oftheherd
Veteran
bmattock said:
Yes, but not the same as new lenses and frames or you should consider another doctor. But you are correct that if the frames are broken or weakened at the temple mounts/screws, it isn't worth keeping them.
bmattock
Veteran
oftheherd said:
What I mean is that although frames are now often made of titanium, the screws are made of the cheapest possible pot metal - they will strip out if any pressure at all it applied to them. And I believe they are designed that way - they have about a one-year lifespan if you open and close your glasses as intended. I don't ever close mine - I just take them off at night and leave them on the nightstand opened. But let one screw pop out on the side of the frame, and the entire frame is shot. I've got Olympus point-n-shoot cameras that have smaller and stronger steel screws than this junk - and my frames are not cheap, they're Flexon Marchons.
And when I take my now-worthless $200 frames in to the eyeglass place, I tell them that hey, the lenses are fine, so let me buy just the frames. Nope, can't do that, they don't make that frame style anymore. Well, can't you reshape the lens to fit whatever similar style they DO make? Oh sure we can. The price is exactly the same as if you ordered new lenses. So why not order new lenses?
It's a racket. I live with it - what choice do I have? But it's a racket.
Imagine if I took my car in to have the oil changed and they told me that they don't make that style oil filter anymore, I'll have to buy a new car.
I always buy two pair of identical glasses for this reason and rotate them. However, I met a guy once who always ordered a spare pair of frames with no lenses. When he inevitably broke his frames, he just mounted the lenses in the second frame and continued on his merry way. I just keep forgetting to do that.
I got lucky this year - the company I work for has some decent vision care insurance, and that's nice. Still ended up costing me $325 for things that the insurance company doesn't cover. The last company I worked for, glasses cost me $1,000 over the insurance. So really, no complaints, except that I haven't really got that kind of money to spare.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
bsdunek
Old Guy with a Corgi
My Dad always said, 'getting old isn't so bad when you consider the alternative'!
So, at 67, I've had lens implants, and they are great. I see better than when I was 10. I still need glasses, as the implants are plastic and don't focus. I use Verilux and love them. I didn't have much trouble getting used to them, and the thing I like is that they don't 'jump' from one strengh to another. Of course, they're not cheap, but they work so well I don't care.
My wife and I both agree, we're still 30. We just don't know who those old people are that are in the bathroom mirror every morning!
So, at 67, I've had lens implants, and they are great. I see better than when I was 10. I still need glasses, as the implants are plastic and don't focus. I use Verilux and love them. I didn't have much trouble getting used to them, and the thing I like is that they don't 'jump' from one strengh to another. Of course, they're not cheap, but they work so well I don't care.
My wife and I both agree, we're still 30. We just don't know who those old people are that are in the bathroom mirror every morning!
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
The optician should be able to fix screws and hinges.
When I first moved here I needed a new screw on my glasses and asked the optician if he could do it. 'Leave them here and come back in ten minutes' he said. When I went back to collect them they were as good as new and he didn't charge me a cent. I wasn't even a customer.
That's why I go back to him every year or two now for a test and new lenses.
In Europe we don't have health insurance, so maybe the opticians and dentists are less expensive than in the US because we pay for our own treatment. For doctors and hospitals we pay high taxes (21% purchase tax) month to month, and then everything is free when we need it. Different places, different systems.
When I first moved here I needed a new screw on my glasses and asked the optician if he could do it. 'Leave them here and come back in ten minutes' he said. When I went back to collect them they were as good as new and he didn't charge me a cent. I wasn't even a customer.
That's why I go back to him every year or two now for a test and new lenses.
In Europe we don't have health insurance, so maybe the opticians and dentists are less expensive than in the US because we pay for our own treatment. For doctors and hospitals we pay high taxes (21% purchase tax) month to month, and then everything is free when we need it. Different places, different systems.
oftheherd
Veteran
bmattock said:
I think they would like to characterize it as it is a business.
But I am not going to argue with your choice of words, much less the intent behind them.
bmattock
Veteran
oftheherd said:
I'm sorry if I offended with my choice of words. By 'racket' what I am referring to is the eyeglass manufacturing industry, not the optometrists, opticians, opthamalogists, and so on who provide a needed service.
What I find irritating, aggravating, and senseless is that there are not that many basic types of eyeglass frame. Yes, fashion dictates changes from year to year, but certain styles - like mine - just don't change. A basic oval shape, made slightly rectangular. I buy the same thing, year after year after year.
And yet, each time, the shape is just subtly different. I can't tell the difference by looking, but I can easily see it if I try to match an old lens up to a new frame. A degree or so of angle, a mm or so shorter or longer on one side. Maddening!Different enough that I cannot reuse an old lens in a new frame, or have new lenses placed in older frames. And that - really - can't be an accident, can it?
Glasses break - everything does. But car makers stock spare parts - camera manufacturers - everybody; with the possible exception of makers of items of such low expense that fixing is not likely to be worth it. Not eyeglass makers, apparently. I don't expect to get ten years' use out of a pair of glasses frames. But I hate it when a screw strips out after six months and 'can't be repaired' so I have to buy new lenses and frames. This has been my experience since I started wearing glasses at age 10.
So I used the term 'racket', by which I mean that the glasses frame manufacturers would much rather you not repair your glasses, but instead buy new if you damage yours. My vision insurance is good, but they only pay for new glasses once every two years. If I break a pair of these new ones, even by stripping out one of the very badly-made screws in the temple, it's $500 out of my pocket instead of $120 for a new frame. I am truly sorry, I did not mean to offend you.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
fgianni
Trainee Amateur
bmattock said:
I think every business that puts making money before serving the customer well can be defined as such, unfortunately that covers 99% of the businesses nowadays.
bmattock
Veteran
fgianni said:
Every for-profit business is designed to make money, so there must be that component to the relationship between manufacturer and consumer. I don't begrudge a profit.
What I meant (and I did not mean to offend) is that this is an unusual industry that does not maintain spare parts for any period of time and requires the repurchase of the item if it breaks - unusual only in that it is a higher-ticket item than is normally considered 'disposable' when it breaks.
I claim that no spare parts are maintained only on the basis of my own experiences over my lifetime. I've broken a lot of glasses; never been able to have a pair repaired vice replaced.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Avotius
Some guy
glasses are too expensive there, I got some new ones here a few year ago and they cost about 6 dollars for frames and lenses.
oftheherd
Veteran
fgianni said:
Bill, I can't speak for anyone else, but I certainly wasn't offended. I was more in agreement, as fgianni put it above. I am not saying they don't serve their customer well either. But I agree they should be able to make a handsome profit charging less. Even considering the speed with which they can deliver eyeglasses. Does the convenience of speed have to cost that much? Well, I wasn't on the business side of it so I can't speak for sure, but I did always wonder.
Peter Klein
Well-known
A while back, there was a TV ad for an optical company that showed a bunch of middle-aged baby boomers demonstrating in front of an official-looking building with columns. One of their signs read: "Free the Presbyopic Six." Another said: "I can't read this sign, either."
--Peter
--Peter
RJBender
RFF Sponsoring Member
bob cole said:
My girlfriend is an optician and that's what she recommends. They use the bifocal part of the prescription to make the entire lens. No line bifocals aren't comfortable if you spend hours looking at a computer monitor.
R.J.
RJBender
RFF Sponsoring Member
Avotius said:
A few years ago, all the designer frames were made in Italy. Now, they are almost all made in China. Have the prices dropped? Nope.
Avotius, ask these retailers if they can ship to the USA.
R.J.
Peter Klein
Well-known
My vision "solutions" have been dictated by the fact that I work in computer and network support, and that I use rangefinder cameras.
I'm nearsighted in both eyes with a bit of astigmatism in one. I've worn glasses all my life.
Around age 42, I started needing bifocals. I tried the progressive lenses, but didn't like them. I used them for several weeks, but I never got used to them. It was like looking through a finder with mild barrel distortion, where the peripheral image changed shape slightly as I moved my head from side to side. Drove me nuts.
Talked to the optometrist. He said that actually, people see better with lined bifocals, but that because of vanity and the "I'm getting old" issue, many people prefer the progressives. I decided that seeing better was more important, so I went to lined bifocals, and was happy with them from the first day. I also got a pair of single-vision computer glasses. I get both pair scratch-coated and glare-coated. Well worth it.
Fast forward a few years. My job takes me to other people's desks a lot more. I'm getting tired of carrying two pairs of glasses around and constantly changing from one to the other. Plus, my compositions with a 35mm lens on a Leica always have stuff on the edges that I didn't see when I shot, and I have to crop.
I end up getting "monovision" contact lenses. So now, my right eye has a distance prescription. My left is set for reading. Somehow, your brain adjusts, and all's well. It took me a while, but I stuck with it, and now it's fine. For casual screen use, I can just use the contacts as-is. For long periods at the computer, I have a pair of off-the shelf reading glasses from which I have removed the left lens. The left eye is already correct for reading and screen, and the right (distance) eye gets corrected by the reading glasses. Plus, it's a great conversation piece when I stick my finger through the empty left side of the glasses. I only have to carry around one pair of glasses, not two.
I still wear glasses at night and on weekends, and I really prefer the glasses for photo editing on the screen. I also prefer glasses when I go to a play, concert or movie. I keep the contacts in when I know I'm going to photograph with an RF. The contacts have made a 35mm lens much more usable. But I'd like an RF viewfinder that worked well with my glasses, so I wouldn't have to plan ahead so much.
It's also a lot easier to hold the camera steady without glasses than with. More stable points of support against the face.
Hope this is useful to somebody.
--Peter
I'm nearsighted in both eyes with a bit of astigmatism in one. I've worn glasses all my life.
Around age 42, I started needing bifocals. I tried the progressive lenses, but didn't like them. I used them for several weeks, but I never got used to them. It was like looking through a finder with mild barrel distortion, where the peripheral image changed shape slightly as I moved my head from side to side. Drove me nuts.
Talked to the optometrist. He said that actually, people see better with lined bifocals, but that because of vanity and the "I'm getting old" issue, many people prefer the progressives. I decided that seeing better was more important, so I went to lined bifocals, and was happy with them from the first day. I also got a pair of single-vision computer glasses. I get both pair scratch-coated and glare-coated. Well worth it.
Fast forward a few years. My job takes me to other people's desks a lot more. I'm getting tired of carrying two pairs of glasses around and constantly changing from one to the other. Plus, my compositions with a 35mm lens on a Leica always have stuff on the edges that I didn't see when I shot, and I have to crop.
I end up getting "monovision" contact lenses. So now, my right eye has a distance prescription. My left is set for reading. Somehow, your brain adjusts, and all's well. It took me a while, but I stuck with it, and now it's fine. For casual screen use, I can just use the contacts as-is. For long periods at the computer, I have a pair of off-the shelf reading glasses from which I have removed the left lens. The left eye is already correct for reading and screen, and the right (distance) eye gets corrected by the reading glasses. Plus, it's a great conversation piece when I stick my finger through the empty left side of the glasses.
I only have to carry around one pair of glasses, not two.I still wear glasses at night and on weekends, and I really prefer the glasses for photo editing on the screen. I also prefer glasses when I go to a play, concert or movie. I keep the contacts in when I know I'm going to photograph with an RF. The contacts have made a 35mm lens much more usable. But I'd like an RF viewfinder that worked well with my glasses, so I wouldn't have to plan ahead so much.
It's also a lot easier to hold the camera steady without glasses than with. More stable points of support against the face.
Hope this is useful to somebody.
--Peter
RJBender
RFF Sponsoring Member
bmattock said:
Read this and decide for yourself:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...120f.htm#Item4_InformationOnTheCompany_184011
I've heard that Luxottica now operates the optical departments in Target and Sears. Pearle Vision is now part of the group.
Old news: http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/regulation/2004-05-12-eyeglasses_x.htm
R.J.
bmattock
Veteran
RJBender said:
Well, it is truly interesting information, but I went to Wilson Eye Associates, hardly a national chain. I got Flexon brand frames last time - they sell Flexon here, but I ended up going with some other brand that also makes titanium frames. I didn't recognize their name in the long list of brand names in the links you provided, but I have no idea who makes them really.
I've never purchased glasses from Lenscrafters, et al - I figure that if I could not get a decent haircut in a shopping mall, I was unlikely to get a decent eyeglass prescription there either.
Given the information you've presented, that does not bode well for the future of competition among eyeglass manufacturers; a shame. Quality will no doubt suffer.
My complaint has not been that they're badly made overall - just that they are unfixable and obsolescent by design, and some key components are clearly made of inferior parts, such as temple screws made of (or screwed into) pot metal. When they strip out, it is game, set and match; either unrepairable or irreplaceable parts.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
bmattock
Veteran
Peter Klein said:
It is useful to me, thanks! I have already ordered the graduated lenses, we'll see how well (or poorly) they work for me; this being my first foray into middle-aged eyeball fixers.
Contacts are not a solution for me. Soft, hard, porous, whatever - I can't wear them, for reasons I don't fully understand. But every eye doctor I've ever seen has said the same thing - I am not a candidate.
I *am* a candidate for Lasik. They even say that given the proper doctor, they can fix my permanent double-vision due to astigmatism in both eyes. That would be nice. I'll look into it, but cannot even consider affording it at the moment.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Peter Klein
Well-known
Bill: Two thoughts. One, be *very* careful of Lasik. There are lots of horror stories as well as successes. I would not consider it for myself--if appliances (contacts, glasses, etc.) work, they are far safer than the knife.
Second thought: If you have permanent double vision, there may be a way to classify it as a medical problem rather than a simple vision correction issue. At which point some medical insurance might cover the procedure.
I may be totally off-base here, but it's a thought.
--Peter
Second thought: If you have permanent double vision, there may be a way to classify it as a medical problem rather than a simple vision correction issue. At which point some medical insurance might cover the procedure.
I may be totally off-base here, but it's a thought.
--Peter
BrianShaw
Well-known
bmattock said:
Not many years ago I had a pair of metal-frame glasses break completely in half at the nose bridge. There is an optician in our area that offers "eye glass repair" services. He brazed it back together, replace the nose pads, adjusted them and sent me on my merry way for $50 (I seem to recall). My feeling was that the price was high for 7 minutes worth of effort, but I still got out of the deal for a fraction of the price of new frames.
His repair parts/materials seems to include screws, a wide assortment of nose pads, solder/flux/torch, many tubes of epoxy, spray paint, and a big box of old frames. I'll bet that he scavenges arms and can cobble together a cheap pair of functional glasses if one really needs a cheap pair of glasses.
They broke again within two weeks. I went back and the guy told me that repairs rarely work for long. He offered to try again, but I decided that buying a new pair of cheap frames might be a better solution. The optician agreed.
BrianShaw
Well-known
Peter Klein said:
I don't think you are off-base, Peter, but the thing that intriques me is that I haven't ever heard any of these horror stories first- or second-hand. I'll bet they are out there, but everyone I've talked to considers this to be a miracle cure for defective vision. Me... I'm a candidate -- mild myopia and mild astigmatism -- but I'm scare to death of even the idea of Lasik... even the bladeless version. I even gave up on contacts after my opthamologist started documenting "stains" on my corneas from wearing contact lenses.
Call me "4-eyes Brian"