Varifocals - hints & tips help required

My preferred cleaning method for glasses:

Rinse glasses under a flow of warm water to remove any solid dirt particles, put a blob of good quality hotel shampoo on each lens rear surface, slide fingers over the lens spreading the shampoo gently over both sides of each lenses, rinse under a stream of warm water.

To dry use dry good quality hotel flannels and mop the water off the lenses - do not wipe only mop. Wiping could cause scratching if there is any sand or grit remaining on the lens.

The above process was developed in one of the Hilton Hotels in Dubai in 1995.

In more basic locations (ie home) I substitute either a generous drop of Fairy Liquid, or liquid soap, and mop the lens dry with fine face tissues (not the harsh type that you can see the wood chips still in them)

This method enable the surface of the lenses to outlast the expectations of the opticians and I think they they adapted the mop dry technique rather than the wipe dry with a fancy cloth.

As you can probably tell I was very short sighted and very picky - a typical myope who would take a long time to determine which lens combination was the better combination during a sight test.

My definition of glasses not working correctly  is not being able to read the second from bottom line on the sight test chart.

That's good advise Derek. It's also important not to use any chemical cleaners unless they are specifically formulated for cleaning lenses as they may damage the coatings on the lens.

Steve

Hi Mike, hi all,

Thanks for the above. I may have explained the looking down badly. The distance part of each lens is in the top of the frame, the close up part at the bottom. With my previous glasses, used mainly for driving and cinema, my face felt like it was looking forward normally. With the new varifocals it feels like I'm having to point my chin down to the ground a bit to see distance-wise.

I've tilted the laptop screen back a bit as per one of the comments above and thanks, it helps.

Saw the very helpful optician this morning and she said I've still got three weeks to see if I can get on with them. She also checked the 'centres' and said they were in the right places.

Points about position of glasses on face, lens depth, proper cameras and cleaning duly noted. (Um, I think I remember and ad for Nikon photographic lens where a cigarette was stubbed out on a coated rear element and the ash was just blown off then the lens was just buffed a bit. Pristine coating! I won't be trying it.)

Chris

Chris,

It took me a short while to get used to watching the television, whilest sitting in my chair. I found my head was tilted up too high and I had to deliberately bend my head forward to get the right bit of the lens to align with the tv screen.

This sometimes happens again with a new prescription.

But somehow, don't ask me how because I don't really know, it is no longer a problem. I probably just sit at a slightly different angle.

Chris,

The graduation of the focal length depends on the 'height' of the lens and now I have a larger pair of lenses there are fewer problems than I had with the previous smaller pair. They certainly take time to accommodate but it's worth persevering as, in time, you make head and eye adjustments automatically. My only problem is with the large vertical desktop computer screens I use at work. If I use the varifocals my neck aches in no time so I use a pair of fixed focal length glasses. I have no problem with a laptop as it's lower in my line of sight.

Good luck,

Steve

Intriguing. Just bought a pair. Terrible. I specifically asked for wide field of vision in all categories and even though I bought hte most expensive set I feel as if I have tunnel vision! Back to single vision lenses for me!

Give them a few weeks. You are very likely to get used to them.

They do take a little time to get used to, especially when you look down, like on the stairs. Your head movements will gradually compensate.

Stick with them Loki. It won't take weeks, just a few days & you'll not think twice about wearing them. Much better than single-focus glasses.

Yup, stick with 'em Loki. And thanks to all who gave me tips. I found turning my head more to look directly at whatever it was I was looking at, was a help.

Chris

I tried vary-focals three years ago.

Total failure.

After a month I bought a pair of bi-focals. Also a failure. I accept using two pairs of glasses these days.

Firstly the ground is not properly visible [with either] so that falls or stumbles become inevitable, and when reading a broad-sheet newspaper the tiny field of reading vision becomes irksome. Reading a book properly is painful after only a few minutes with either vari-s or bi-focals.

Don't be vain, and just carry some readers about. 

Sir Melcolm Sergeant was so vain that he would not use reading glasses to conduct, and new music was a real menace for him. and the composers who had to watch basic mistakes being made.

Otto Klemperer used the appropriate glasses, and no music was a menace for him.

ATB from George

Loki -

Agreed with those saying give them some time. For now just make sure that you have the right prescription, and can actually see clearly through the different distance bands. If you can, then within a week you will start to automatically compensate by slightly titling your head up and down. Within a month, it will become second nature.

I used to only need distance glasses. Then my near sight started deteriorating, and I got a pair of inexpensive cheaters. I hated switching glasses so many times per day!  While I fully admit that varifocals were disappointing at first, even a bit scary, I am now so glad to have them!

Good luck!

Hook

Seriously??

I was told that I might experience perspective issues when changing to variofocals and waliking down stairs as given as an example - but it didn't happen . Better from second one. Loved and love them no issues whatsoever.

Glasses that is - variofocal contact lenses though are a different story

Hi Clay -

I thought, apparently mistakenly, that the two terms were used interchangeably. But yes, the optician I got my last lenses from called them "high definition progressives", and they were in fact a Zeiss product.

Bi-focals were alright for me now, but my first attempt with "vari-focals" was a failure.

Swimming computer keyboards and car dashboard, similar symptoms to Mikes, so maybe a "second opinion" as to whether the central setting is correct 

Second attempt for me a few years later was so much better, investigation by my second optician found that the first pair had been "centered" incorrectly.

So like many products correct installation and knowledgeable suppliers are everything.

Any problems? I do find searching my CD towers or looking up and down or something like a library rack as you tilt your head your eyes try to use the near lens part and vision gets blurred.

I think you need a certain amount of head movement to help and after a while it becomes second nature, but for me so much better than the 2 pair system.

Thank you guys, this is really helpful. The wonders of the Naim community! My daughter can't believe I'm getting opthalmic advice from a bunch of HiFi geeks! But I guess purity and perfectionism is in our nature. 

Okay, I've had these varifocal / progressive glasses since Friday afternoon. Long distance is particularly accurate and I'm beginning to get used to subtle vertical head tilting to bring things into focus. 5 annoyances:

1) the very small field of vision. I enjoy good peripheral/lateral vision and yet I have to move my whole head and look stroght though the lense rather than swiftly and unnoticeably flicking my eyes back and forth. Absolutley useless for subtle surveillance. Today in a cathedral service, instead of looking around subtly I had to move my whole head as the edges of the lens are always out of focus.

2) each band of focus is very small. For reading it is only about 0.6mm tall at the bottom of the lens so I have to look down. I can read the middle of a sentence, or the end but not the whole thing at once. Absolutely useless for skim reading techniques or spreadsheet work.

3) Some of you know that I spend a lot of time on the Valhalla hills in the High Peak. I need to be able to take in the panoramas and negotiate rocky stream climbs at speed. To focus on the ground I have to look straight down through the top of the lenses whereas my single vision glasses gave me full vision in each direction

4) Driving. Looking in wing mirrors now demands that I move my whole head to focus on the mirrored view rather than a quick flick.

5) reading a computer screen without feeling like I'm in a hall of distorting mirrors is impossible.

I think these limitations seem fundamental to the system. Swapping glasses seems a small price to pay (much cheaper than these super posh varifocals, at any rate) for proper focused vision.

I'll let you know how I get on.

Hi Loki, I'm concerned about the restriction on your field/width of view. This is not normally a major issue with varifocals unless the frame size is considerably smaller than your normal distance glasses. I have 3 pairs of varifoclals plus sun and sport glasses. When I'm switching between them it takes a little time for the eyes to settle down. I always choose frames carefully. On the width I would never go less than 52 mm and try if possible for 54. The height of the lens is critical to give your optician room to play with. Whilst I have a pair with just 32 mm, my most comfortable frames have a height of 35/36 mm. Also when I go to be measured up I always request my optician to lower the split between distance and mid view by a shade. This means when I'm driving or watching TV and my head rests back I don't find I'm looking through the mid distance. Computer screens are notoriously difficult to view with  varifocals depending on height and distance. some resort to moving the screen position around, some get a pair of specs just for screen use including reversing the order of focal bands. If your problems continue do consider going back to your optician and getting them to re check that prescription is correct, and that when fitted your eyes lining up correctly with the focus bands.

Chaps

I have been wearing specs since the age of 22 and my eyes have very slowly deteriorated ever since.

I was advised to try varifocals about 20 years ago when I was a borderline case for wearing them. I tried and gave up as they did not seem worth the bother.

My eyes continued to deteriorate and about 10 years ago I tried varifocals when I really needed them and they where a Godsend. 

I think the lesson is, well certainly in my case, if you find them hassle, don't wear them but the day will surely arrive when you will have no real option, that is the time to jump in.

Regards

Mick

Cheers TOTR. Mine are 55mm across and 34mm from top to bottom.

Yes Mick, our stories are similar. Two years ago my optometrist said I would need to consider varifocals soon. A different optician this time suggested  I try them. I was uncertain and can take them back and swap them out if I don't get on. I feel they are a a compromise too far. What George said about over-restriction for reading is absolutely true, thus far. 

The Shamir lenses are particularly clear, though.

One of my main issues were when using the computer, but my latest VF specs are no different to using single lenses.

So Loki I would say if you are getting these issues your specs are not (up to spec) ie set up correctly. I can't read the etching on my lenses but I'm sure they are Pentax. 

It certainly feels that way BigH47. The issues aren'g getting any better. Mid vision is actually better without glasses! I shall be going back.

Hi Loki, and everyone else,

Thanks for a fantastically interesting and informative discussion. Loki, I think I'm about a week behind you; I got my first pair of varifocals on Thursday (17th April) so I know it's been only 4 days but I am finding them hugely frustrating and disorientating.

I have a relatively low prescription (+0.50 distance to +2.50 reading, and I'm 55) and until about 5 years ago had very good eyesight, including good peripheral vision. Also I use computers, iPad and iPhone extensively. Until now I had one pair of glasses for computer work (I have two large screens at work) and one for reading. I got fed up of looking at people over the top of my glasses in meetings and having to take another pair with me when I needed to be able to see presentations in meeting rooms.

With my new varifocals distance vision is good, and I can see my husband over the dinner table (with a bit of nodding of the head to get the position right). They are also just about OK for using my iPhone, although again I have to get the position right. I understand that this will get easier, so fine, I'm happy to persevere.

However, for anything between 'across the table' and 'iPhone' there seems to be only a tiny place where things are in focus. Even if (when) I get used to it I will be moving my head constantly in order to read anything larger than a postage stamp. I am currently convinced that I will never be able to use them for reading or iPad, never mind one computer screen. This more-or-less defeats the point of them for me.

Interestingly, I have just rediscovered some bi-focal sunglasses that I got a few years ago. I find these are great for things like walking, where I need to alternate between distance and reading iPhone or map. The field of vision on these is very good - just nothing in between.

I would be really interested in hearing from others whether my 'tiny field of vision' problem is common and/or resolvable. Will I get used to it? Have I got the wrong type of varifocals? How long should I persevere?

And Loki, as you're a week ahead of me, how are you getting on now? It would be great if you could post an update at some point ...

Thanks everyone!

Miranda

 I am currently convinced that I will never be able to use them for reading or iPad, never mind one computer screen. This more-or-less defeats the point of them for me.

Hey MIranda, you sum up my situation particularly well. I've just bunged the VFs back on and can't focus on the screen at all. To get long distance vision when driving I have to perch them on the end of my nose. If they are sat close to my eyes then the ceiling is in focus but all else is a blur. Even so, looking at things in the wing mirror now means a complete turn of the head rather than a flick of the eyes. I find myself moving my head a lot. As a demigod I can no longer surreptitiously glance across the classroom/dining hall/cathedral as a full head movement is required and I end up looking down my nose at everyone; even more than usual! Reading is particularly painful. It is better without them or with my old prescription reading gasses where I get a full field of vision and can scan/skim/speed read without pulling my neck muscles out of kilter in the midst of ocular gymnastics. Honestly it is a blessed relief to use old out fo date prescription sunglasses/long distance glasses for hill/coastal walking where I can see my feet/ the ground, mid and far distance in focus.

What irritates me is that I explained very clearly what my needs/activities were before shelling out a small fortune for bespoke VFs and they don't really satisfy any of the criteria. 

As DM were wont to say 'Compromise... to a disastrous effect'.  Defo going back next week.

HI again Loki - Further to my previous reply I am convinced you were not measured properly by your Optician. To have to perch the glasses on the edge of your nose to drive is ridiculous. As I have said I found with my early varifocals I had had to sometime tilt my head forward when driving as was sitting in an upright position so when I went for nest pair I had the optician lower the bottom edge of the distance field and can new even rest my head back against the seat and still have no issues. I'm not saying there are other problems with you adapting to the specs but for sure your zones are not in the right place. Im guessing you would have similar problems viewing TV (unless you have the screen up on the wall) That was the other issue I had until I changed the depth of the distance zone.