Varifocals and Driving
Discussion
Sheepshanks said:
Same for me and my missus and we got varifocals a few years ago. I'd read all the horror stories but had absolutely no problem with them.
What make and model of lens have you got? There must be hundreds, if not thousands, and I do think it's an issue that the differences are not explained to people.
Our whole family wears glasses so I have a lot of experience of all types of optician. We got our first varifocals from Specsavers at the same time, both had no issues and I feel a lot of that was because we had a very good dispenser. She used Essilor Varilux Panamic lenses for the main pair and Specsaves own (branded Pentax as they bought the name) for the photochromic second pair.
We couldn't tell any difference between them. Put them on and they just worked. Amazing!
We both changed a few years later. Based on the Pentax lenses seeming OK, I went for those in both pairs (at half the cost). They felt weird. Turned out they'd been made with a split prism which seems to be designed to make the lenses appear equal thickness top and bottom. It had the effect of making things jump about. Specsavers remade them without question although the new pairs are still not as awesome as the first pairs seemed to be.
Based on that, my wife got hers replaced at Costco as they use Essilor Varilux lenses, but Panamic wasn't available and they used Physio. The measuring and fitting didn't seem very thorough and again she's not as happy with them as she was with her first pair.
I'm disappointed that the Specsavers Pentax lenses are no longer as good, because my current pair are Boots/Dollonds and are inferior to the old Pentax ones. What make and model of lens have you got? There must be hundreds, if not thousands, and I do think it's an issue that the differences are not explained to people.
Our whole family wears glasses so I have a lot of experience of all types of optician. We got our first varifocals from Specsavers at the same time, both had no issues and I feel a lot of that was because we had a very good dispenser. She used Essilor Varilux Panamic lenses for the main pair and Specsaves own (branded Pentax as they bought the name) for the photochromic second pair.
We couldn't tell any difference between them. Put them on and they just worked. Amazing!
We both changed a few years later. Based on the Pentax lenses seeming OK, I went for those in both pairs (at half the cost). They felt weird. Turned out they'd been made with a split prism which seems to be designed to make the lenses appear equal thickness top and bottom. It had the effect of making things jump about. Specsavers remade them without question although the new pairs are still not as awesome as the first pairs seemed to be.
Based on that, my wife got hers replaced at Costco as they use Essilor Varilux lenses, but Panamic wasn't available and they used Physio. The measuring and fitting didn't seem very thorough and again she's not as happy with them as she was with her first pair.
motco said:
I'm disappointed that the Specsavers Pentax lenses are no longer as good,
It's a can of worms - there are multiple models available. It's like someone on here asking what we think of Dunlop tyres, without saying which model of tyre.Also, I think (but not certain) that Pentax is a name that Specsavers use for lenses they source from various places.
It do get the impression with varifocals that a lot has to do with the selection of a suitable lens and the fitting / positioning of it.
My close vision has gone downhill in last few years and I also picked up some varifocals just last week. For half a day it felt like the pavement was much closer and a bit blurry and the top of stairs was interesting! Couple of days and all was well and I have taken to them.
Fantastic being able to read small print now.
Fantastic being able to read small print now.
Well, I had the varifocals for a week and I wore them every day from first thing in the morning.
I got a little more used to the difference in focus across the different areas of the lenses, and I became a bit more competent at moving my head around to suit the glasses.
But - the lenses didn't give me the clarity of vision in the right parts of the lens. I could only achieve decent distance vision through the very top of the lens, but then when I looked in the rear-view mirror, it was completely blurred. The lower part of the lens didn't allow me to focus on the dashboard clearly (the badge on the steering wheel was crystal clear, but not the instruments) and the centre part of the lens - the bit you look through most of the time - wouldn't allow distance, close, or computer monitor vision. They have sort of a dead spot in the centre.
Worst of all, after an hour or so, I started getting headaches. I hardly ever suffer headaches, but every time I tried the new specs I'd start with a headache which got progressively worse as the day went on. Switching to my old glasses relieved the headache almost immediately so it was clear that the varifocals were the cause.
The glasses were from Specsavers (no idea of the lens make I'm afraid) and were their most expensive varifocal option with the anti-glare coating.
I've been back this afternoon and had a long chat with one of the opticians. He checked my prescription and noted that it was a particularly difficult drop in my reading vision to correct - minus 1.5 in one eye and plus 1.5 in the other - not sure exactly what that means, but he told me the eyes cancelled each other out and it was a difficult fault to correct with varifocals.
After adjusting the fit of the glasses and getting no improvement, we both agreed that I'd be better going back to single vision lenses for my short-sightedness. They were very easy to deal with and there was no hesitation in offering to replace the lenses. I even get a refund of the difference - £140, which I wasn't expecting.
So, although many people, including Mrs Local, have found varifocals to be a huge improvement and have adapted to them nicely, it seems they're just not for me at the moment. You live and learn.
I got a little more used to the difference in focus across the different areas of the lenses, and I became a bit more competent at moving my head around to suit the glasses.
But - the lenses didn't give me the clarity of vision in the right parts of the lens. I could only achieve decent distance vision through the very top of the lens, but then when I looked in the rear-view mirror, it was completely blurred. The lower part of the lens didn't allow me to focus on the dashboard clearly (the badge on the steering wheel was crystal clear, but not the instruments) and the centre part of the lens - the bit you look through most of the time - wouldn't allow distance, close, or computer monitor vision. They have sort of a dead spot in the centre.
Worst of all, after an hour or so, I started getting headaches. I hardly ever suffer headaches, but every time I tried the new specs I'd start with a headache which got progressively worse as the day went on. Switching to my old glasses relieved the headache almost immediately so it was clear that the varifocals were the cause.
The glasses were from Specsavers (no idea of the lens make I'm afraid) and were their most expensive varifocal option with the anti-glare coating.
I've been back this afternoon and had a long chat with one of the opticians. He checked my prescription and noted that it was a particularly difficult drop in my reading vision to correct - minus 1.5 in one eye and plus 1.5 in the other - not sure exactly what that means, but he told me the eyes cancelled each other out and it was a difficult fault to correct with varifocals.
After adjusting the fit of the glasses and getting no improvement, we both agreed that I'd be better going back to single vision lenses for my short-sightedness. They were very easy to deal with and there was no hesitation in offering to replace the lenses. I even get a refund of the difference - £140, which I wasn't expecting.
So, although many people, including Mrs Local, have found varifocals to be a huge improvement and have adapted to them nicely, it seems they're just not for me at the moment. You live and learn.
Reg Local said:
- minus 1.5 in one eye and plus 1.5 in the other - not sure exactly what that means
It is the dioptre, the reciprocal of the focal length.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dioptre
What they are stating is the value for the lens needed to correct your vision at the distance it is being measured. At reading distance one eye is long sighted and the other short. Compare this with your distance prescription and you get an idea how much the prescription has to vary across the height of the lens. The measurements under CYL are the ones for astigmatism and the correction is a cylindrical lens at an angle, though this only seems to be measured for distance.
If you look at the change in prescription you get an idea what the lenses are trying to do over the vertical range.
My eyes are both +1.5 for near vision and I can read the instruments fine without glasses so I would think at least one of your eyes could too. I assume at distance you have a negative prescription (very odd if not) so that will make it harder for the +1.5 eye, but easier for the -1.5 to focus close up.
I'm not an opthalmologist, optometrist or optician so the above only comes from a bit of research and a knowledge of optics from working with optical systems for thermal imagers and image amplifiers.
Well I got varifocals 2 days ago and am really struggling with them. I am shortsighted and don't need specs for reading but have to take my distance glasses off for reading and computer work so my optometrist recommended varifocals. The distance upper part is fine but the lower area has a small reading centre and then both sides have a lot of distortion. So if I am looking at my laptop screen only about 3 inches is clear and the rest is blurry.
I have asked the optometrist by email about it and he says to keeping going and said the following:
"You are used to no restriction on reading area (reading without specs) and myopic wearers always find the initial stages quite tricky. At this stage my advice would be wear them as much as possible and remove for near if you have to.
The reading area will seem very small with large areas of distortion. However, the brain does adapt to this and you do learn to move your head differently. Normally for first time wearers the adaptation process is 1-2 weeks of difficulty (and sometimes frustration), and then upto 6 weeks for your brain to adapt."
I have no reason to not believe him but my question is will my brain really adapt and the large areas of distortion will go? I am seriously doubting that. I can understand you get used to moving your head all over the place but will the blurryness really get better?
At the moment I just feel like binning the glasses but they were so expensive...seriously thinking of going back to basic distance glasses....helppppppp
I have asked the optometrist by email about it and he says to keeping going and said the following:
"You are used to no restriction on reading area (reading without specs) and myopic wearers always find the initial stages quite tricky. At this stage my advice would be wear them as much as possible and remove for near if you have to.
The reading area will seem very small with large areas of distortion. However, the brain does adapt to this and you do learn to move your head differently. Normally for first time wearers the adaptation process is 1-2 weeks of difficulty (and sometimes frustration), and then upto 6 weeks for your brain to adapt."
I have no reason to not believe him but my question is will my brain really adapt and the large areas of distortion will go? I am seriously doubting that. I can understand you get used to moving your head all over the place but will the blurryness really get better?
At the moment I just feel like binning the glasses but they were so expensive...seriously thinking of going back to basic distance glasses....helppppppp
Switched to varifocals about 4 years back, as my reading vision was getting poorer. I have pretty sever astigmatism and short-sight, bas was suffering doing anything close-up in poor light.
Varifocals have pretty much changed my life. I don't both with reading glasses, and recently when I had to switch back briefly to single-focus, i found them a complete nightmare.
For driving, I find them fine - previously I was struggling to focus on instruments at night.
Varifocals have pretty much changed my life. I don't both with reading glasses, and recently when I had to switch back briefly to single-focus, i found them a complete nightmare.
For driving, I find them fine - previously I was struggling to focus on instruments at night.
cailean said:
So if I am looking at my laptop screen only about 3 inches is clear and the rest is blurry.
Blurry as in unreadable?I use a 14" screen laptop and can read email on that without moving my head. Experimenting, I can turn my head 1/16 of a turn (so 22.5 degrees) - approx., obviously) either way and the text is looking blurry but is still readable.
I'm typing this on a 22" screen, approx. 22" away - I can read from side to side without a problem, although if I don't think about my head is turning itself slightly at either side.
Sheepshanks said:
Blurry as in unreadable?
I use a 14" screen laptop and can read email on that without moving my head. Experimenting, I can turn my head 1/16 of a turn (so 22.5 degrees) - approx., obviously) either way and the text is looking blurry but is still readable.
I'm typing this on a 22" screen, approx. 22" away - I can read from side to side without a problem, although if I don't think about my head is turning itself slightly at either side.
What lenses do you have, when I tried a set with a full distance prescription at screen distance (around 90cm) barely one word was in focus. I have ended up with a set that focuses out to about 1.5m right at the top for office use, I wouldn't bother with them at all but having a lower section with some reading prescription is useful.I use a 14" screen laptop and can read email on that without moving my head. Experimenting, I can turn my head 1/16 of a turn (so 22.5 degrees) - approx., obviously) either way and the text is looking blurry but is still readable.
I'm typing this on a 22" screen, approx. 22" away - I can read from side to side without a problem, although if I don't think about my head is turning itself slightly at either side.
I have had varifocals for a few years now, but I have never been 100% happy with them for driving.
So recently I went for an eye test and tried to figure out why.
I have the expensive ones (£500 just for the lenses alone).
The varifocals are great around the house, reading, laptop, watching TV etc, but I have always found them slightly blurry beyond about maybe 7 or 8 metres. If I am a car length from another car I can read its number plate but as the distance increases I cannot.
My prescription had not changed at all
R V=0 sph=-5.25 cyl=-0.75 axis=170.0 D prism=0 VA=6/6 Add=+1.5 N Prism=0 NVA=n5 I Add=0
L V=0 sph=-6.75 cyl=-0.25 axis=145.0 D prism=0 VA=6/6 Add=+1.5 N Prism=0 NVA=n5 I Add=0
so in theory I should be able to see fine with the varifocals, and in the testing room I can.
So I asked them to make up some normal lenses to my prescription the old fashioned way with those lenses that drop into a frame, and to go out of the testing room and look across the street.
My conclusion is that the varifocals even in the "sweet spot" are something like 0.25 to 0.5 softer, and this just isn't good enough for driving.
So I have gone back to "normal" glasses for driving and they are lovely. I just can't see the satnav or radio controls quite as clearly as longer distances.
If you get varifocals and don't get on with longer distances then my suggestion is to go back to the optician and ask for temporary simple lenses and make him prove that they are the same over longer distances. In my case they are not.
So recently I went for an eye test and tried to figure out why.
I have the expensive ones (£500 just for the lenses alone).
The varifocals are great around the house, reading, laptop, watching TV etc, but I have always found them slightly blurry beyond about maybe 7 or 8 metres. If I am a car length from another car I can read its number plate but as the distance increases I cannot.
My prescription had not changed at all
R V=0 sph=-5.25 cyl=-0.75 axis=170.0 D prism=0 VA=6/6 Add=+1.5 N Prism=0 NVA=n5 I Add=0
L V=0 sph=-6.75 cyl=-0.25 axis=145.0 D prism=0 VA=6/6 Add=+1.5 N Prism=0 NVA=n5 I Add=0
so in theory I should be able to see fine with the varifocals, and in the testing room I can.
So I asked them to make up some normal lenses to my prescription the old fashioned way with those lenses that drop into a frame, and to go out of the testing room and look across the street.
My conclusion is that the varifocals even in the "sweet spot" are something like 0.25 to 0.5 softer, and this just isn't good enough for driving.
So I have gone back to "normal" glasses for driving and they are lovely. I just can't see the satnav or radio controls quite as clearly as longer distances.
If you get varifocals and don't get on with longer distances then my suggestion is to go back to the optician and ask for temporary simple lenses and make him prove that they are the same over longer distances. In my case they are not.
Dogwatch said:
Worn them for years without any problems whether driving or anything else.
I haven't noticed this left-right business though - am I a bit weird?
Different lenses have different patterns of where close and distant transition, according to an optician I consulted. My eyesight is long-sighted so my problem is loss of downward peripheral vision because the bottom part is very positive. Also vibrations in a crash helmet on track days are exaggerated because the helmet jiggles the arms. I haven't noticed this left-right business though - am I a bit weird?
pscandoteu said:
My conclusion is that the varifocals even in the "sweet spot" are something like 0.25 to 0.5 softer, and this just isn't good enough for driving.
Oddly enough -0.25 at long distance with similar in astigmatism is when I decided to wear glasses for driving, I could still drive without, but lost that edge I prefer to have for reading the road at speed. My wife has tried driving with varifocals and is going to get single vision next time even though being -9 this will make reading instruments difficult.Hi Reg, while surfing the internet looking for advice on using vary focals for driving I found this thread. I tried them before and couldn't get on with them for the same reasons you mentioned. I just wondered if you ever managed top get them to work as this thread is a few years old now?
Reg Local said:
Well, I had the varifocals for a week and I wore them every day from first thing in the morning.
I got a little more used to the difference in focus across the different areas of the lenses, and I became a bit more competent at moving my head around to suit the glasses.
But - the lenses didn't give me the clarity of vision in the right parts of the lens. I could only achieve decent distance vision through the very top of the lens, but then when I looked in the rear-view mirror, it was completely blurred. The lower part of the lens didn't allow me to focus on the dashboard clearly (the badge on the steering wheel was crystal clear, but not the instruments) and the centre part of the lens - the bit you look through most of the time - wouldn't allow distance, close, or computer monitor vision. They have sort of a dead spot in the centre.
Worst of all, after an hour or so, I started getting headaches. I hardly ever suffer headaches, but every time I tried the new specs I'd start with a headache which got progressively worse as the day went on. Switching to my old glasses relieved the headache almost immediately so it was clear that the varifocals were the cause.
The glasses were from Specsavers (no idea of the lens make I'm afraid) and were their most expensive varifocal option with the anti-glare coating.
I've been back this afternoon and had a long chat with one of the opticians. He checked my prescription and noted that it was a particularly difficult drop in my reading vision to correct - minus 1.5 in one eye and plus 1.5 in the other - not sure exactly what that means, but he told me the eyes cancelled each other out and it was a difficult fault to correct with varifocals.
After adjusting the fit of the glasses and getting no improvement, we both agreed that I'd be better going back to single vision lenses for my short-sightedness. They were very easy to deal with and there was no hesitation in offering to replace the lenses. I even get a refund of the difference - £140, which I wasn't expecting.
So, although many people, including Mrs Local, have found varifocals to be a huge improvement and have adapted to them nicely, it seems they're just not for me at the moment. You live and learn.
I got a little more used to the difference in focus across the different areas of the lenses, and I became a bit more competent at moving my head around to suit the glasses.
But - the lenses didn't give me the clarity of vision in the right parts of the lens. I could only achieve decent distance vision through the very top of the lens, but then when I looked in the rear-view mirror, it was completely blurred. The lower part of the lens didn't allow me to focus on the dashboard clearly (the badge on the steering wheel was crystal clear, but not the instruments) and the centre part of the lens - the bit you look through most of the time - wouldn't allow distance, close, or computer monitor vision. They have sort of a dead spot in the centre.
Worst of all, after an hour or so, I started getting headaches. I hardly ever suffer headaches, but every time I tried the new specs I'd start with a headache which got progressively worse as the day went on. Switching to my old glasses relieved the headache almost immediately so it was clear that the varifocals were the cause.
The glasses were from Specsavers (no idea of the lens make I'm afraid) and were their most expensive varifocal option with the anti-glare coating.
I've been back this afternoon and had a long chat with one of the opticians. He checked my prescription and noted that it was a particularly difficult drop in my reading vision to correct - minus 1.5 in one eye and plus 1.5 in the other - not sure exactly what that means, but he told me the eyes cancelled each other out and it was a difficult fault to correct with varifocals.
After adjusting the fit of the glasses and getting no improvement, we both agreed that I'd be better going back to single vision lenses for my short-sightedness. They were very easy to deal with and there was no hesitation in offering to replace the lenses. I even get a refund of the difference - £140, which I wasn't expecting.
So, although many people, including Mrs Local, have found varifocals to be a huge improvement and have adapted to them nicely, it seems they're just not for me at the moment. You live and learn.
I have had varifocals from Specsavers in the past. First pair a few years ago took four attempts to get the cut off in the right place, but were OK once sorted. Got a new pair last year and the cut off was right near the top, so ended up returning them. I have just had corrective lenses fitted during cataract surgery which have some kind of varifocal effect, but I'm still getting used to them.
I have gone for bifocals this time, main lens for distance then the inset at a little longer than reading distance, I find the cut over is just at the top of the dash so perfect for a glance down to read instruments or nav. Useful for shopping too as the lower section is good for reading labels even if not quite as close as reading focus would get me. I like them for driving because I get the full width of the lens to use and the rhd lower corner is good for the door mirror as it is still on the distance prescription.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff