Varifocal spectacles - good or bad?

kuvvy

kuvvy

Well-known
Local time
5:02 PM
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,948
Off to have an eye test at the weekend and the optician is recommending varifocal lenses. I can have these on a trial basis and if I don't get along with them I can exchange them. I have astigmatism and currently have a pair of distance glasses and a pair for reading. I always use the distance ones when shooting.
However, I was wonder edging how many here wear varifocals and are they any good from a photographers poiny of view. Would like to hear your opinions.

Paul
 
At first I thought you meant autofocus eyeglasses and I got all excited, as that would be great. Well, that aside . . .

I tried tri-focal glasses and could not use them. Constantly twisting and bobbing my head to get focused on objects and people. Drove me nuts. I now use two separate pairs of glasses.

I cannot even use bifocals, as they distort the lower half and going down stairs is tricky (trippy ? :D)

Some people love them though.
 
I wear progressive lenses (basically bifocals without the dividing line). It takes a bit of time to get used to them, but now I wear most of the day, for reading, shooting, working on the computer etc. The only time I switch to reading glasses is when I have to do extended reading. No issues with focusing on the RF, even when shooting with the Visoflex.
 
I suppose this is what we call multifocals. It took me a month in my late 40s to get used to them, but I just knew it would work. I can now stare at a distant tower and count the aerials, and focus close on my thumbnail, all with the one pair of glasses. I am onto my second or third set of these and can wear the old ones and the new ones like my brain has a library of templates all remembered. I was warned not to play tennis in them when I first got them but by the time my adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder was better I forgot that advice and played tennis quite happily in multifocals. They are simply fantastic. Not perfect, but almost. It never occurred to me to have a concern about using a camera with them. I only take a Leica along to the optometrist to see that any new pair of glasses gives me a sporting chance of accessing the 35mm frame lines.
 
I've been wearing varifocals for years and it takes about a week or so for the brain to get used to them, after that they are fine provided the optician has got the correct centering for your eyes.

As I have got older my eyes have improved so I don't really need glasses for walking about but I generally wear them anyway. I tend to lift the glasses when I use a camera viewfinder but if I didn't it would be important to centre the eyepiece over the correct area of the glasses lens.

I value VF lenses as it would drive me crazy to have to keep swapping glasses when viewing closer objects or reading.
 
I've worn glasses since I was 8yrs old.

I had varifocals for the last 5 years and the only problem I had with shooting SLRs, Rangefinder, View Cameras and Digital POS was not being able to see the whole frame in a camera viewfinder, which is common w/ glasses. There is a "swimming" feel when you first use them, but I got used to it easily.

Presently trying out contacts for the first time at 48yrs old. Doing the mono-vision thing (dominate eye at infinity, other eye pulled back to bring in closer objects) so far so good.

Oh yeah, I still need reading glasses for extended computer use and reading small print
 
Last edited:
I have a bit of astigmatism and a bit of hypermetropia (long sighted). I trust my optician as not being interested just in $, and he recommended 'no'.

But my advise to you is to check it up with an ophthalmologist (or oculist as we used to call them). Sometimes you/we spend so much in photo gear and we neglect our eyes...
 
They work fine for farsighted people (those who can not see close), and not so good for nearsighted,(I tried a pair 20 years ago).

My solution is bifocals for every day set for 20 feet and reading distance. Second pair of bifocals set for 2 feet on top and bottom for reading. These are perfect for my computers
where the large screens are at eye level. I built this system so everything is ergonomic, table height, screen height, chair height, keypad height and a semi darkened room which I make completely dark for critical color work..
 
I am farsighted and have relatively severe astigmatism. Have worn glasses since I was about 4. And have worn progressive bi-focals for the last two pairs I've had (5 years? ).
They are really good, I think!
I first had regular bi-focals and those, not so much. This was because of the optician I had at the time; he didn't get the line at the right place for my eyes. It was neither level nor high enough in the frame:bang:.
I switched opticians and ophthalmologists and have been very happy with the results.
It did take about two weeks for me to get used to the first pair.
I also will suggest that you get the best lenses you can afford.
The improvements in coatings and scratch resistance are well worth it, I think.
Especially if you are being offered a trial period, I would absolutely try 'em!
You might also try "mono-vision" as JOE1951 mentions; this works well for some folks and not for others. I asked about it but for my vision, contact lenses aren't helpful so it was not an option.
Good luck!
Rob
 
Farsighted, significant astigmatism... and progressives work very well. The only problem with them is when you can't raise your head high enough to get the bottoms of the lenses in the position you need to see up close (like trying to read the ID tag on the differential of a car while lying under the car.) If you do a lot of that kind of work, I'd recommend a pair of glasses specifically for that range to complement your progressives.

Oh, and pay the money for the anti-reflective and hard coatings. They're worth it. Photochromic (photo-gray) lenses... not so much. I used to have photochromic lenses, but they don't lighten quickly enough to be useful, and they tend not to darken inside a car when you need them. They may have improved in the past ten years, but I just get a second pair of prescription high-quality sunglasses.
 
Progressives work fine for me on the cameras without diopters. But I mainly shoot those with, b/c I prefer to shoot (focus) without glasses.
 
hepcat said:
Oh, and pay the money for the anti-reflective and hard coatings. They're worth it. Photochromic (photo-gray) lenses... not so much. I used to have photochromic lenses, but they don't lighten quickly enough to be useful, and they tend not to darken inside a car when you need them. They may have improved in the past ten years, but I just get a second pair of prescription high-quality sunglasses.
Click to expand...

I can only agree with this!
As to the photochromic lenses, I also tried them and really did not like them. And, in any moder car the windshield blocks most (or all? ) uv light and so the lenses will NOT darken. Which makes them useless as sunglasses for driving. I have also gone with seperate sunglasses.
Rob
 
These comments are getting me to re-think varifocals.
Possibly the pair I had simply did not have the areas located correctly ?
Also, in retrospect, I had no warning that they would take some getting used to - the optometrist had just raved about the concept. I gave it about two weeks and figured it was my brain that was screwed up - he was happy to sell me two new, separate pairs of glasses.

I agree about the photochromics - must keep a pair of real sunglasses in your car for driving.
 
I've worn varifocals for many years now and had no problems with them. I can see the rangefinder patch just fine. Mine have a center area optimized for computer work which I also find invaluable. You do have to give them a chance to work though. As I recall it took me nearly a month before I was comfortable with mine.
 
At my age I use spectacles to read since many years. Spectacles on, spectacles off, where did I left them? Since a couple of years I use variable focal spectacles (which I almost always wear) and the quality of my life has really increased. Now the photography: as mentioned the main problem is to see all the frame in the viewfinder, I was lucky when I bought my used M7 because I got a 0.58 VF. No problem with RF. Caution: these lenses are very expensive and I have to be careful no to scratch it! The rubber protection on the VF is a must!
robert
 
Lined bifocals and trifocals provide superior vision, much lower distortion and a much wider field of view. These are absolutes. Most people use progressive lenses because they don't want lines. Also, these 'absolutes' are less pronounced with early presbyopes, but become rather nasty as you age. This is a result of lens design, where the greater the difference in power between the distance and near results in great progressive distortion. Many that don't adapt to lined glasses never wanted them in the first place. Adaptation to either takes many weeks for many people and the glasses must be worn full time during that time. I wear glasses to see, but prior to the age of fifty I wore progressive lenses.
 
I have been wearing varifocals for the past 20 years. I tried bifocals once and they were literally a pain in the neck. Both types tend to make the ground look farther away to me. I remember stairs being a bit of a learning experience. Be careful until you get used to them. I am able to use cameras with the glasses OK. Adjustable diopter viewfinders semm to work best. For those cameras that don't work with varifocals, I shoot without my glasses. Some VFs are notorious for scratching glasses. I severely scratched my right lens shooting with the FSU turret VF.

Mike
 
Ctein has recently posted a series of very interesting articles on this topic over at The Online Photographer. The series is in this tagged group.

Personally, I've stayed with using two pairs of glasses. One for distance and one for "computer distance". My presbiopia is significant enough to require the two perscriptions but mild enough to allow the computer distance glasses to also work for most reading situations. My nearsightedness is strong enough and my astigmatism is also modest enough to allow me to read well without glasses, even in dim light. Since I live in a small condo and work in a relatively confinded space (computer imaging and printing for a photographer's gallery) I find that the computer distance (aka Middle Distance) glasses work for everything except driving and other outdoor activities.
 
I don't have much trouble with seeing through the vf on the cameras I have so that's good. I wondered whether you have to re- adjust your eyes between looking in the distance and reading the info in the vf. I ended up with two pairs the last time I was tested but i find im now wearing an old pair when on my PC. they seem to cover the middle distance. Seems that many do use varifocals these days. May give them a go.
 
I have similar issues, but recently solved them with my new Zeiss ASPH custom ground eyeglass prescription. The lenses are custom ground to match what the doctor ordered - highly variable lenses with a +3 reading and large anti-astigmatism range. Very different left/right eye needs - works great.

Provides far better accuracy across the entire lens. Also has much wider middle area without any distortion. I've never had better glasses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom