Anyone have experience with multifocal reading glasses?

[neilmarr]

Yup, Geoff. The prices are crazy ... maybe one of the reasons this Scotsman was so determined to get used to his. Funny thing is that I'd taken my wife to the optician's for reading glasses. I thought my eyesight was 20-20 perfect, but the doc decided I should have a test anyway. Seems I was nearly as blind as a bat and that the deterioration had crept up so slowly, I just never noticed (I'd been using those five-dollar magnifying specs from the local garage for reading, which probably hadn't helped). My wife's specs cost about a quarter of the price of mine. Mind you, there was a two-for-the-price-of-one deal running, so I also got a pretty snazzy pair of prescription sun-glasses that folks say make me look like the late Aga Khan. Hoots. Neil

[RCR]

Well, an update for those who helped me by responding to my first post.

I tried the lenses for three weeks. Eventually, I was able to use them without headaches or burning eyes. But I still didn't like them. There was such a narrow focus, like looking through a telescope. Imagine looking at a 24 inch computer screen and having only a saucer sized area of the screen in focus at any one time. And if you move your head, the screen distorts. I noticed too, reading a paper book, that one page would be in focus, and the other page would be fuzzy.

So, I took them back to the optometrist and asked for regular reading glasses. He was grumpy about it - he muttered "Well, they're still under warranty. I won't have to pay extra, and you won't either."

I got my new "regular" reading glasses yesterday, and they're great. I have the same wide vision as my old pair, just a bit crisper.

I think the lesson to be learned is to be wary of professionals offering you the latest and greatest. I think too, the optometrist was partly at fault. He should have explained the side effects and short-comings of the lenses in the beginning. Instead he promoted them as the best thing out since sliced bread and didn't tell me about the problems until I came back and complained.

Anyway, thanks for all your input, guys.

[lene1949]

I had progressive lenses for years... I do remember the first few months... Whenever I looked quickly to one side, it was like the whole room was moving... Walking down steps was even worse... I got used to them, but now my 'long' sight has improved so much, I no longer need glasses to drive or other everyday chores, and I now have just reading glasses. I have been wearing glasses since I was 11 years old (I should have had them at 7, but they were a bit behind in those days)

At 11 I again asked my Mum to take me to the optometrist... I had tried a pair of glasses from a friend in school, and I could suddenly see the leaves on the trees, and even the clock on the wall (and what time it was)

[Coops]

Originally Posted by RCR

Well, an update for those who helped me by responding to my first post.

I tried the lenses for three weeks. Eventually, I was able to use them without headaches or burning eyes. But I still didn't like them. There was such a narrow focus, like looking through a telescope. Imagine looking at a 24 inch computer screen and having only a saucer sized area of the screen in focus at any one time. And if you move your head, the screen distorts. I noticed too, reading a paper book, that one page would be in focus, and the other page would be fuzzy.

So, I took them back to the optometrist and asked for regular reading glasses. He was grumpy about it - he muttered "Well, they're still under warranty. I won't have to pay extra, and you won't either."

I got my new "regular" reading glasses yesterday, and they're great. I have the same wide vision as my old pair, just a bit crisper.

I think the lesson to be learned is to be wary of professionals offering you the latest and greatest. I think too, the optometrist was partly at fault. He should have explained the side effects and short-comings of the lenses in the beginning. Instead he promoted them as the best thing out since sliced bread and didn't tell me about the problems until I came back and complained.

Anyway, thanks for all your input, guys.

Sounds to me like you need to find a better optometrist.

Seems that when it comes to progressive lenses, the experience and skill of the person fitting you is far more important than just regular single vision correction or bifocals etc. Not only does the lens have to be fitted to the frame and to your face so the different zones are accurately positioned, but the choice of what progressive lens design that best suits you is something only an experienced optometrist can help decide.

And $246 seems a bit cheap too - with progressive lenses you often get what you pay for - the latest designs with the focusing 'digitally' surfaced on possibly both faces of the lens will be way more pricey but also probably (no guarantees...) more comfortable to use.

I'm also having to wear progressive glasses and also got another reading pair for desktop computer and book reading use like the pair you've tried. These work extremely well - both pairs do, in fact - but certainly the 'computer' reading pair are much easier for reading and intermediate use (around 40cm i think they're designed for).

My wife had also tried progressive lenses before and given up, but I forced her to try again and after getting some fearsomely expensive Rodenstock progressive lenses she has been able to adjust fine - and is very happy with them.

I've also bought a progressive pair with the latest Zeiss lenses. Somehow they aren't quite as good - hard to pinpoint, but the Rodenstock ,for me, seem to flow more naturally from distant to near etc. Different Optometrist, so might be a slight fitting issue too - but has shown me there is something of an art to getting fitted for them, and you may not get the right pair for you first time... and a good optometrist wouldn't get upset about it but try to find you a better fit.

Certainly the computer/reading pair should be much quicker and easier to adjust to than the full distant to near progressive lenses - I can certainly tell that the reading zone is far, far wider with the reading pair as opposed to the full progressives (which means much less head movement required if any), which is after all what they're designed for.

Anyway - sorry they didn't work out for you.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by wodin

As my presbyopia progressed I went from single lens to bifocals to trifocals then to progressive. When I first got my bifocals, they were wonderful, and I had little trouble adjusting. Then the trifocals were slightly more difficult, but I soon adjusted and became adept at the head movements to select the correct focal plane.

So when I finally graduated to progressives I already had the head movement training down, and the transition was immediate. Now I wouldn't be without them.

Update:

After my last refraction I got another pair of progressive lenses, but unfortunately the height of the stronger part of the lens was lower than the old ones, and so when at the computer I had to tip my head back farther resulting in neck pain. Since my prescription had only changed minimally, I ended up going back to my old glasses.

Then I recently had cataract surgery and opted for an expensive "premium" lens that is both accommodating and toric.

The toric part means that it corrects my astigmatism and that part works very well, giving me an improvement of three or four lines corrected to uncorrected.

The accommodating part means that the lens has a little hinge that changes the focal length depending on the tension of my ciliary muscle (the muscle in the eye that focuses the lens in young people). That part is a bit more problematic, and I now need reading glasses for anything less than about 12 pt. I'm told that this is because my ciliary muscle has atrophied from disuse, and that exercising it will improve the performance over several months. We shall see.

[GeoffC]

Originally Posted by RCR

Well, an update for those who helped me by responding to my first post.

I tried the lenses for three weeks. Eventually, I was able to use them without headaches or burning eyes. But I still didn't like them. There was such a narrow focus, like looking through a telescope. Imagine looking at a 24 inch computer screen and having only a saucer sized area of the screen in focus at any one time. And if you move your head, the screen distorts. I noticed too, reading a paper book, that one page would be in focus, and the other page would be fuzzy.

So, I took them back to the optometrist and asked for regular reading glasses. He was grumpy about it - he muttered "Well, they're still under warranty. I won't have to pay extra, and you won't either."

I got my new "regular" reading glasses yesterday, and they're great. I have the same wide vision as my old pair, just a bit crisper.

I think the lesson to be learned is to be wary of professionals offering you the latest and greatest. I think too, the optometrist was partly at fault. He should have explained the side effects and short-comings of the lenses in the beginning. Instead he promoted them as the best thing out since sliced bread and didn't tell me about the problems until I came back and complained.

Anyway, thanks for all your input, guys.

I recognise the experience you've mentioned .... Hope you're all sorted ....

[Tarana]

I had similar problems - terrible nausea and headaches, when I first got progressives. I gave up and had new glasses made and stuck these in a case in the dresser. The following year, my ophthalmologist told me to give them a try again after a year of using regular bifocals and no problems. That said, I don't need them for reading - I just take my glasses off. I needed the bifocals for such things as sewing where you can't move the object that you need to see.

[Lin2412]

I'm somehow worried that I'll be needing glasses soon, because I've been experiencing nausea and headaches as well, my previous visit with the ophthalmologist last year had been great news because I was told my vision was still on the normal range (if that's how you call that). I had a classmate with astigmatism, and the lenses are so detailed/unique, I tried to put it on at one point and got dizzy. lol

[pdurrant]

I'm fascinated to find out that accommodating replacement lenses are now available. I don't think the procedure is old enough (i.e. tested enough) yet to be attractive for people without cataracts, but perhaps that day will come.

I must admit that the idea of a replacement lens that fixes the lack of accommodation, and could also correct for my myopia and astigmatism is very attractive.

After another decade of experience with them and I might be tempted to go for it.

[HarryT]

I've got my first pair of varifocals on order - should have them either later this week, or next week. I'll report back how I get on.

[HarryT]

As luck would have it, about half an hour after posting the previous message, I had a phone call to say that my glasses had arrived. Just been to the opticians, and I have to say that it's a strange experience wearing varifocals for the first time. I'm having to keep my head horizontal and look down at my laptop screen to get it in focus, rather than looking directly at it as I normally would, but I'm sure I'll get used to it in a few days.

The big "winner" for me is my middle distance vision. My long-distance vision had remained constant for about 6 years, but my close-up and middle-distance vision had changed quite considerably, and although, being short sighted, I could read simply by taking my glasses off, I was really struggling with things at a distance of a couple of metres, such as the TV. These varifocals should allow me to actually see the programmes again, rather than it all being a bit of a blur .

[wodin]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I'm fascinated to find out that accommodating replacement lenses are now available. I don't think the procedure is old enough (i.e. tested enough) yet to be attractive for people without cataracts, but perhaps that day will come.

I must admit that the idea of a replacement lens that fixes the lack of accommodation, and could also correct for my myopia and astigmatism is very attractive.

After another decade of experience with them and I might be tempted to go for it.

Yes, they are premium lenses by Bausch and Lomb Called "Crystalense", and the ones with the toric (astigmatism) elements incorporated are called Trulens. Mine cost a bit over $2600 (for one) above what Medicare would pay. As of now they are the only accommodating IOL with a toric element that are approved by the FDA, although there are several other companies who have something in the pipeline, and there are a couple approved in Europe.

I'm quite happy with mine, and don't regret the extra cost at all, since the toric element diopter is fairly rigid and usually doesn't exactly match your prescription a perfect 20/20 correction is rare. Mine came out at 20/40, but my surgeon says he can tweak it with limbal relaxing incisions.

After sixty years of being dependent on spectacles it's all quite exiting.