Reply With QuoteI had reading glasses for a few years then 6 months ago I went for Verizon focals, next time I’ll go back to a pair for reading and a pair for day to day, I just can’t get on with veri focals.
I’ve just had my first eye test. I’m looking to get the frames and lens online but need a wee bit of help.
Here are the results.
R. Sph +0.25 Cyl -0.75 Axis 128.0. near add +1.00
L. Sph 0.00 Cyl -1.25 Axis 52.0 near add +1.00
does that mean for reading glasses I need to add 1.00 to sph and Cyl?
My thoughts are to have a pair of driving glasses and then a pair of reading ones. What is the general consensus for that or do most people go for vari- focals?
thanks in advance for any help.
I had reading glasses for a few years then 6 months ago I went for Verizon focals, next time I’ll go back to a pair for reading and a pair for day to day, I just can’t get on with veri focals.
For reading just add the near add to the sph only.Originally Posted by badger1
So your NV rx is
R +1.25 / -0.75 x 128
L +1.00 / -0.25 x 52
2 pairs would be fine as your vision without glasses in the distance will be adequate so use them for driving mainly but TV/cinema etc. NV pair just for reading but you won't see anything more than 4 feet or so away.
If you want to do both at the same time then you'll need varifocals.
I'd strongly advise you to do it properly, face to face not online. Frankly if you buy varifocals online you're asking for trouble.
I can recommend Lynne Fernandes
www.lynnefernandes.co.uk
She has a couple of practices in Bristol.
Hope that helps
David
Definitely wouldn't buy glasses online. Getting them fitted correctly is vital.......more important than trying to save a few quid.
Paul
I would never buy varifocals online as they need accurate measurement & fitting. I'd be willing to bet the one measurement the optician didn't give you is your PD, which is how far apart your eyes are. Without it you won't be able to order glasses online anyway.
I specifically asked him to measure my PD, so I do have that. Assume I didn't go for vari focals and just had two pairs would you still not order online?
The pair of glasses I like (and have tried on) are £180 in Vision Express/£225 at Lynne Fernandes, and I'm not sure that includes lenses or not. The same pair, including lenses, are £95 online.
So its not exactly saving a few quid!!!!
Last edited by badger1; 5th October 2017 at 09:48.
Your reading PD is usually 1.5 to 2.0mm less than your distance PD, although given your PX its not worth worrying about............
I stand corrected then. I have varifocals with three blended correction zones & whilst they are good for far & middle distance I find them not so good for reading. The reading section is at the bottom of the lens so while they are OK for reading the label on a tin it's not relaxing to read a magazine or book. Given the price difference you could try one pair from an on line supplier & only risk £100 or so. I'm not sure if a return would be allowed under the CCR as these would probably count as personalised items.
Can i ask what prompted you to look at getting glasses? Your prescription is very mild.
I was sitting in a café and the names of the shops across the road were not as sharp as I was used to. I've also begun to notice that reading is similar. I'd never had a test before and up until that point I always assumed I had 20/20 vision. A sign of getting old I assume.
He did say that I was legally able to drive without glasses so that was a relief
Last edited by badger1; 5th October 2017 at 11:37.
If you've not worn glasses full time before I'd be careful about spending a lot of money on a set of varifocals. Glasses are a pain, they fog up, get rain on them, slip off & are a general nuisance. Have you thought about contact lenses?
As a quick test buy a £10 pair of 1.00 or 1.25 reading glasses & see if that helps your reading. They won't correct the astigmatism but it might be worth a try.
The legal vision requirement for driving is alarmingly low. It's the second or third line on the chart.
I'm not a professional, but I have worn glasses since my teens and I have had varifocals for years. However, I am very myopic. Your prescription is very mild except for the cylindrical correction of an astigmatism in both eyes.
I'll be quite happy to be corrected if I'm wrong, but I would try some over the counter reading glasses (+1 or +1.5) to see if you get on with them. They're cheap enough and available from many shops and libraries.
Once you have noticed a deficiency in your vision, I think that you'll be happy to have it corrected. So glasses for driving may become glasses for everyday wear. They will also relieve any strain that you may be putting on your eyes and will probably be most appreciated at night.
If, as it does with age, your eyesight slowly deteriorates or you cannot get on with two pairs of glasses, then varifocals (or bifocals) may better suit your needs.
There's a chart?
I found my reading vision going (35+ years of computer work didn't help I guess), but my wife's a Dispensing Optician (she would totally agree with walkerwek) so I wasn't buying online.
Actually I did for a bit, I used to buy ready-readers from Poundland just to annoy her - At first they worked, but in the end I had to admit defeat and get a proper test.
I had a pair of readers to start with, but once you start wearing glasses, your eyesight gets worse, so I needed some for computer work too, but I can still see over long distance. I hate wearing glasses, but I can't really read without them in less than excellent light, but obviously contact lenses aren't an option.
I once had 20/10 vision (apparently - When I first met the wife, she persuaded me to get an eye test) which is very good, but I'm old and falling to bits, so it's about 20/80 now! (actually I've no idea what it is on that scale now, as no-one uses it!)
M
I am also just a varifocals user and I get on extremely well with them. Except when driving at night where my old glasses mean incoming cars are less blinding. I don’t know if it’s just an impression or if it has any scientific basis but there.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Ready readers won't be wonderful in this case as a large part of the prescription is astigmatism which they don't correct. Yes it will make things larger but they'll still be a bit fuzzy around the edges. Big and blurred is better than small and blurred but remains blurred all the same.
Your eyes don't get worse once you start wearing glasses. Its just that you have glasses at the top of a slippery slope that you will descend whether you have glasses or not. So it just seems that way!
Varifocals are fine but get half decent ones. A lot of costs bandied about from internet sites are at retail less than I pay as trade so they aren't the same lenses and it makes a big difference. Also the big multiples like to hide behind gold/silver/bronze tiers. What that allows them to do is change their lens supplier and not tell the punters. You had their gold lens last time and you get it again but its a different lens. This doesn't always end well. Find out exactly who makes it and which model it is. Then and only then can you make a sensible comparison of cost. Its bit like saying all watches are equally expensive and have the same quality of movement etc.
David
Do you have AR coatings on both? Are they the same quality. The lesser ones reflect brighter colours They are Anti reflection coatings so the brighter the reflection the less effective they are.
Otherwise it can be down the curvature of the lens itself and the angle the frame sits relative to you facial features.
Thank you. I think I have AR coating, and went for the highest index to have the thinnest possible lenses. Unless they have even better now, mine are almost 3 years old (eyesight hasn’t degraded apparently)
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
I first realised I needed glasses when it became struggle to fill in my football coupon (remember them?). I've had varifocals for 20 years now although I do use my prescription to buy a cheap pair of readers online for reading in bed.
Eddie
Whole chunks of my life come under the heading "it seemed like a good idea at the time".
Slightly off topic, but may I ask the resident opticians what their view of Optomap is?
I've worn glasses since I was around 30 (I'm now 52). Initially it was a very mild -0.5 for short-sight. Around 6 years ago I got varifocals with -0.5 and +0.25 just to aid reading a little; they were excellent. I had an eye test a few months ago and my prescription has changed to -0.75 and +.075 and the varifocals I bought as a result are a complete pain. The difference, for me, is now too great and the area for reading is so small as to be irritating. I will be having the lenses changed to correct purely for the short-sight and have purchased several pairs of reading glasses online for just a few pounds in preparation for this. I'm fortunate in that I have a relatively straightforward prescription.
The price of prescription glasses in the UK is, in my opinion, extortionate and I will never buy from an opticians again. I'm awaiting delivery of my first online purchase for non-reading glasses.
Optomap is fine but rather out done by a decent OCT machine these days. To be fair they do slightly different things but I'm looking at an OCT but they aren't cheap!
Good advice but in my experience it's often difficult to find the same lens sold by different retailers.
My independent sold me Seiko lenses. No idea where they sit on the scale but it's a brand I trust!
1.76 is the thinnnest out there but mostly they are 1.74. This hasn't changed in 3 years. Good 1.74 (Lineis from essilor or nulux 1.74 from hoya for example) have a half decent v (aberation) value these days but it depends what you have and where they came from. This can make a difference. More distortion = more problems. Also how they were fitted. Some people must have vertical centration heights in aspheric hi index, others less so. In theory everyone should on aspherics but it isn't always the case.
Did they come from the same place?
Can you tell me that an OCT machine is please?
Also, does Optomap actually offer the optician a clear advantage when assessing the condition of the eye (if they do not have an OCT machine)?
Sorry - another question; are Lindberg frames worth the cash??
Sorry for the online consultation David. I’ve been seeing the same multiple (VE) for almost as long as I’ve been in this country...
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Disagree, you're paying the extra for the service you'll receive in getting the optimum fit. I speak from experience.
Suit yourself, I'll save money where I can but buying glasses online isn't something I'd do.
Paul
an OCT machine is a laser scanning device which images the retina in cross section and can enable diagnosis of certain retinal pathologies in patients which can be hard to see on examination. Optomap/Optos is a method to allow wider field images to be taken of the retina than can be achieved with a standard fundus camera.
Both are helpful in the diagnosis and monitoring of certain eye conditions and in the diagnosis of patients with certain eye symptoms however they do not add a lot in patients with no pre existing eye symptoms or problems. IMO they are best used in a targeted way, not used on anyone who walks through the door of their optician as like MRI scans and things tend to find lots of incidental things which result in concern by the patient and consign them to loads of other appointments and tests!
Some less reputable opticians sell them (OCT scans mainly) as an extra to patients to offset the high lease/capital costs of the machine as mentioned above with minimal information being gained for either party.
That sounds about right.
I'm not sure the last sentence is entirely helpful - lots of pathology isn't easily detectable with simple fundus examination and many people have been very grateful for issues identified by OCT which hadn't been picked up before. Yes you can just keep doing test after test for no apparent reason but I'd argue that those practices who have chosen to invest what is a considerable amount of money in one of these are more likely to be those who have more than a passing interest in their profession not just making money out if it. There are of course exceptions to every sweeping statement.
Put it this way the last set of lectures I went to an Ophthalmology registrar wondered how we could do a retinal examination without one. Our goalposts are in a slightly different place to theirs but it paints a picture.
Lindberg frames - well we sell them. They're a lot of money but they are well screwed together (not literally as they have no screws) and the materials are excellent. The vast majority of patient's who have them (including me) are very happy with them. You'd have to go and see one and see what you think.
David
No bother. Id be inclined to ask if they have provided lenses from the same manufacturer each time and get the base curves checked (front surface curve) and the centration to see if they differ. Even if the prescription is the same lenses on differing curves can be quite different to wear.
David
The ones I have are my first varifocals, I was just shortsighted when I was younger
Funnily enough I took to varifocals like a duck to water, never any dizziness or difficulty going down the stairs, but they privilege long and medium distance to the point that I take them off to read or use my mobile.
Last edited by Saint-Just; 6th October 2017 at 19:40.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Thanks for the feedback - I ordered a couple of pairs this afternoon.
That is a fair point. OCT is very powerful when targeted to the correct patients/presentations. I am probably slightly jaded by seeing lots of patients referred from their optician with "a finding" on an OCT scan when the patient had no symptoms and the referrer has no idea what the scan actually shows nor the urgency of its further assessment!
I rarely see the patients from a good optometrist who have undergone OCT as these would naturally have avoided unnecessary referral or they would have been referred at the appropriate interval to the appropriate service. Even where I work, OCT in optometrists practice is fairly rare.
Goodness, where do they work? A place with 24 hour access to OCT is somewhere I have never had the pleasure of working and how they have got through their work to date without it is rather incredible! Hopefully they are never presented with a peripheral retinal issue-I assume they just the Optos...
Posting Permissions
