problems with buying prescription specs

I moved to Australia from the UK almost a year ago and have yet to find
an optician who can make me specs that I can see out of! My
prescription is:


sph cyl axis
R +8.00 - 2.50 25
L + 7.50 -2.50 168


I have never had problems buying specs before and have worn specs for
28 years in the UK.
I have transitions lenses also.

I have had 4 pairs made up in OZ and the vision in 2 of them was so bad
it was like looking through a goldfish bowl. The 3rd pair was better -
left eye ok but right eye MAJOR distortion all over. They took some
measurements and made adjustments. The 4th pair is better - left eye
ok - right eye still a problem. I have major distortion on the left
hand side only (by my nose) so that over a cm of the lens is blurred
and makes using the specs impossible (almost crashed the car when I
tried them as I couldn't see the car coming .....)

I think they have tried high index aspheric lenses but they claim that
my old pair (from the UK) are these too, and that I should be able to
see clearly. I don't know what my old specs are but I think they are a
different material as the magnification feels different, and they weigh
slightly more than the new pair. I am at a loss of what to do - 3
opticians and I am still without new specs! Given that they cost a lot
more here than the UK I need to make sure that the pair I get are
right.

Can anyone advise what to try next?

 

These are very strong lenses. You should do whatever it takes to find out
what lens brand and lens material and index you had before and post the info
here (I assume you still have them). You can also post what they are now
recommending.

Above all else, avoid polycarb like the plague. They are terrible with very
high plus lenses like yours.

High index is a very vague term, and can mean anything from 1.59, 1.60,
1.67. 1.70, etc. The higher the index, the worse the optics, expect for
polycarb which has the worse optics of any of them at 1.59 index (but is
considered to be a safety lens)..

With very high power aspheric lenses, a good fitting is very important, and
if not done properly it could be the source of your problem. You can
sometimes figure out if the fitting is the problem by moving the frame
around on your face to see if the vision improves.

 

Re: contacts - used to use them over 10 years ago but after a year I
made mistake of using the combined pill - my eyes are now intolerant to
contacts (I tried them again a few years ago and within an hour my eyes
are bright red blood shot and very painful).

 

Sorry to pester - I really am grateful for ANY comment/suggestion.

The brand of lenses that the recent optician has used is Sola and they
are spectralite 1.54 index transitions. He wants to remake some lenses
using standard lenses with a 1.5 index as he thinks that without the
aspheric component, the vision should be better. I will call the UK in
a few hours to see if I can can find out what my old specs are. Oh
bother!

 

Yeah, I get the magnification bit. I find it strange that only one
edge of the specs is distorted. If I can't find an optician that makes
specs ok, what chance of I got of finding one that makes contacts???
Plus, again, they are expensive here (UK did free trials too)

 

I have been told that my old prescription lenses were standard
transitions lenses, not hi index, not aspherics, nothing was done to
them to make them thinner. They were a standard specsavers lens.

The new lenses were made with sola spectralite (hi index) transitions
with index 1.54 and aspheric. I was told that this would make them
thinner. My optician now wants to try a sola transitons lens with
index 1.5 but not aspheric.

A different optician has recommended a hi index 1.6 aspheric.
Another had recommended a hi index hoya 1.7 aspheric lens.

Still confused as to what to do. One says that aspheric will add to
distortion, another says it will decrease it.

 

Spectralite is 1.54 index and is considered mid-index. Spectralite has
excellent optics and I don't think you will improve much if you get regular
plastic 1.5 index (AKA CR-39 hard resin).

Both Spectralite and especially 1.5 regular plastic are going to be fairly
thick in a +8 lens. But there are potential problems in terms of optical
quality (chromatic aberration measured in abbe value) if you go to a high
index lens. However, it they are a good design and fitted properly, you
should be able to wear a high index design (especially if you stay away from
polycarb). High index will take a little getting used to compared to your
present lenses, and you may encounter a slight "swim" effect (even for SV
lenses) with a +8 in a aspheric design.

However, the problems you are now encountering appears to be a very poor
fitting or a badly made lens. Try moving the frame around to see if that
helps (indication of bad fitting). If just one lens is bad, then that is
strong indication of poor fitting and/or badly made lens.

Perhaps some others can recommend a specific lens for a +8 that will
minimize distortion (if made and fitted properly).

 

Aspheric will result in a thinner & flatter lens with better quality
vision than a conventional (spherical) lens, BUT only if it is
manufactured correctly - i.e. with the optical centres of the lenses
positioned correctly with respect to your pupils (both vertically &
horizontally).

An aspheric lens that is not centered correctly will potentially give
you worse vision than a conventional (spherical) lens.

If only one side of the lens is distorted this suggests to me that the
horizontal centration of the lenses is out.

Spectralite 1.54 is an excellent material and in my opinion that is
definitely the material that I would recommend for you, in a frame that
is as small as possible, and with accurate measurements. Standard 1.5
index plastic (spherical) is more forgiving of sloppy measurements but
is thicker and less attractive. However it would be my second preference
after spectralite. 1.6 and 1.7 lenses would be a little thinner than
spectralite but with noticeably worse quality optics so I wouldn't
recommend these.

Contacts could really be great for you but you still need to get your
glasses right so you have something to wear when you're not wearing
contacts.

Are you sure the prescription you are using is correct in the first place?

Also, where are you in Australia? (I may be able to recommend someone
near you). Having worked in optics in both the UK and Australia the
skill level in Australia is on par but it sounds like you've been
unlucky so far.

PS. Trivial Detail: In Australia it is "Optical Dispenser" rather than
"Optician" which sounds very quaint and old fashioned to Australian ears!!

Dom

 

Your Rx and mine are not terribly different ... poor bastard ;-)

The doc's here are right on two counts:

- You need an excellent optometrist (forgive me if this
terminology doesn't translate exactly in OZ)--preferably a low-vision
specialist who works with strong prescriptions like ours. These are
people who understand all of the particular optical physics
(pantographic tilt, vertex distance, placement of lenses within the
trial frames, optical center locations, etc.) very well and are really
quite meticulous in their prescribing and fitting.

- I totally agree with Mike Tyner (no surprise there):
contacts. There are dramatically new materials and options than there
were ten years ago. The decrease in optical 'noise' from glasses to
contacts is awesome. The peripheral vision is awesome. The ability
to wear your choice of sunglasses is awesome. Additionally, for high
hyperopes (that's us), you need less accommodation when looking
through contacts than you do when wearing glasses. This can lessen
eyestrain.

Try to find a low-vision specialist. Tomorrow, I drive two hours for
a contact lens fitting ... in the legendary Southern California
traffic ... to go to the best place I can find. It's worth it.

Best of luck, Mate. Seriously. I feel your struggle ;-)

 

Not to my understanding.

Though you're likely correct about the "lower down your nose" thing,
that introduces a variable. All the research I've ever seen indicates
that hyperopes acc. less with cl's, and that myopes acc. more with
cl's.

I'd be more than interested if you have any citations that point to
the opposite conclusion....

1) http://www.revoptom.com/archive/issue/ro06f2.htm

2) Sampson WG. Correction of refractive errors: Effect on
accommodation and convergence. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol
1971;75:124-32.

3) http://www.revoptom.com/archive/issue/ro09f7.htm

4)
http://www.optometry.co.uk/files/16b584a2c9ab1d496644a3d8e3b2184c_bansai20040924.pdf

OR http://snipurl.com/mbij

 

Thanks for the advice. My gut feeling is that the opticians I have
been to in OZ don't know how to measure accurately (big hint: present
lens got better when different measurements were taken). From what
people have said to me, I also think that this last problem lens
probably hasn't been manufactured properly. My current specs appear to
be CR-39 - slightly heavier than the 1.54 spectralite, slightly
thicker, and with greater magnification. I say the word 'slightly'
because I really don't notice much of a difference except for the
magnification, which isn't extreme and has benefits when driving,
watching TV from a distance, sewing, etc. I'm debating whether to
just have some lens made of the same material again or change opticians
for the 5th time in 12 months. Unfortunately, I don't know of any low
vision specialists to help as I'm still quite new here (Launceston,
Tasmania). I also assume the optician who made me the 'fish bowl
vision' lenses (specs no.3 made in the past 12 months) used
polycarbonate - dur. Even I know not to use that for my prescription!

 

I've never been to this place (primarily because I live, literally,
thousands and thousands of miles from there), but ... I found these
guys:

http://www.eyelines.com.au/pages/about.html

61 Brisbane Street. Phone 6331 7513

Their website lists them as proficient with low-vision optometry.

Know of them?

 

Have you tried these people:
http://www.optomeyes.com.au/index.htm
Andrew Hogan I believe is very good... but he is one of the optometrists
(who tests your eyes) rather than an optical dispenser (who makes the
glasses).

Dom

 

Thanks to all the advice - I had just had my 6th pair of specs made up
(CR39 as that is what my currecnt usuable pair are) and they do not
work either! Judging by teh distortion on one side I think the
mesurements are very wrong. Going to try some of the opticians
suggested above next.

 

Problem with +8.00 is ther eis little other than CR39 to make lenses
out of. Spectralite is as good as cow-dung and high index lenses just
don't go that high. What you need to do is copy the old Rx PD, tilt
Vertex distance etc so you can adapt. Ultimately the mein problem is
with you adapting to the aberrations, assuming the lenses are made
correctly. One of the problems we face as optoms is making a great set
of glasses, only to find the patient not adapting due to crappy old
glasses and having adapted to them and not being able to change to the
new set.

As much as we want to make new and beter glasses, sometimes you have to
stick with the old design because that is what you are comfortable
with.

dr grant

 

Hi,
Just come into this thread, but looking through my lens catalogues (NB there
are UK listings)

Seiko SSV aspheric 1.67 index goes to +16.00 cyls to
-6.00DC on a 60 uncut

Pentax 1.67 Aspheric +8.00 with cyls to -5.00 on a 65 uncut

Pentax 1.60 aspheric +8.00with cyls to -5.00 on 65 uncut
Seiko Super 16 +8.50 cyls to -6.00 65 uncut

In CR39 several types of aspherics

So for thin lenses on this side of the pond should not be a problem. I would
have thouht that Seko and Pentax would be available world wide.

Regards


Ian Hodgson - Isle of Man