Glasses, lense choice,reflective or non reflective?

BrianMurphy

BrianMurphy

Veteran
So its that time of the year again for me, eye exam, choose the frames and the lenses. I usually go for two pairs of glasses, one for work, the other for not work. Do it every year and hate doing it. My question for you is do you go for reflective or non reflective lenses for the glasses you wear when working. Nikon, Essilor, Crizal or ____________?
Most of the time I end up using my not for work glasses as the year ends. The work ones have the reflective coating worn off in places from contact with viewfinders of all sorts. When that happens you know 'cause people start looking at you in a odd manner trying to figure out why your eyes look a little different from left to right.
I am considering getting work glasses that are non reflective. Can't wear contacts...tried...it was like a half bottle of burbon...bumped into things.
Any anecdotal help would be appreciated.
Brian
 
BrianMurphy said:
So its that time of the year again for me, eye exam, choose the frames and the lenses. I usually go for two pairs of glasses, one for work, the other for not work. Do it every year and hate doing it. My question for you is do you go for reflective or non reflective lenses for the glasses you wear when working. Nikon, Essilor, Crizal or ____________?
Click to expand...

First, you do know you aren't required to get a new pair of glasses every year, yes? Even if your prescription changes a little, you aren't required to buy a new prescription. For that matter, you aren't even required to have your prescription checked every year. Some locations may require a new prescription to buy lenses if the old prescription is over a year old or so, but if you aren't having trouble seeing, and you don't have some eye problem that needs to be monitored on a yearly basis, and you hate doing it, then why are you doing it?

Second, you do know that you don't have to buy new frames every year, yes? The frames I'm wearing right now are nearly 20 years old. I just put new lenses in them when required, and it's likely I won't need new lenses for quite a few years yet (I'm old and my eyes are completely stable now -- but I still get checked every year by my opthamologist because I've got all the markers for developing glaucoma).

Third, my personal theory is that every eyeglass lens should be UV coated, and AR coated (both sides). Every single one (even my computer glasses are UV coated and AR on both sides). A good double-sided AR coating makes life so much more pleasant no matter what you're doing. In addition to that, any sunglass lenses I use are also coated with a good polaroid coating. Knocks the glare down significantly which really helps.

As to which AR coating... All of them are perfectly adequate. That said, I'm not a big fan of the Crizal coatings, but I am a big fan of my optician (he puts in the effort to line up my astigmatism corrections exactly on axis which is nice, and he's the best at this I found in my area), and Crizal is all he carries. So... that's what I've got. It's adequate. I think Crizal is trading off AR capability to make the coating harder (scratch resistance), so IMHO their AR qualities have been decreasing over the years.
 
I never used glasses when working the computer. But I have to get an exam because it just seems like in the past few months my eyes can only take looking at the monitor so long. lol I must be getting younger.
 
Bruce Watson said:
First, you do know you aren't required to get a new pair of glasses every year, yes? Even if your prescription changes a little, you aren't required to buy a new prescription. For that matter, you aren't even required to have your prescription checked every year. Some locations may require a new prescription to buy lenses if the old prescription is over a year old or so, but if you aren't having trouble seeing, and you don't have some eye problem that needs to be monitored on a yearly basis, and you hate doing it, then why are you doing it?

Second, you do know that you don't have to buy new frames every year, yes? The frames I'm wearing right now are nearly 20 years old. I just put new lenses in them when required, and it's likely I won't need new lenses for quite a few years yet (I'm old and my eyes are completely stable now -- but I still get checked every year by my opthamologist because I've got all the markers for developing glaucoma).
Click to expand...
Bruce Watson said:
Thanks for the input Bruce, and yes I am aware that I don't have to have my eyes checked every year but there is a history of cataracts in my family and after the age of 65 in Canada yearly eye exams are free, though I paid previously now I take advantage. I am impressed your frames have lasted that long, mine take a beating and though some have looked better than others after a year I still prefer to change them. But thanks for your vote on the AR or not AR as well as your take on UV coating and I totally agree with astigmatism corrections being crucial as I have the same problem and have a good optician. But neither my ophthalmologist nor optician quite understand what demands glasses are dealing with when you operate a camera despite my even bringing the camera to them.
Click to expand...
 
BrianMurphy said:
But neither my ophthalmologist nor optician quite understand what demands glasses are dealing with when you operate a camera despite my even bringing the camera to them.
Click to expand...

Yep. For that, you might need an O.D. (aka, an optometrist). My take on it is that an opthamologist (M.D.) is interested in eye diseases, an optometrist (O.D.) is interested in your vision, and an optician is interested in your glasses.

I once took my 5x4 view camera with me to show my OD, who then was able to prescribe for me "camera glasses" (about 2x magnification with my astigmatism correction) that let me see the ground glass in excellent focus from about 12 cm, very close. These lenses greatly improved my ability to focus and my photography improved quite a bit as a result.

You might want to give an O.D. a try, or not. IDK. Clearly, YMMV.
 
I have reflecting glasses. The non reflective coating is optional, I don't see any difference except the price. As far as I can see it is a marketing thing to let you pay more. I never noticed any difference.
 
I have Crizal coated lenses, BUT I also do not shoot with my glasses. I would recommend giving contacts another try, especially if you shoot with your eye in the VF and/or outdoors a lot. I couldn't imagine trying to shoot with my eye in the VF with glasses on. But if you're mostly in a studio or doing stuff inside like sit-downs and working off of a monitor instead, it could be fine.

Sometimes it takes a while to get used to contacts and even to find the right lenses for your eyes. When I first started wearing them about 19 years ago it took months. Actually ended up with different brands in each eye at the time. I also had an astigmatism back then and that makes it more difficult, too, because of having to wear a toric lens(weighted on one side so that it sits in a specific orientation in your eye).

One other thing... If you're only shooting with one camera and you're the only one that uses it, there are guys that used to get prescription/custom diopters made for the VF's.
 
I switched to coated non-reflective lenses last time around (Crizal). They definitely provide better visual and color contrast than non coated lenses in much the same way that modern photo lens coatings do compared to vintage lenses. I am particularly sensitive to glare and the improvement for that alone was considerable.
I don't wear them when using an EVF since I'm near sighted anyway.
There are also choices to make for refractive index of the lens material and computerized grinds that significantly improve the size of the visual field for people with severe astigmatism.
I had to ask for it, but my opthalmologist uses a radial line chart as a final check for astigmatism correction. One can tweak the correction visually to a finer degree than the smallest difference in prescription grind possible. He pulled up the radial chart after I complained that the text chart wasn't good enough because you don't know what the geometric shape of the font is supposed to look like once it is in focus.
I've never bothered with contacts because I like having the eye protection that glasses offer and would wear them even with contacts.
Glasses to me are as much a precision optical instrument as any camera lens. There are significant improvements with coatings and other modern technological innovations in materials and grinding methods. IMO it pays to take advantage of them for people like us that make a living with our eyes. Get the best you can afford.
 
Last edited:
GaryinCalifornia said:
I never used glasses when working the computer. But I have to get an exam because it just seems like in the past few months my eyes can only take looking at the monitor so long. lol I must be getting younger.
Click to expand...

You will when you're old enough. Don't worry about the inevitable -- enjoy your youth while you've got it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top