BrianShaw
Well-known
ruben said:
a) That's what led me to contacts also. I liked them so much that I wore them all of the time and only wore glasses once-in-a-while to let my eyes rest.
b). If I understand your description correctly - you are myopic (near-sighted). Me too. I also am showing presbyopia (old age in the eye) and the ability of my eyes to adapt (focus) for close vision like reading is diminished. I have bifocals now.
c.) This is not my experience. With RF or SLR I use the distance-focused lens of the bi-focal glasess; with viewcamera I use the near-distance lens.
d.) see my comments in "c", but talk to your optomotrist... he will know what's best and will likely be able to demonstrate the correct prescription for your needs. BTW, I notice no difference in the use of the distance-focused lens of my bi-focals (or the distance-focused contacts when I wore them) for either rangefinder cameras or SLRs. Bring a camera to your appointment!
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I haven't read all the posts in detail, but here is my experience...
I have rigid gas permeable (hard) contacts, correcting for myopia, presbyopia and astigmatism. That's not an easy prescription, and my understanding is that it's nearly impossible with soft contacts. In general, rigid give better acuity, especially with presbyopia. (There may be new soft materials and technologies that have changed this a bit; I haven't spoken to my optometrist about this lately.) I know that some people cannot tolerate rigid lenses very well, or cannot wear them as long. I'm fortunate in that I wear them well and can (with the correct wetting solution), wear them for 14-16 hours per day.
Yes, some contact fittings use monocular corrections, i.e. one for distance one for close, to deal with presbyopia. Mine are not that way, both lenses are full corrected for presbyopia as well as myopia. I like this because I can use either eye for both, and my brain didn't have to adjust to it.
But the key to all this is a good, I mean a really good optometrist. I have found one who is not only good but is always updating her technology to stay at the forefront of what is possible.
My advice is to not be satisfied with just any optometrist. Before committing to one, interview your choices. Grill them about what are the possibilities, their experience with all the solutions, their likes and dislikes, their successes and "failures". If they don't understand your need with regard to rangefinder focusing, show them a camera, let them operate it and give them an idea.
I put pressure on my doc to get me the best she can. It's loving pressure, and she says I'm her favourite patient because I am such a perfectionist. Yes, I want better than perfect vision, and we laugh about that, but if someone really cares about their patient, they won't think of someone like me as an annoyance.
Two final thoughts on rigid lenses:
1. They're not cheap. I think mine cost about $400USD/pair. I recently broke one, so I am currently wearing glasses most of the time, rather than my backup pair which has an older script. And ...
2. Material makes a difference. My old pair is a different material, and while good, don't wear as long and stay as clean.
I hope Ron steps in here to add his comments, and maybe contradict what I've said.
Earl
EDIT: Yes, I much prefer my contacts to spectacles when using the camera. In addition to the better view of the frame, it keeps my from scratching spectacle lenses ... which I have done.
I have rigid gas permeable (hard) contacts, correcting for myopia, presbyopia and astigmatism. That's not an easy prescription, and my understanding is that it's nearly impossible with soft contacts. In general, rigid give better acuity, especially with presbyopia. (There may be new soft materials and technologies that have changed this a bit; I haven't spoken to my optometrist about this lately.) I know that some people cannot tolerate rigid lenses very well, or cannot wear them as long. I'm fortunate in that I wear them well and can (with the correct wetting solution), wear them for 14-16 hours per day.
Yes, some contact fittings use monocular corrections, i.e. one for distance one for close, to deal with presbyopia. Mine are not that way, both lenses are full corrected for presbyopia as well as myopia. I like this because I can use either eye for both, and my brain didn't have to adjust to it.
But the key to all this is a good, I mean a really good optometrist. I have found one who is not only good but is always updating her technology to stay at the forefront of what is possible.
My advice is to not be satisfied with just any optometrist. Before committing to one, interview your choices. Grill them about what are the possibilities, their experience with all the solutions, their likes and dislikes, their successes and "failures". If they don't understand your need with regard to rangefinder focusing, show them a camera, let them operate it and give them an idea.
I put pressure on my doc to get me the best she can. It's loving pressure, and she says I'm her favourite patient because I am such a perfectionist. Yes, I want better than perfect vision, and we laugh about that, but if someone really cares about their patient, they won't think of someone like me as an annoyance.
Two final thoughts on rigid lenses:
1. They're not cheap. I think mine cost about $400USD/pair. I recently broke one, so I am currently wearing glasses most of the time, rather than my backup pair which has an older script. And ...
2. Material makes a difference. My old pair is a different material, and while good, don't wear as long and stay as clean.
I hope Ron steps in here to add his comments, and maybe contradict what I've said.
Earl
EDIT: Yes, I much prefer my contacts to spectacles when using the camera. In addition to the better view of the frame, it keeps my from scratching spectacle lenses ... which I have done.
plummerl
Well-known
I have been wearing hard lenses (the original , not gas permeable) since 1967. I am now required to also use reading glasses. It is somewhat frustrating to be able to use the viewfinder with excellent results, but in order to see the settings on the body/lens, I have to flip on the reading glasses when the light is dim. My ability to see so well with the contacts, prevents me from ever considering switching away from contacts.
, not gas permeable) since 1967. I am now required to also use reading glasses. It is somewhat frustrating to be able to use the viewfinder with excellent results, but in order to see the settings on the body/lens, I have to flip on the reading glasses when the light is dim. My ability to see so well with the contacts, prevents me from ever considering switching away from contacts.POSTI-Tuomo
Level 1 Camera Repairman
ruben said:
Heh, just trying to help as I best can. I'm quite excited about contact lenses myself. I wore glasses for some 13 years and got tired of their inconvenience...