[OT] Varifocal glasses

I expect there's a few people here with them...
I have been forced (well that or two pairs of glasses) down the progressive lens route.
I'm short sighted (-3.50 dioptre with very minor astigmatism) but at that power, I can no longer read the ingredients on food jars (which is important if your kids have allergies).
My question is:
How long does it take to get used to them? And is it reasonable to wonder if my prescription is actually not correct?
Only had them for 2 days - but they are fine for driving and have relatively little distortion and "swim" effect. The worst I've noticed is my phone goes a bit "parallelogram" at certain angles.
But there is a limit to what can be done with passive optics.
My main concern is that I think she's set the progressive boundary too high - more or less on the horizontal axis. I reckon it should be about 15-20 degrees below before it starts transitioning from far sight power to mid sight and reading. If I drop them to the end on my nose, that actually works quite well.
If I have a laptop on my knees on the train, it's in the near-sight zone whilst being at a mid-sight distance.
Same with the TV - my TV is below horizontal and my sofa tends to lean you back as they do.
Now, it's not a huge problem as the lens manufacturer offers a money back satisfaction guarantee within the first month.
However, the dispensing optician is not raising my confidence levels hugely. She says she can have a go at adjusting the frames in a couple of weeks (to give it a fair chance) but I'm not sure how you could adjust 15 degrees in. her answer to the TV is turn my head down. Well, I do know varifocals need head movement - but I've tried it and I get a crick in my neck because I have to look down so far.
Anyone with experience - am I being impatient? For the cost (not cheap) I'm not really prepared to put up with something highly suboptimal.
Cheers,
Tim
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've never worn anything else, and it didn't take me long at all.

Weren't you asked where you wanted it?

I'd go back and ask that the boundary be moved.
--
"Please stop telling us what you feel. Please stop telling us what your
intuition is. Your intuitive feelings are of no interest whatsoever,
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 16/04/15 18:21, Tim Streater wrote:

No not really. She did take a lot of car measuring things, but seh seemed to be working to a stock layout rather than spending much time making sure the zones would suit me.
That did make me wonder. I described the work I did and using laptops on trains. But she didn't ask me explicitly how I'd like the zones laid out.
Trouble is there's no way to dry run these things because if I knew them what I know now, I would have told her exactly how I wanted them.
In practice, I'd be happier with a very small reading zone right in teh bottom centre and even far power over the rest of the field. Something like bifocals, but with a soft transition rather than this very wide transition over half the lens.

To be fair, I'll give it the full 2 weeks - but I will certainly insist on that - or take the refund and go and visit some other dispensing opticians until I find one that offers more consultation.
I would have thought they'd have had something a little more scientific to assess these things...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tim Watts wrote:

I wonder whether opticians fully appreciate the distances and angles at which people view screens (whether on desks, with or without monitor arms, or actually on laps)?
I was first prescribed varifocals a couple of years ago, I was a bit reluctant, but did get a pair made, I didn't like them and went back to an even older pair for a while (as the ones I was using up to that point had really buggered up coatings) and I quite happily put up occasionally having to take off glasses to read small print on stuff.
The other week, I was doing various jobs that meant I was constantly taking off/putting on glasses and it was too much, so I dug out the varifocals and I have to say I get on with them better now, still a few annoyances, such as glancing at the centre display in the car is noticeably blurry, when turning the head slightly it's fine, and it annoys me not to be able to glance up/down, instead having to nod up and down.
There are some situationsz where you're just looking in the wrong direction (e.g. looking up at something close such as when wiring a ceiling rose where they just don't work at all, or looking down to avoid obstacles on stairs).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 16/04/15 19:33, Andy Burns wrote:

Trouble is the lenses are so damn expensive by the time they're made up with the coatings and stuff (guarantee noted but that is by no means universal).
I think they need to be able to mill out a throwaway trial pair of lenses out of soft plastic with no coatings so the user can test the visual areas.

Indeed. One accepts the limitations, but I'd certainly hope my majority use scenarios were catered for.
Driving seems fine and it has not messed up my depth perception (much) but I am finding having all of the ground fuzzy is a bit dodgy.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 16/04/15 19:48, Tim Watts wrote:
On a side note - I notice that you can even buy varifocal lenses online - I cannot think of anything less suitable to do an online purchase of.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 16/04/2015 19:49, Tim Watts wrote:

I looked at a few online sites and they are more expensive than using a normal shop. In one case they were double the price and you don't get a fitting either. You need to make measurements yourself or take photos and let them measure the photos.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You fucked that up then.

The one I use is much cheaper.

Mine can be a tenth of the price of the normal shop.

Sure, but you don’t with sunglasses either, hardly the end of civilisation as we know it.

There is just one measurement and its trivial to do that and isn't that critical either.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 16/04/2015 21:27, Rod Speed wrote:

go on then, which one.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


http://www.zennioptical.com/
$25 for my last metal frame pair with all the available coatings. $13 without the coatings http://www.zennioptical.com/451321-metal-alloy-full-rim-frame-with-spring-hinge
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 16/04/2015 22:34, Rod Speed wrote:

$105 and you can't get my prescription in that frame. So where is the cheap site?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


That isn't more expensive than the normal shop.

That's only because the frame isn't deep enough, there are plenty for the same price that are.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Rod Speed wrote:

And Omnioptics.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 17/04/2015 11:32, F Murtz wrote:

How can they be cheap? They want £130 extra just for having thin varifocal lenses. That's twice the price for the same thing in asda.
I don't know where you get the idea they are cheap from you must have been buying at the most expensive high street shop in britain to think they are cheap.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


Very few of theirs are very cheap and no free postage either on the cheap ones.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 16/04/15 20:33, Dennis@home wrote:

That'll be for the pupil distance - I know mine because I hear her say them (there are two, one for near and one for far).
I'd have no problems with online for single focus, because, apart from fitting, there's not much can go wrong with a recent prescription. But as progressives need various other measurements I reckon they just knock out a generic template.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 16/04/2015 21:29, Tim Watts wrote:

Well that just doesn't work. You need to measure the pupil distance, the height of each eye (they are frequently different) at the minimum.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

PD isn't part of the prescription they have to hand to you. Yet it's an important parameter for varifocals. It's like they keep it a secret. I wonder why?
--

Graham.

%Profound_observation%
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

It's very easy to measure yourself.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 16/04/2015 23:27, john james wrote:

Not for varifocals, you need to mark the frame where the pupil is on both eyes so the reference marks on the lens align so you can machine it to fit in the correct place. If you don't do that then someone is going to have to try and bend the frame bits to get the alignment correct.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.