


I suppose I must now surrender and buy a cardigan.

Can't help you much, although I've been wearing varifocals for
several years. Got used to them very quickly, although I usually
start wearing new glasses the next day I get them. In the probably
misguided belief that it's easier on the eyes to avoid switching
prescriptions during the day.

I believe some have trouble adjusting to varifocals. In which case
they may be better off with bifocals or separate reading glasses.
A friend who holds a HGV licence stated he wasn't allowed to wear
varifocals whilst working because of the distortion at the edges.

Got my varifocals from a national high street chain. Had my eyes
tested by them last December and thought the optician doing the
testing was very capable and professional.


Thanks for that - all most intersting...

On 16/04/2015 19:59, Dennis@home wrote:
On 16/04/2015 18:17, Tim Watts wrote:

Only had them for 2 days - but they are fine for driving and have
relatively little distortion and "swim" effect. The worst I've noticed
is my phone goes a bit "parallelogram" at certain angles.

That's the astigmatism.

That turns out not to be the case.

I tried a pair. My distance vision is fine; better than most people in
fact. It's just that I can't see anything less than a couple of metres
away. I found that straight ahead they were great, for reading they were
great, but anything looking out of the side of the glasses was distorted
and unfocused. It looked like cylindrical aberration to me, AKA astigmatism.

I gave up.

I'm currently reading this screen with a pair of pound shop readers (+2
IIRC... but if I take them off to look I can't read the number...) It
doesn't really matter when I wreck them

Andy

On 16/04/2015 21:27, Rod Speed wrote:


"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 16/04/2015 19:49, Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/04/15 19:48, Tim Watts wrote:

On a side note - I notice that you can even buy varifocal lenses online
- I cannot think of anything less suitable to do an online purchase of.

I looked at a few online sites

You ****ed that up then.

and they are more expensive than using a normal shop.

The one I use is much cheaper.

go on then, which one.

On 16/04/2015 21:29, Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/04/15 20:33, Dennis@home wrote:
On 16/04/2015 19:49, Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/04/15 19:48, Tim Watts wrote:

On a side note - I notice that you can even buy varifocal lenses online
- I cannot think of anything less suitable to do an online purchase of.

I looked at a few online sites and they are more expensive than using a
normal shop. In one case they were double the price and you don't get a
fitting either. You need to make measurements yourself or take photos
and let them measure the photos.

That'll be for the pupil distance - I know mine because I hear her say
them (there are two, one for near and one for far).

I'd have no problems with online for single focus, because, apart from
fitting, there's not much can go wrong with a recent prescription. But
as progressives need various other measurements I reckon they just knock
out a generic template.

Well that just doesn't work.
You need to measure the pupil distance, the height of each eye (they are
frequently different) at the minimum.

On 2015-04-16 17:17:14 +0000, Tim Watts said:

I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism) but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which is
important if your kids have allergies).

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?


Only had them for 2 days - but they are fine for driving


I tried them and thought they were dangerous for driving so I took them
back and got a set made up for working at the computer so I don't have
to sit too close.

E.

On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 19:49:06 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

On 16/04/2015 18:17, Tim Watts wrote:

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

I don't have any answers, but would just comment that this is an
interesting thread, being a similar age, I had been having similar over
whether it was time to take the plunge with vari or bi focals. I got a
pair of prescription reading glasses a while back, which are very good
when I use them - but the main limitation is not usually having them
when I need them!

My solution is to carry a monocle everywhere. Small, easy to carry....

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £3 0a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 18:17:14 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism) but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which is
important if your kids have allergies).

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

Ive been wearing varifocals for a very long time now, longer than I care
to remember and have had no problems with them.
Apart from one occassion when I went for a cheaper lens rather than the
more expensive one, that made a real difference but the optician was
happy to upgrade them to either Nikon or Zeiss paying only the difference
in cost between the cheap and the more expensive. My advice would be to
go for a quality lens if you haven't already done so.

In terms of querying the prescription, many opticians will offer free or
cheap eyetests so you can always get a second opinion on prescription at
nominal cost.



My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high - more or less on the horizontal axis. I reckon it should be about
15-20 degrees below before it starts transitioning from far sight power
to mid sight and reading. If I drop them to the end on my nose, that
actually works quite well.

Could be a combination of things here - firstly that the measurement
between eyes and lens were incorrectly specified which may be one reason
why you find it easier to drop them further from your eyes and secondly
that the transition point was poorly marked. I generally have to go
through various 'read this. look at that' scenarios whilst dots are
marked on the lens to show where I look in such scenarios - did this
happen with you? If not it could be they are wrongly marked up.

Tim Watts wrote:
I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which is
important if your kids have allergies).

No one can read the ingredients on food packaging. Similarly the usage
on a container of Boss white, I opened today.

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 16/04/15 20:12, john james wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism)

I'm at -6 and -7, no astig.

I'm going backwards - was -3.75

Yeah, I was told that would happen in old age
when I first started to wear glasses at about 13
or something but it hasnt happened yet and
I'm heading into the 70s now, still getting worse.

But I have just been told that I have cataracts
so its all academic now for me.

but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which
is important if your kids have allergies).

I just read stuff like without the glasses.


It was getting annoying, but I might just go back to that...

The only real problem I find with that approach is that its
not easy to read the labels when stuff is on the shelves
with the small type. Have to pick it up to read it that way.

I normally read stuff like a book without my glasses but now
find that its a bit close to my face to be very convenient so
will just get some reading glasses for that.

On 16/04/2015 19:49, John Rumm wrote:
On 16/04/2015 18:17, Tim Watts wrote:

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

I don't have any answers, but would just comment that this is an
interesting thread, being a similar age, I had been having similar over
whether it was time to take the plunge with vari or bi focals. I got a
pair of prescription reading glasses a while back, which are very good
when I use them - but the main limitation is not usually having them
when I need them!

I have had bifocals for years and got used to them after a day or so.
No trouble looking down for steps, etc. or for driving, but could be a
problem when I used to repair cars - underneath trying to look back over
your forehead. :-)



--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

On 16/04/15 22:10, eastender wrote:
On 2015-04-16 17:17:14 +0000, Tim Watts said:

I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism) but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which
is important if your kids have allergies).

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?


Only had them for 2 days - but they are fine for driving


I tried them and thought they were dangerous for driving so I took them
back and got a set made up for working at the computer so I don't have
to sit too close.

E.

It seems mine are OK for distance "above the horizon" and that suits
driving. But I'm less keen on not seeing the floor clearly when I walk...

On 16/04/15 22:19, Mark Allread wrote:
On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 18:17:14 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism) but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which is
important if your kids have allergies).

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

Ive been wearing varifocals for a very long time now, longer than I care
to remember and have had no problems with them.
Apart from one occassion when I went for a cheaper lens rather than the
more expensive one, that made a real difference but the optician was
happy to upgrade them to either Nikon or Zeiss paying only the difference
in cost between the cheap and the more expensive. My advice would be to
go for a quality lens if you haven't already done so.

In terms of querying the prescription, many opticians will offer free or
cheap eyetests so you can always get a second opinion on prescription at
nominal cost.

I believe the basic prescription is fine - I think it's the dispensing
that's gone wrong - or I just don't get on with them... Not sure which.




My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high - more or less on the horizontal axis. I reckon it should be about
15-20 degrees below before it starts transitioning from far sight power
to mid sight and reading. If I drop them to the end on my nose, that
actually works quite well.

Could be a combination of things here - firstly that the measurement
between eyes and lens were incorrectly specified which may be one reason
why you find it easier to drop them further from your eyes and secondly
that the transition point was poorly marked. I generally have to go
through various 'read this. look at that' scenarios whilst dots are
marked on the lens to show where I look in such scenarios - did this
happen with you? If not it could be they are wrongly marked up.


There was not a lot of that - certainly not with my main use cases...

On 16/04/15 22:25, john james wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
On 16/04/15 20:12, john james wrote:


"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism)

I'm at -6 and -7, no astig.

I'm going backwards - was -3.75

Yeah, I was told that would happen in old age
when I first started to wear glasses at about 13
or something but it hasnt happened yet and
I'm heading into the 70s now, still getting worse.

But I have just been told that I have cataracts
so its all academic now for me.

Apparently you can now get varifocal lenses for cataract ops...


but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which
is important if your kids have allergies).

I just read stuff like without the glasses.


It was getting annoying, but I might just go back to that...

The only real problem I find with that approach is that its
not easy to read the labels when stuff is on the shelves
with the small type. Have to pick it up to read it that way.

I normally read stuff like a book without my glasses but now
find that its a bit close to my face to be very convenient so
will just get some reading glasses for that.

In article , Tim Watts
writes
I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism) but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which is
important if your kids have allergies).

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?


Only had them for 2 days - but they are fine for driving and have
relatively little distortion and "swim" effect. The worst I've noticed
is my phone goes a bit "parallelogram" at certain angles.

But there is a limit to what can be done with passive optics.


My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high - more or less on the horizontal axis. I reckon it should be about
15-20 degrees below before it starts transitioning from far sight power
to mid sight and reading. If I drop them to the end on my nose, that
actually works quite well.

If I have a laptop on my knees on the train, it's in the near-sight
zone whilst being at a mid-sight distance.

Same with the TV - my TV is below horizontal and my sofa tends to lean
you back as they do.


Now, it's not a huge problem as the lens manufacturer offers a money
back satisfaction guarantee within the first month.

However, the dispensing optician is not raising my confidence levels
hugely. She says she can have a go at adjusting the frames in a couple
of weeks (to give it a fair chance) but I'm not sure how you could
adjust 15 degrees in. her answer to the TV is turn my head down. Well,
I do know varifocals need head movement - but I've tried it and I get a
crick in my neck because I have to look down so far.


Anyone with experience - am I being impatient? For the cost (not cheap)
I'm not really prepared to put up with something highly suboptimal.


Cheers,

Tim
I tried them a couple of years ago and I couldn't get used to them so
back they went. My conclusion was that I was and still am too active adn
my head movement was too quick and I felt giddy momentarily when I
turned my head. I'll maybe try them again when I get really old..
--
bert

In article , John
Rumm writes
On 16/04/2015 18:17, Tim Watts wrote:

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

I don't have any answers, but would just comment that this is an
interesting thread, being a similar age, I had been having similar over
whether it was time to take the plunge with vari or bi focals. I got a
pair of prescription reading glasses a while back, which are very good
when I use them - but the main limitation is not usually having them
when I need them!



And not being able to find them!!
--
bert

"Dennis@home" wrote in message
b.com...
On 16/04/2015 21:27, Rod Speed wrote:


"Dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 16/04/2015 19:49, Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/04/15 19:48, Tim Watts wrote:

On a side note - I notice that you can even buy varifocal lenses online
- I cannot think of anything less suitable to do an online purchase of.

I looked at a few online sites

You ****ed that up then.

and they are more expensive than using a normal shop.

The one I use is much cheaper.

go on then, which one.

http://www.zennioptical.com/

$25 for my last metal frame pair with all the available coatings.
$13 without the coatings
http://www.zennioptical.com/451321-m...h-spring-hinge

Tim Watts wrote:

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

The normal problem with glasses is that the optical centre is not the
vision optical centre. My experience is that the optical centre is
pitched 4 - 6mm too high if you are in a laid back position. It sounds
like you have the same problem. I find that two pairs of glasses worn at
the same time are best for close up work. I use off the shelf 1.5D
glasses when necessary. The main pair provide the astigmatism
correction, the second pair the magnification. A separate pair focussed
at 30" is best for computer work IME. I have doubts about some
prescriptions. I suspect that the lenses are grouped similarly to
resistors, and if you need an odd value, it doesn't exist within some
dispensers stocks.

"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism) but at that
power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which is
important if your kids have allergies).

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to wonder
if my prescription is actually not correct?



I couldn't get used to mine:

The transition from the short sight correction to normal was too high up and
made long distance vision too fuzzy unless I tried really hard to look out
of the top half, but when used with a computer screen (which is why I really
need them) the glasses suffered from glare from the screen, so I found it
much easier just to take them off.

Fortunately, I had got them on a 2 for 1 deal and I opted to have the second
pair as single vision, so I use them for long distance and take them off for
close up work. The Varifocals are kept in the drawer for an emergency
spare.

No-one ever mentioned a "satisfaction guarantee", but I will certainly look
out for that next time as it's becoming apparent that my close vision is no
longer 20/20 and I shall soon need that corrected as well :-( (oh the
horrors of old age!)

tim

On Thu, 16 Apr 2015 22:34:09 +0100, bert wrote:

In article , John
Rumm writes
On 16/04/2015 18:17, Tim Watts wrote:

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

I don't have any answers, but would just comment that this is an
interesting thread, being a similar age, I had been having similar over
whether it was time to take the plunge with vari or bi focals. I got a
pair of prescription reading glasses a while back, which are very good
when I use them - but the main limitation is not usually having them
when I need them!



And not being able to find them!!

Going back to the monocle..it's on a cord, hung round my necy, and kept
in a shirt pocket.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £3 0a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

"Dennis@home" wrote in message
b.com...
On 16/04/2015 18:17, Tim Watts wrote:
I expect there's a few people here with them...

I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the
progressive lens route.

I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism) but at
that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which is
important if your kids have allergies).

My question is:

How long does it take to get used to them?

It varies for different people.
In my case it was minutes.
The wife took a day or so.
I know some that have never got used to them.

And is it reasonable to
wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?

I went to collect a pair and I couldn't see through them.
They had put the cylinder 90 degrees out.



Only had them for 2 days - but they are fine for driving and have
relatively little distortion and "swim" effect. The worst I've noticed
is my phone goes a bit "parallelogram" at certain angles.

That's the astigmatism.


But there is a limit to what can be done with passive optics.


My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too
high - more or less on the horizontal axis. I reckon it should be about
15-20 degrees below before it starts transitioning from far sight power
to mid sight and reading. If I drop them to the end on my nose, that
actually works quite well.

If I have a laptop on my knees on the train, it's in the near-sight zone
whilst being at a mid-sight distance.

Same with the TV - my TV is below horizontal and my sofa tends to lean
you back as they do.


Now, it's not a huge problem as the lens manufacturer offers a money
back satisfaction guarantee within the first month.

However, the dispensing optician is not raising my confidence levels
hugely. She says she can have a go at adjusting the frames in a couple
of weeks (to give it a fair chance) but I'm not sure how you could
adjust 15 degrees in. her answer to the TV is turn my head down. Well, I
do know varifocals need head movement - but I've tried it and I get a
crick in my neck because I have to look down so far.


Anyone with experience - am I being impatient? For the cost (not cheap)
I'm not really prepared to put up with something highly suboptimal.

Varifocals are cheap, you can get two pairs for less than £159 including
fitting in a shop without going online.

most shops offer various "grades" of VF. You are right, the lowest option
is "cheap" at about 30 quid extra but an upgrade to the best grade will cost
you an extra 200 quid.

God know what you get for that money

perhaps that does solve the problems but, "do you feel lucky!"

tim