New glasses - is it me?

DorsetDude

DorsetDude

Spud
Suspended / Banned
Messages
7,018
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
Yes
So Ive been trying Boots opticians this time instead of my usual bloke.

Been back twice already, due to my own fault probably. however today Ive got my new "for screen use" glasses on and the area in focus (left to right and up, down, not depth of focus IYSWIM) seems minute. i.e. if I look at the centre of a sentence on screen and tilt my eyes, not my head, to look at for instance the date/time in the bottom right of screen, the time is out of focus. Ive tried my previous prescription pair back on and with them I can see the whole screen clearly and in focus without moving my head around.
So have I got a duff pair of lenses or are you meant to move your head around as well as your eyes when looking around the screen at various places to keep the focus?

Ive also noticed with the new ones I get chromatic aberration at more extreme angles(an A4 piece of paper tacked up next to and behind my screen has orange edge one side and blue the other. WIth the previous pair of specs this is not present. This is not as much of an issue as the area of focus I get though, but I think shows a fairly poor quality lens.

Take 'em back or a case of get what you pay for? (although about the same price, if not more, as I paid last time anyway , £160 and second pair £80)

Cheers all.
 
"For screen use" suggests (to me, anyway!) that they're single focus rather than bi or vari so you should be able to flick your eyes around the screen and see it all clearly IMO. My cheapo reading glasses show no CA. Hate to say it but you should have gone to... ;)
 
Nod said:
Hate to say it but you should have gone to... ;)
Click to expand...
I usually do too, although my glasses are little more than magnifiers for reading I have no issues, and a £25 / pair
I have even less issues :D
 
Fewer issues!!!

If you have a Tiger (Danish cheap crap shop) nearby, you can get readers for a couple of quid. Lidl sometimes have folding readers for £3.50 or so.
 
If they're not varifocals, the focus should be constant across the lens.
Take them back.
 
Better stick your hands in your pockets (or wipe them on a teenager!)
 
How does that matter?
Thin as wafers or thick as bottle bottoms, he should still be able to see through them.
 
viv1969 said:
How does that matter?
Thin as wafers or thick as bottle bottoms, he should still be able to see through them.
Click to expand...
Because the 'thin and light' lens is made out of polycarbonate, which some people are non-tolerant to due to its low v-value. Polycarb non-tolerance has such symptoms as colour fringing and reduced field of vision.
 
Is the prescription the same for both your eyes? Maybe one lens is too strong/weak? I noticed something similar a while back before going to the optician.
 
My prescription is fairly strong, it had changed 0.5 at the last eye test.

£250 later and I will have some new lenses :)

Can't be without my current ones so needed to buy new ones.
 
DorsetDude said:
Yes
Click to expand...
I'd suggest you go back to the practice, explain your problems and propose the idea that you aren't getting on with the polycarbonate lens, see what they say. Based on what you've described here, I would revert back to the standard 1.5 index as a first step (or, if you really need the thinning, upgrade to the 1.67 index.)

The other thing to watch is if you now have a lens that is much 'curvier' than your previous pair, although I've only known a handful of people have a problem with this (all were very high prescriptions) whereas polycarbonate non-tolerance is relatively common in comparison.
 
Carousels Spin said:
I'd suggest you go back to the practice, explain your problems and propose the idea that you aren't getting on with the polycarbonate lens, see what they say. Based on what you've described here, I would revert back to the standard 1.5 index as a first step (or, if you really need the thinning, upgrade to the 1.67 index.)

The other thing to watch is if you now have a lens that is much 'curvier' than your previous pair, although I've only known a handful of people have a problem with this (all were very high prescriptions) whereas polycarbonate non-tolerance is relatively common in comparison.
Click to expand...
Are/were you "In the trade"? I was 37 years a technician (SMCTech)
 
Carousels Spin said:
I'd suggest you go back to the practice, explain your problems and propose the idea that you aren't getting on with the polycarbonate lens, see what they say. Based on what you've described here, I would revert back to the standard 1.5 index as a first step (or, if you really need the thinning, upgrade to the 1.67 index.)

The other thing to watch is if you now have a lens that is much 'curvier' than your previous pair, although I've only known a handful of people have a problem with this (all were very high prescriptions) whereas polycarbonate non-tolerance is relatively common in comparison.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that. Will go back. not really sure what the 1.5 index stuff means mind. :confused: I'll just tell em about the focus and fringing issues. Troublesome lens is slightly flatter than my previous pair if anything.
 
Hope you get it sorted quickly, Keith.
 
Nod said:
Hope you get it sorted quickly, Keith.
Click to expand...
I was just reading this again thinking, actually they're not too bad, then I realised I had come back with a coffee and put my older pair on by mistake. lol. ho hum.
 
Back to Boots over the weekend and they gave me a few wierd looks, tried adjusting the glasses somehow, which did improve things a tiny bit but not enough. Finally agreed to replace the lenses with a non polycarbonate material and they reckon that should do it.

Fingers crosssed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top