MIMF

Hi, now that I've reached a certain age, I find that presbyopia is becoming a nuisance when doing various kinds of fine work. i saw these multi-focus reading glasses that might be just the thing for my problems. Has anybody tried these, or will I be the first? They don't look too expensive for what they may offer.

http://fostergrant.c...ing-glasses/wes,

Bob Hammond wrote:Hi, now that I've reached a certain age, I find that presbyopia is becoming a nuisance when doing various kinds of fine work. i saw these multi-focus reading glasses that might be just the thing for my problems. Has anybody tried these, or will I be the first? They don't look too expensive for what they may offer.

http://fostergrant.c...ing-glasses/wes,

Is this the link?

http://fostergrant.com/foster-grant-mul ... g-glasses/

-Eric

If your reading Rx is about +1.75 or less, you should only need readers. At +2.00 and over you start losing intermediate, and then the progressives are great.

Brent

Hmm, the first link worked ok when I posted it, but that's of no importance, I guess. You found a workable one.

Currently I use separate readers from 1.25-2.0, but sometimes even higher. But I'd like to keep track of just one pair of specs.

Hopefully this link to a video about choosing readers will work:

https://youtu.be/T5lpAWvzYUE

Some people do fine with progressive lenses, some don't. You only have $35 at risk here. Be bold and try it.

I have prescription progressive lenses in my glasses.
I finds them really good sometimes, and not so good others. If I am doing fine work above my head, I have to crank my head back to get the right angle, so I can look through the bottom of the glasses. That is the bad.
Once you get used to them it's OK.

Gordon Bellerose wrote:If I am doing fine work above my head, I have to crank my head back to get the right angle, so I can look through the bottom of the glasses. That is the bad.

You can get Double D lenses for this - I loved them for my work, but I don't know if they're made as progressives.
http://www.allaboutvision.com/over40/work_bifocals.htm

I wear tri-focal glasses. Got some CA on my lens one day in the shop, and when I tried to clean it off, it chipped out a piece of the lens right in a critical area. I had to go out of town the next day, and my only option was to get a one day set of lenses, but the only thing they could do in one day was a set of progressive lenses. I thought it might be a good time to try them. They were fine until I returned home and went to work in the shop. When you wear progressive lenses, apparently there is no such thing as a straight line. It drove me crazy for 2 weeks. Nothing looked right. IMO, perception is huge in my work, so I went and got them replaced with tri-focals again. Fortunately, it was one of those deals where I had a month to decide, and If I didn't like the new lenses, they would make me a set like my old lenses. Much better.

Like Waddy, I couldn't tolerate the progressive trifocals. This was 30 years ago, and they're probably improved now, but the field of view for the reading (near) correction was so narrow that I had to turn my head to keep the words in focus as I read across a page. I only lasted a few days before I returned to the split views.

Peter Wilcox wrote:Like Waddy, I couldn't tolerate the progressive trifocals. This was 30 years ago, and they're probably improved now, but the field of view for the reading (near) correction was so narrow that I had to turn my head to keep the words in focus as I read across a page. I only lasted a few days before I returned to the split views.

Progressive lenses have improved a bit, but I am about to ditch mine. I do not like the distortion they add to everything. In the shop I'm using bifocal safety glasses and I really like them. I talked this over with an optometrist and my ophthalmologist and they both agree that progressive lenses are mostly for vanity. Split view glasses are more practical.

-Eric

You'll feel like you're stepping in holes for a day or so when you first get them but I like progressives and have used them for ~15 yrs for both distance and ~2.75 closeup vision correction. The quality of the plastic, the placement of the intermediate zone and accuracy of the prescription make a lot of difference. I've tried several progressives from different manufacturers (Zeiss, Nikon) and my local optician had me try Varilux Physio and it made a lot of difference with parallax problems, night driving vision and they did not turn yellow after ~6 months. The negative is the cost with the higher index plastic. I used to work with a Anesthesiologist who turned his progressive glasses upside down and taped the arms to the sides of his face when he needed to put in a breathing tube on small kids.

I wonder if the size of the lens makes a difference for progressive lenses. Assuming the distance from the eye to the eyeglass lens is the same, I'd think that a larger lens spreads the progressive gradient over a larger area. This would give a more gradual, finer gradient, at the expense of the need to tilt one's head over a greater arc. For persons with implanted lenses (e.g. after cataract surgery) this might be an issue.

Peter Wilcox wrote:

Gordon Bellerose wrote:If I am doing fine work above my head, I have to crank my head back to get the right angle, so I can look through the bottom of the glasses. That is the bad.

You can get Double D lenses for this - I loved them for my work, but I don't know if they're made as progressives.
http://www.allaboutvision.com/over40/work_bifocals.htm

You do not need progressives if You have double Ds.

Instead of using trifocals i am (still) using bifocals, but a bit specialized: one for "office" use with a normal reading distance but 0.5 less in the far field, one normal bifocal - reading distance plus fully corrected in the far and one for really closeup work, e.g luthery, with a near field corrected to a working distance of 20 cm.

Waddy Thomson wrote:When you wear progressive lenses, apparently there is no such thing as a straight line. It drove me crazy for 2 weeks. Nothing looked right.

Peter Wilcox wrote:the field of view for the reading (near) correction was so narrow that I had to turn my head to keep the words in focus as I read across a page.

My experience exactly. When I first tried progressives I was still working on a drawing board. It was a nightmare! When I moved onto CAD I tried them again but reading a paperback book was like watching a tennis match, so I dumped them again. But I didn't know about tri-focals, so I still get a crick in my neck when changing a light bulb. I'll have to talk to my optician.

I've been using progressive lenses for about 20 years, and I have never experienced any of the effects mentioned in this thread.
I really like them, except for the above the head thing I mentioned earlier.
I could use some bi-focal safety glasses for that kind of thing but honestly, I would still have the same thing. Cranking my head back far enough to see out of the bottom of the glasses.
And, I really don't have to do that kind of thing very often. Once in a while if I wire a new light fixture into the house or garage, or if working under a vehicle.

My eyes differ by 2 dioptres. Therefore it is not possible anymore to obtain a common focus for both eyes in the transitional distance range. That's why i need to use bi- or trifocals.And similar reasons are probably the reason why some people do well with gradient glasses (both eyes are really similar) and some do not (both eyes differ significantly).

Anyone here remember my thread on the old forum on just this subject? That was nearly 10 years ago.... My vision had gone to hell and I discovered that I couldn't tolerate bifocals because of how it forced me to move my neck too much, so I was left with swapping between my regular glasses and my "readers", which I hated doing....

Then I tried exercising my eyes using the charts in this course, and it worked. I'm now 50, and still don't need readers, and in fact, have gained enough in my vision to have returned to the prescription I have had since my mid 30's! I still have to do the exercises for a week or so every few months, but it is so worth it...!

https://www.amazon.com/Read-Without-Gla ... op?ie=UTF8

I'm happy that Mario has had success retaining his youthful vision, but those considering this method might be interested in this article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22820471

"CONCLUSIONS: The Read Without Glasses Method does not produce clinically or statistically significant changes in unaided near VA and fails to show clinically significant changes in accommodation at near in presbyopic emmetropes despite favorable subjective responses of participants."

As with many things in life, it's not how well something actually works, but rather how well you think it works.

After reading the first few messages in this thread, I ordered a set of 1.5 progressive lenses from ReadingGlasses.com but I don't think they will work for me. Sitting at the computer I can only get proper focus by tilting my head up and looking through the very bottom edge of the lense. And to read the whole screen, I have to move my head back and forth. It seems that the focal area is quite small. Bummer. I do like the large frame which fits my head a lot better than common drug store readers. And they provide a 30-day money back warranty if not happy, so I will probably trade them in for normal readers, or maybe bifocals?