Eyeglass question (bifocals)

[Coytee]

Couple years ago, I went from never needing glasses.... to bifocals. Need some help reading & need some help with distance.

I opted for progressive bifocals. I went back to TN for a couple of weeks and went to the eye Doc for a checkup. I don't know that he changed anything but, he gave me another prescription so I can get another pair if I want.

If I get progressives, I understand how their focus changes with respect to where you are looking through them. I also understand that if I get traditional bifocal, there would be a line between the two sections.

My question is... the band of focus. (it's the only way I can think to describe it)

If I get traditional bifocals with the line of seperation, then my understanding is the top half is 100% prescription #1 for distance and the bottom half is 100% prescription #2 for reading. If instead, I get progressives.... does my band of focus narrow because of the blending?

Meaning, would I have say, 35% full prescription #1 and 35% full prescription #2 and the balance (transition area) being a blend of the two, giving me less lens for each prescription?

I'm debating on trying the non-progressive to see if they are more functional. Having never had that type, I sometimes wonder if the "band of focus" that I'm using is a thinner band than it would be on my progressives than it would be on non-progressives.

Heck, I don't even know if that makes sense.

Thoughts ?

[Chris A]

If I get traditional bifocals with the line of separation, then my understanding is the top half is 100% prescription #1 for distance and the bottom half is 100% prescription #2 for reading. If instead, I get progressives.... does my band of focus narrow because of the blending?

That's been my experience with progressive bifocals. It took about two weeks to get acclimatized to them. Now the only issue that I have is that one eye might drift in correction a bit, thus causing one eye to be out-of-focus and the other eye more dominant and in-focus. Not to worry though.

I'm debating on trying the non-progressive to see if they are more functional.

They probably are, but younger folks will probably treat you differently (if you catch my drift).

Chris

[Daddy Dee]

I've been wondering the same thing. Have been wearing progressive bifocals for maybe 20 years. Took a while, but got used to the idea that I could see about whatever I pointed my nose at.

My issue has been never having been satisfied with the bifocal prescription. ie: always have ended up taking off my glasses to read.

Got new glasses about 15 months ago and told the doc go ahead and write the script, but I was going to order glasses for distance only. Didn't want to pay for something I'd take off anyway. She said ok, but I'd probably find myself missing the other correction. She was right. I'm taking my glasses off all the time to read labels in the grocery store or whatever.

It's time for another exam and pair of glasses. Will go ahead with the bifocals this time and probably with the continuous correction, though the old school BF is a road I haven't taken yet. Maybe I'll be curious enough to take it this time.

[colterphoto1]

Last time I tried bifocals and took them back in a week. When lying in recliner watching TV, I'd look right through the transiltion zone. It was never comfortable. SO went back to standard lenses. Now I'm at the stage where I have to remove glasses to read my phone or cue sheets/sound board (when mixing), so it's become a PITA. If I ever get bifocals I'll say screw the vanity and get the kind with two distinct corrections so a slight tip of head gets me into the reading zone. But I'll have them put that line way down low.

[T2K]

I've been wearing eyeglasses for a few years now because they make me look smarter. Also because I can't read a newspaper without them.

I have always bought lined bifocals because I was worried about the 'transition', and I have been happy with them. YMMV.

Merry Christmas to y'all (if you can read this).

Keith

[dtel]

Old man. [8-|]

[HDBRbuilder]

Last time I tried bifocals and took them back in a week. When lying in recliner watching TV, I'd look right through the transiltion zone. It was never comfortable. SO went back to standard lenses. Now I'm at the stage where I have to remove glasses to read my phone or cue sheets/sound board (when mixing), so it's become a PITA. If I ever get bifocals I'll say screw the vanity and get the kind with two distinct corrections so a slight tip of head gets me into the reading zone. But I'll have them put that line way down low.

I have a pair with no lower bifocal part for recliner tv-watching.

-Andy

[HDBRbuilder]

I've been wearing eyeglasses for a few years now because they make me look smarter. Also because I can't read a newspaper without them.

I have always bought lined bifocals because I was worried about the 'transition', and I have been happy with them. YMMV.

Merry Christmas to y'all (if you can read this).

Keith

My vote is for the lined bi-focals, too...even though I am now wearing lined tri-focals! The hell with vanity, I want to SEE what I look at!

-Andy

[djk]

Bifocals without a line have problems.

The field-of-view narrows considerably in the center, if you were to map it it would look like an hourglass.

I prefer to have the line. The down vision is restricted to a small area, fine for reading things that are up close, but as you shift your eyes left or right it transitions into distant mode, I can see clearly without having to swing my head. With no-line I had to swing my entire head rather than just shift my eyes. My glasses have an aviator style shape (large kidney-shaped lens), and the field-of-view is very wide. I have a distance-only pair just for the movie theater, I use the pair with the line for driving.

The only problem I had adapting was when trying to put a cup of ice onto a table (while I was standing), my brain insisted the table was farther away than it actually was. A few times a month I would hit the bottom of the cup on the edge of the table and spill the ice. It took a year for my brain to adjust to this. Fortunately there was only ice in the cup, no liquid.

[Marvel]

I now have had TRIfocals, and watching tv is alful if you are laying back any. I also now have to take my glasses off when I am looking inside equipment as the right part of thelens is never where it needs to be. Quite a pain,really.

I have always had them with the lines and can't imagine having no line trifocals.

Bruce

[indyhawg]

I have been wearing progressive bifocals for several years now. They are the only type I have ever worn. I keep saying that one day I wil try the lined bifocals out. But I never have. I usually just take mine off when I am watching TV.

[JL Sargent]

Good quality progressive lenses are the way to go. The more $$$ the better they are typically. Peripheral vision is distorted on the cheaper versions. True bifocals or trifocals are yesterday's technology. Your brain will memorize what to do.

[Coytee]

Some interesting comments.

For the .000012 cents it's worth, as I sit here and type, I can see the screen laser perfect without any glasses on. I guess it's in the good zone.

What prompted me to wonder about this was one day I forgot my glasses. While at work, I pulled out a $5.00 pair of +1.00 or something like that reading glasses that I bought at at a discount store prior to getting the actual glasses.

What I found interesting was my field of view seemed to be bigger than when I had my prescription glasses on. This is what got me thinking that for reading purposes, the reading glasses offered a better experience because they had more lens in the corrective area for reading. Likewise, I would expect that for distance, a single lens would offer more lens in the corrective area.

I can certainly make do with the progressive lens but every now & then it does seem as though I can't quite get the distance & nose pointing thing perfectly aligned. This is what made me think I needed another prescription as it had been 3 years since the first one. I figured they were going into 'Stage 2', whatever stage 2 might be defined as.

Vanity has never been one of my vanities so if I wear glasses with lines, it won't bother me much. Most of the 'chicks' at work are old enough to be my daughter so they already think I'm an out of style old fart. Come to think of it... so does my wife. []

[BEC]

Here is something that people needing bi-focals might consider. I have used this for 20 years and this is the only way I would want to go with correcting vision. This might not be for everyone, but it took me less than one day trying it to be sure it was the best for me.

http://www.allaboutvision.com/contacts/monovision.htm

[oscarsear]

If you know your prescription you can get as many pairs of glasses you want on-line. On-line stores do not require you to show an Rx. Some of the posts here echo my own experience which is even more distinctive. I have an extrinsic fixation in just one eye. The other eye truly needs bifocals. Yet the odd-ball eyeball is extremely weak and quite sensitive to light. Put a pair of bifocals on me and it is like bug vision with 4 fields of differing focus and if the light changes fast (think on-coming headlights) I'm as good as blinded. I have to use separate reading and distance glasses. I think I'd see better if I could go with a monocle and a pirate patch. Clear eyesight has always been a challenge and something I've cherished. For me I prefer separate reading and distance glasses not only because I need them but because the usefulness of the visual field is the best possible. That is something a bifocal just cannot deliver for anyone (IMHO). That's my 0.02 - separate glasses for reading and distance.

[tube fanatic]

Some interesting points have been touched upon in the various replies here. Unfortunately, no optical correction is going to be perfect under all viewing conditions. Regarding progressive lenses, the shape and contour of the zone immediately beneath the distance correction varies with manufacturer, and many offer different progressives which can favor different visual activities. A detailed discussion of your needs with the optician or optometrist should reveal what is best. As stated by others, progressives require a head movment when scanning from side to side, particularly when using the lens portion which covers the intermediate (i.e. arm's length) focusing range. This is usually adaptive, and automatic, after 2-3 weeks of constant use. The key is to keep them on full-time. If use is sporadic throughout the day, adaptation can take a very long time. The downside of conventional flat-top bifocals (i.e. visible line) is that one is locked into a distance or near scenario depending on which lens portion is used. Standing in a store and looking at something at arm's length is usually frustrating because it isn't clear with the top or bottom forcing one to either get closer or move back. Same issues for viewing a computer screen which is arm's length away. Lined trifocals eliminate this problem by offering a center, rectangular, window which has a prescription which corresponds to the arm's length distance. An advantage is that the non-distance segments are available in different widths (up to 45 mm across is typical) which can allow significant side to side scanning ability with no head movement. Keep in mind that your eye doc can arrange the prescription for any scenario that is suitable for you. Some people have lined bifocals with the intermediate prescription on top (for viewing the computer screen, for instance) and the reading prescription on the bottom. For those working in an office cubicle and having no need to look across the office, this works well. Bob mentioned using monovision contact lenses (i.e. one eye for distance, and one for near). If going that route, remember that it will markedly affect your depth perception which may or may not be an issue. And not everyone's brain can tolerate that mode of sight. Using a distance lens in one eye and a "multifocal" lens in the other can work well for some. So, in conclusion, discuss your visual needs in great detail with your practitioner and a workable solution will be easily found.

Can't believe I wrote so much! Time for a nap......

[Coytee]

Can't believe I wrote so much! Time for a nap......

It was however, appreciated! [Y]

I hope you had a nice nap [|-)]

[Turbox]

Interesting discussion, i was at the eye doctor 2 weeks ago, im on the cusp on need bifocals...another year or two...i do find that i have to take my glasses off to see some things very close up.

[John Warren]

If you don't know your blood sugar levels after a 12h fast, I would recommend that one gets to know them when changes to vision are noticed. Vision changes are not always associated with aging. Blurring and difficulty in seeing can be a result of onset Type 2 diabetes. It tends to show up as having issues with reading. After a 12h fast blood glucose should be <100 milligrams per deciiter. Values >110 can cause blurring and other vision artifacts. Unfortunately eye exams tend to pick up the diabetic damage to the eye after the damage has occurred.

[tube fanatic]

If you don't know your blood sugar levels after a 12h fast, I would recommend that one gets to know them when changes to vision are noticed. Vision changes are not always associated with aging. Blurring and difficulty in seeing can be a result of onset Type 2 diabetes. It tends to show up as having issues with reading. After a 12h fast blood glucose should be <100 milligrams per deciiter. Values >110 can cause blurring and other vision artifacts. Unfortunately eye exams tend to pick up the diabetic damage to the eye after the damage has occurred.

Valid point John. However, diabetic vision changes will affect not only the close vision, but the distance as well. Individuals in their 40s and 50s who have a stable distance prescription but begin noticing that "their arms are too short" are experiencing the usual presbyopic function changes which correlate with that age range. Eye exams should never be used as a substitute for having periodic blood work and a checkup with the MD. Both hypertension and diabetes can be present for many years before changes in the retina will be evident, as you stated. Even folks who don't need any glasses to see clearly should have periodic eye exams as well since conditions like glaucoma may be present for extremely long time periods before any symptoms will be noticeable.