|
|
| Author |
Message |
Quick
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Posts: 343
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:28 am Post subject:
polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
Ok, Doc is really advising against CR-30 and recommends
polycarb, or as an alternative 1.67, 'cause I'm getting drill
mounts. Air Titanium rimless.
O.D. +1.25 sph add +2.25
O.S. +0.75 -0.25 add +2.25
Physio 360
Crizal Alize with Clear Guard (gold)
Transitions (grey)
Yea, I know, I don't need the 360... it's only $20 more.
I don't play Jai Lai
So...
I don't expect the difference in thinness to be measurable.
I don't expect the difference in weight to be noticeable.
Is there any possibility I could see any material caused
abberations with either (I'm very sensitive to that sort of
thing)?
Would there be any difference with the transitions
performance?
Price difference is about 10% of total so not a factor
if there is any advantage to the 1.67
-Quick |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Mark A
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 226
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:28 am Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:DZKmg.71647$4L1.55417@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
| Quote: | Ok, Doc is really advising against CR-30 and recommends
polycarb, or as an alternative 1.67, 'cause I'm getting drill
mounts. Air Titanium rimless.
O.D. +1.25 sph add +2.25
O.S. +0.75 -0.25 add +2.25
Physio 360
Crizal Alize with Clear Guard (gold)
Transitions (grey)
Yea, I know, I don't need the 360... it's only $20 more.
I don't play Jai Lai
So...
I don't expect the difference in thinness to be measurable.
I don't expect the difference in weight to be noticeable.
Is there any possibility I could see any material caused
abberations with either (I'm very sensitive to that sort of
thing)?
Would there be any difference with the transitions
performance?
Price difference is about 10% of total so not a factor
if there is any advantage to the 1.67
-Quick
|
Polycarb has the worst chromatic aberration of any commercially available
lens material (measured by abbe value) regardless of index. Avoid it like
the plague.
Except for polycarb, the higher the index, the worse the chromatic
aberration. 1.67 is overkill for you. I would go with 1.60 at the most. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Quick
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:01 am Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
Mark A wrote:
| Quote: | "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:DZKmg.71647$4L1.55417@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
Ok, Doc is really advising against CR-30 and recommends
polycarb, or as an alternative 1.67, 'cause I'm getting
drill mounts. Air Titanium rimless.
O.D. +1.25 sph add +2.25
O.S. +0.75 -0.25 add +2.25
Physio 360
Crizal Alize with Clear Guard (gold)
Transitions (grey)
Yea, I know, I don't need the 360... it's only $20 more.
I don't play Jai Lai
So...
I don't expect the difference in thinness to be
measurable. I don't expect the difference in weight to
be noticeable. Is there any possibility I could see any material caused
abberations with either (I'm very sensitive to that sort
of thing)?
Would there be any difference with the transitions
performance?
Price difference is about 10% of total so not a factor
if there is any advantage to the 1.67
-Quick
Polycarb has the worst chromatic aberration of any
commercially available lens material (measured by abbe
value) regardless of index. Avoid it like the plague.
Except for polycarb, the higher the index, the worse the
chromatic aberration. 1.67 is overkill for you. I would
go with 1.60 at the most.
|
I don't think that's an option. I think the Physio 360 is only
offered in polycarb, 1.67, and they just added CR-30 which
has been recommended against due to the drill mounts.
thanks,
-Quick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark A
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 226
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:08 am Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message news:q5Omg.49044
| Quote: | I don't think that's an option. I think the Physio 360 is only
offered in polycarb, 1.67, and they just added CR-30 which
has been recommended against due to the drill mounts.
thanks,
-Quick
|
You are correct that 1.60 is not available for Varilux Physio 360. Therefore
I would strongly consider the Varilux Panamic which is available in 1.60. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CatmanX
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 367
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 12:08 pm Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
Buddy, you are an idiot.
Physio 360m is a much better lens. Pay the $20.00 and be happy it was
well invested.
Airwear is fine for lower scripts. Chromatic aberration is
inconsequential at these scripts. The benefit of 1.67 is it is
virtually unbreakable - more so than airwear. Airwear is cheaper and
great for rimless fits.
Quick, stick with the physio 360, multicoated and choose the material
you are happy with.\
dr grant |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark A
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 226
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:44 pm Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
"CatmanX" <drgrant@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:1151064494.425756.206140@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | Buddy, you are an idiot.
Physio 360m is a much better lens. Pay the $20.00 and be happy it was
well invested.
Airwear is fine for lower scripts. Chromatic aberration is
inconsequential at these scripts. The benefit of 1.67 is it is
virtually unbreakable - more so than airwear. Airwear is cheaper and
great for rimless fits.
Quick, stick with the physio 360, multicoated and choose the material
you are happy with.\
dr grant
|
The OP said "Yea, I know, I don't need the 360" so I assume he was advised
on this by his OD and/or optician. I took him at this word on that.
The OP also said that he was "very sensitive" to chromatic aberration. I
don't consider an add of +2.25 with a sphere of +1.25 to be a "lower
script". I would consider it to be moderate plus and somewhat susceptible to
chromatic aberration with polycarb. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Quick
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:25 pm Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
Mark A wrote:
| Quote: |
The OP said "Yea, I know, I don't need the 360" so I
assume he was advised on this by his OD and/or optician.
I took him at this word on that.
|
oops, sorry for that. By "I don't need the 360" I meant
that I don't need the Physio 360 over the plain Physio.
-Quick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Quick
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:06 pm Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
CatmanX wrote:
| Quote: | Buddy, you are an idiot.
Physio 360m is a much better lens. Pay the $20.00 and be
happy it was well invested.
Airwear is fine for lower scripts. Chromatic aberration is
inconsequential at these scripts. The benefit of 1.67 is
it is virtually unbreakable - more so than airwear.
Airwear is cheaper and great for rimless fits.
Quick, stick with the physio 360, multicoated and choose
the material you are happy with.\
|
I've decided on the Physio 360 (over the Physio).
I have decided on the Air Titanium drill mount frames.
I don't know what "Airware" is.... Is that another term for
polycarb?
I'm not sure what lens material will make me happiest 
The viable alternatives are polycarb and 1.67
I have no qualms about the extra money if there
is any advantage at all to the 1.67 over polycarb
given my Rx.
For all I know polycarb might be better than
the 1.67 given my Rx.
I have no idea if the materials effect the transitions
performance differently.
At the moment it sounds like I'm going with the 1.67
thanks,
-Quick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
William Stacy
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 01 May 2005
Posts: 1177
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 9:21 pm Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
Not sure if I missed it, but someone should recommend a Trivex ECP by
hoya. It's a great, thin, strong, light lens with little aberration. I
wear them myself and love them.
w.stacy, o.d.
Quick wrote:
| Quote: | CatmanX wrote:
Buddy, you are an idiot.
Physio 360m is a much better lens. Pay the $20.00 and be
happy it was well invested.
Airwear is fine for lower scripts. Chromatic aberration is
inconsequential at these scripts. The benefit of 1.67 is
it is virtually unbreakable - more so than airwear.
Airwear is cheaper and great for rimless fits.
Quick, stick with the physio 360, multicoated and choose
the material you are happy with.\
I've decided on the Physio 360 (over the Physio).
I have decided on the Air Titanium drill mount frames.
I don't know what "Airware" is.... Is that another term for
polycarb?
I'm not sure what lens material will make me happiest
The viable alternatives are polycarb and 1.67
I have no qualms about the extra money if there
is any advantage at all to the 1.67 over polycarb
given my Rx.
For all I know polycarb might be better than
the 1.67 given my Rx.
I have no idea if the materials effect the transitions
performance differently.
At the moment it sounds like I'm going with the 1.67
thanks,
-Quick
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Quick
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 19 Jun 2005
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:08 pm Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
Yea, I think that would have been my first choice... If it was an option.
It's not. The choice is between polycarb or 1.67
-Quick
"William Stacy" <wstacy@obase.net> wrote in message news:LXYmg.71968$4L1.3537@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
Not sure if I missed it, but someone should recommend a Trivex ECP by hoya. It's a great, thin, strong, light lens with little aberration. I wear them myself and love them.
w.stacy, o.d.
Quick wrote:
CatmanX wrote:
Buddy, you are an idiot.
Physio 360m is a much better lens. Pay the $20.00 and be
happy it was well invested.
Airwear is fine for lower scripts. Chromatic aberration is
inconsequential at these scripts. The benefit of 1.67 is
it is virtually unbreakable - more so than airwear.
Airwear is cheaper and great for rimless fits.
Quick, stick with the physio 360, multicoated and choose
the material you are happy with.\
I've decided on the Physio 360 (over the Physio).
I have decided on the Air Titanium drill mount frames.
I don't know what "Airware" is.... Is that another term for
polycarb?
I'm not sure what lens material will make me happiest
The viable alternatives are polycarb and 1.67
I have no qualms about the extra money if there
is any advantage at all to the 1.67 over polycarb
given my Rx.
For all I know polycarb might be better than
the 1.67 given my Rx.
I have no idea if the materials effect the transitions
performance differently.
At the moment it sounds like I'm going with the 1.67
thanks,
-Quick |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
William Stacy
medicine forum Guru
Joined: 01 May 2005
Posts: 1177
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:16 pm Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
Locked out of free choice by someone? Anyway if I had to choose between
the lesser of 2 evil lenses, I'd go with the poly in your Rx, because
it's pretty low power so chromatic abb will not be a large factor...
w.stacy, o.d.
Quick wrote:
| Quote: | Yea, I think that would have been my first choice... If it was an option.
It's not. The choice is between polycarb or 1.67
-Quick
"William Stacy" <wstacy@obase.net <mailto:wstacy@obase.net>> wrote
in message news:LXYmg.71968$4L1.3537@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
Not sure if I missed it, but someone should recommend a Trivex ECP
by hoya. It's a great, thin, strong, light lens with little
aberration. I wear them myself and love them.
w.stacy, o.d.
Quick wrote:
CatmanX wrote:
Buddy, you are an idiot.
Physio 360m is a much better lens. Pay the $20.00 and be
happy it was well invested.
Airwear is fine for lower scripts. Chromatic aberration is
inconsequential at these scripts. The benefit of 1.67 is
it is virtually unbreakable - more so than airwear.
Airwear is cheaper and great for rimless fits.
Quick, stick with the physio 360, multicoated and choose
the material you are happy with.\
I've decided on the Physio 360 (over the Physio).
I have decided on the Air Titanium drill mount frames.
I don't know what "Airware" is.... Is that another term for
polycarb?
I'm not sure what lens material will make me happiest
The viable alternatives are polycarb and 1.67
I have no qualms about the extra money if there
is any advantage at all to the 1.67 over polycarb
given my Rx.
For all I know polycarb might be better than
the 1.67 given my Rx.
I have no idea if the materials effect the transitions
performance differently.
At the moment it sounds like I'm going with the 1.67
thanks,
-Quick
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anon E. Muss
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 22 May 2006
Posts: 136
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 12:10 am Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 05:28:03 GMT, "Quick"
<quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Ok, Doc is really advising against CR-30 and recommends
polycarb, or as an alternative 1.67, 'cause I'm getting drill
mounts. Air Titanium rimless.
|
For drill-mounted frames, my preference for materials is this, from
best to worst: TRIVEX, 1.67, polycarb, CR-39, other mid-index
plastic.
| Quote: | O.D. +1.25 sph add +2.25
O.S. +0.75 -0.25 add +2.25
Physio 360
Crizal Alize with Clear Guard (gold)
Transitions (grey)
Yea, I know, I don't need the 360... it's only $20 more.
I don't play Jai Lai
So...
I don't expect the difference in thinness to be measurable.
|
It isn't in that prescription.
| Quote: | I don't expect the difference in weight to be noticeable.
|
It won't.
| Quote: | Is there any possibility I could see any material caused abberations
with either (I'm very sensitive to that sort ofthing)?
|
Yes, but that possibility is low with that small of a precription.
I second Dr. Leukoma's opinion. For a rimless frame, I would ask if
you could be prescribed a progressive you can get in TRANSITIONS V
TRIVEX such as Hoya's Summit ECP. Essilor will not/cannot apply
Crizal Alize to a TRIVEX lens, but I-Coat's Vivix Stainless and Hoya's
high-end A/R coat (Super HiVision?) are just as good IMHO.
I would be surprised if you are one of the rare birds that find a
noticable negative difference being prescribed a Hoya Summit ECP
versus a Varilux Physio 360.
| Quote: | Would there be any difference with the transitions performance?
|
I have found all of the TRANSITIONS V materials to perform about the
same. Make sure you are aware of the pros/cons of TRANSITIONS lenses.
| Quote: | Price difference is about 10% of total so not a factor if there is any
advantage to the 1.67
|
That is a low price difference.
I have found that 1.67 performs better in a rimless frame, however the
lower abbe value of 1.67 versus poly may be an issue. 1.67 performs
better as in less risk of the spider cracks at the drill points that
is not uncommon after time with polycarbonate.
However, both poly and 1.67 have lower abbe values than TRIVEX or
CR-39. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark A
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 226
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 12:49 am Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
| Quote: | "William Stacy" <wstacy@obase.net> wrote in message news:
0LZmg.71985$4L1.30889@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
Locked out of free choice by someone? Anyway if I had to choose
between the lesser of 2 evil lenses, I'd go with the poly in your
Rx, because it's pretty low power so chromatic abb will not be a large
factor...
w.stacy, o.d.
|
However, the abbe value for 1.67 is slightly higher than polycarb, which
means 1.67 should have less chromatic aberration. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark A
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 226
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:00 am Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
"Anon E. Muss" <anonymous@example.org> wrote in message
news:ejvo92terkve4ldrs8rh3ijha7m1pndnph@4ax.com...
| Quote: | snip
I have found that 1.67 performs better in a rimless frame, however the
lower abbe value of 1.67 versus poly may be an issue.
snip
|
I believe that 1.67 has an abbe value of 32 and polycarb has a abbe value of
30 (the higher the less chromatic aberration).
Here is a link from an Essilor (parent of Varilux) site in UK:
http://www.essilor.co.uk/lensinfo/pdfs/Stylis%20Brochure.pdf
(see page 6 of the doc). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark A
medicine forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Posts: 226
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:01 am Post subject:
Re: polycarb vs 1.67 for weak prescription
|
|
|
"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message news:xJYmg.155945
| Quote: | I don't know what "Airware" is.... Is that another term for
polycarb?
|
Yes, that is the name that Essilor/Varilux uses for polycarb. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
The time now is Fri Jan 09, 2009 10:44 pm | All times are GMT
|
|
Advertising Forum | Credit Report | Car Finance | NJ CoLocation | Credit Report
|
|
Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
|
|
Other DeniX Solutions sites:
electronics forum,
Science forum
Unix/Linux blog
Unix/Linux documentation
Unix/Linux forums
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
Medicine forums
»
vision
