Varilux Physio vs Varilux Physio360

Could someone please explain the difference between the Physio and
Physio360. I've been to
Varilux.Com, but they are far from clear on the target market of
either product.

I know the following question has been asked and answered in many
posts, but I am getting ready to
make a purchase and just want to be sure (the retailers tell me the
opposite of what I read here)...

For a light prescription using a Varilux lens and a regular metal
frame, I am better off getting
a standard plastic lens as opposed to a polycarb lens... is that
generally correct?


Thanks


Tom

 

For your Rx (previously posted) with a regular metal frame, 1.50 plastic
(CR-39) is fine. If you want a thinner and lighter lens from Varilux, I
would go with the 1.60 plastic, which is optically much better than the 1.59
polycarb.

Looking at the Varilux web site, it appears that Physio 360 is a finished
lens with Crizal Alize AR coating included, whereas regular Physio is
available in traditional unfinished lens which is custom finished at a local
lab. But I cannot guarantee that this is the only difference.

 

All Physio lenses are made with patented technology by essilor. The
difference between the 2 designs is the Physio is a rear surface
control only, while the Physio 360 has aberration control on both
sides.

While there is not a huge difference between the lenses, we have found
a wider reading zone in the 360 and crisper distance optics. With the
exception of higher scripts and higher base curves (where the 360 can't
be ground) we now are using the 360 exclusively. The few dollars
difference in cost is irrelevant once function and ease of adaptatin
are factored in.

There is no "target" market for these lenses per se. Essilor does not
and never has made lenses for a specific purpose as some companies,
such as Sola do. I find most of my patients do a bit of everything, so
a lens for computers is often useless for reading etc. Essilor has
always aimed at lenses for general use that work in most situations.

The Physio 360 is the best lens I have come across and I can highly
recommend it. For low scripts, stick to CR39. Airwear for higher
scripts and industrial needs.

dr grant

 

I should have mine any day now. (low script with a 2.5 add).
Drilled frames so the doc recommended poly. I elected to go
for 1.6 (Somehow I thought it was 1.67 instead of 1.60?) and
transitions.

First pair from the lab they had drilled one side for the frames
crooked and it was poly instead of 1.6. Doc sent it back but
not before I tried them out for a couple of days. I don't have
anything to compare against except my translating trifocal
rgps but the crispness and clarity was stunning.

The 360s also come with ClearGuard (antistatic). I'm don't
know if that is available as an option on the Physio.

-Quick

 

1.60 and 1.67 are two different lens materials (among others) available from
Varilux.

 

Physio do not come in 1.6 material.

dr grant

 

I am not saying that you are wrong, but that is different than what the
availabity chart says:
http://www.varilux.com/Vision+Care+Professionals/Lens+Availability/

 

You are correct. We don't get it as an option here.

dr grant

 

Robert, the 360 is freeform on both surfaces, the Physio on the back
only. The MF is purely front surface on both, but the aberration
profile is better controlled over both surfaces on the 360.

grant

 

The Ipseo was never moulded. It was laser generated front and back
from day 1. That was the reason to test head/eye movement so as to
vary the reading band accordingly.

You americans are very funny then if you get a generated physio as
they are diamond cut on the rear surface everywhere else to account
for the aberrations of a given prescription. You can't get that from a
generator, thus nullifying any benefit of the lens.

grant

 

No, Essilor is very funny.