Varilux X Progressive lenses

[GJM]

Just saw this on SigForum, where a poster reported great results with these lenses and iron sights. Anyone here have experience with them?

http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/430601935/m/7920040254

[MGW]

I’m delaying the change to progressive lenses for this reason. Watching this with interest.

What about the Varilux lenses would make them better than other progressives?

[Jim Watson]

I have been wearing Varilux glasses for years; never did have conventional bifocals.
The X sounds interesting, although I don't know if it would replace my dedicated shooting glasses with right lens on sights, left lens on target.

I tried some generic progressives once, when covered by insurance. Two sets of lenses gave me headaches, so I paid the premium and went back to Varilux.

[nycnoob]

What about the Varilux lenses would make them better than other progressives?


I watched a bunch of youtube videos on them about a year ago. I never really understood exactly how they worked but
the idea is that there are numerous prescriptions cut into the lens. They figure out where you hold a book (distance from eye
and arc on the glasses) and make sure that that part of the lens is close up. Some parts of the lens are intermediate
distance. They measure exactly where each of your eyeballs turn and ensure that the classes correct for the fact
that the eyes are often rotating about some non central point. The whole thing sounded cool, but also had lots of
"marketing speak" about all kinds of magic that improved the glasses from their previous progressive lens offering.
They had numerous testimonials who said the glasses worked better and gave them less headaches.

all about the eye rotation center
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wksbtdMPzA

About the various zones in the x series lenses
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tvVjyIGTD4

Less head movement needed for intermediate distance
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElQlKJHFZJQ

[MGW]

I have been wearing Varilux glasses for years; never did have conventional bifocals.
The X sounds interesting, although I don't know if it would replace my dedicated shooting glasses with right lens on sights, left lens on target.

I tried some generic progressives once, when covered by insurance. Two sets of lenses gave me headaches, so I paid the premium and went back to Varilux.


Have you tried your shooting glasses for anything other than shooting Jim? Could you compare those to your progressives as far as shooting is concerned? The first person I heard talk about glasses set up like this was Rob Leathem on a podcast. Been interested every since. I talked to my eye doctor about glasses set up like that and he tried to talk me into contacts instead.

My prescription readers just aren’t cutting it anymore for shooting or daily activities.

[critter]

It looks like the X is a new "honeycomb" type of grind where multiple distances are ground into focus adjacent to each other (as opposed to finding focus distances by looking through varying upper and lower portions of the lens in a linear manner). It looks/sounds promising. I'm due for a new pair so I'll check these out.

[BillSWPA]

Thanks for posting. I am watching this thread with interest.

[Jim Watson]

Have you tried your shooting glasses for anything other than shooting Jim? Could you compare those to your progressives as far as shooting is concerned? The first person I heard talk about glasses set up like this was Rob Leathem on a podcast. Been interested every since. I talked to my eye doctor about glasses set up like that and he tried to talk me into contacts instead.

My prescription readers just aren’t cutting it anymore for shooting or daily activities.

I know there are a lot of people with "monovision" in glasses, contacts, Lasik, and implants.
I don't like it and don't wear my shooting glasses off the range.

Regular Varilux requires you to bob your head to find sight focus. That is ok for my gunsmith who shoots mainly to zero sights he installs. Too slow for action competition.

[nycnoob]

Have you tried your shooting glasses for anything other than shooting Jim? Could you compare those to your progressives as far as shooting is concerned? The first person I heard talk about glasses set up like this was Rob Leathem on a podcast. Been interested every since. I talked to my eye doctor about glasses set up like that and he tried to talk me into contacts instead.


GreggW if you are on the East Cost I suggest you get in touch with Frank Rively.
He made my shooting and everyday glasses for me. I wrote about him here.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?13565-Frank-Rively-Optometrist-for-Shooting-Sports


You really can not combine shooting and everyday glasses, because you want shatter resistant shooting glasses
and that means you are giving up some optical quality and for my needs I have two sets of glasses, one for shooting
and one set up for long distance for driving (and walking around out doors).

[nycnoob]

I found two more articles on the Varilux X, these are particularly good at explaining the details

Varilux X series: the progressive lens with an expanded field of near vision

https://www.pointsdevue.com/article/varilux-x-series-progressive-lens-expanded-field-near-vision




Varilux X series: ultimate personalization to the wearer’s near-vision behavior



https://www.pointsdevue.com/article/varilux-x-series-ultimate-personalization-wearers-near-vision-behavior

[Jim Watson]

Interesting.
Shooters need a Varilux Y with more blend between intermediate and distance instead of the X "arms length."

[farscott]

I have a pair of Varilux that I use only for driving at night. For that purpose, they are superb. For seeing front sights, not so much. The lower portion is good for viewing cluster and displays, and the upper portion is great for distance.

[JHC]

Just saw this on SigForum, where a poster reported great results with these lenses and iron sights. Anyone here have experience with them?

http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/430601935/m/7920040254

My glasses are Varilux Physio. I've noted them on a few posts incl some PR groups. They are amazing in their visual acuity and focus flexibility. They tempt me to abandon contacts.

[JHC]

Interesting.
Shooters need a Varilux Y with more blend between intermediate and distance instead of the X "arms length."

Oh my! New pair this year!!!

[BillSWPA]

I am wearing traditional progressive lenses as I type this. In general, they work well. However:

I find myself having to tilt my head back a little more than I would like when reading my computer screen.

For close reading of tiny print (typical patent or published patent application), I find myself simply taking them off.

For reading high-mounted menus in restaurants, I fund myself having to tilt my head back to a very unnatural degree.

For shooting, the intermediate focus portion of the lens works well, but the most natural part of the lens to look through is the upper portion. The upper portion is not only strictly distance, but also not the optically best part of the lens. I do far more pistol shooting than rifle shooting, but I can envision this resulting in some uncomfortable head positions when trying to get a cheek weld and see low-mounted rifle sights.

[Larry T]

I'm due for new glasses soon. I have the same "head tilt" issue with my progressives if I want the front sight to be in focus. I use a few different "stack the dots" sights which are fairly easy to see well enough without needing to be in sharp focus. I'm not interested in any shooting glasses that I wouldn't be wearing in the Walmart parking lot or wherever a fight might happen.

I'm considering having the progressives mid-range line moved a little higher so that I don't have to tilt my head back as much. It will make the distance (top) section a little shorter but I think it might be a fair compromise.

[GJM]

I have some X lens glasses in process, and will report after I receive them and use them a while.

[JHC]

I have some X lens glasses in process, and will report after I receive them and use them a while.

Mine are the Physio. When I chose them two years now I didn't know much about them. I'll inquire about the "Y" but this "X" sounds like the top of the top. Look forward to your review.

[GJM]

Mine are the Physio. When I chose them two years now I didn't know much about them. I'll inquire about the "Y" but this "X" sounds like the top of the top. Look forward to your review.

I think the “Y” isn’t a product, but someone here’s idea of what would be perfect for shooting.

[Poconnor]

This was timely; I need new glasses

[flyrodr]

TL: DR - - - One size doesn't fit all.

I've been through multiple discussions with my eye doc about shooting glasses. He said, first off, accept that there are many variations in people's vision, caused by all sorts of things (eye geometry, starting eye correction, etc.). And that people were often looking for different "solutions": distance to sharpest focus (front sight, best compromise of focus on sight and target, etc), position (tilt) of head, others. In other words, if not endless variables, plenty enough to not generalize or assume that one person's solution might be best for you. Clearly, though, it's up to the shooter to describe what he wants so the doc (and optician) understand, and up to the doc and optician to keep up with what's out there that might work.

I have progressive lenses in my daily wear glasses, and I have a strong correction (+7). They're OK. But there's no front sight focus. Doc let me bring in gun (fake actually, but representative of my typical), and he put various corrections on me so I could see front hard front sight focus did to distance, and several in-between that distance and normal distance lenses.

Then we talked about whether lenses could be ground with a section of what seemed to be best compromise correction to me so that that section was where it needed to be for shooting, and yet I could see normally and read normally in other sections. Just didn't seem it would work - - - for me. I have to wear relatively small lenses, because with the distance correction needed, the grind gets really thick out toward the edges. Making the lens larger, with more curve, makes the problem worse - - - true coke bottle lenses.

So, I ended up with a pair of range glasses that has the right lens corrected just for front sight focus (actually somewhat past front sight, while keeping the sight picture decently sharp). Left lens has normal distance correction. Works OK, but wouldn't on the street. And truthfully, they don't work too well at distances beyond 15 yards or so.

Mostly, though, I'm transitioning to red dots . . . er, PMOs. Still not up to satisfactory speed, but gaining. Accuracy is vastly improved.

[nycnoob]

I have some X lens glasses in process, and will report after I receive them and use them a while.



Tell us about the fitting process.

[GJM]

Tell us about the fitting process.

Go in, they take some different/additional measurements, and you write them a check for about $500 for the lenses.

[nycnoob]

Go in, they take some different/additional measurements, and you write them a check for about $500 for the lenses.

The way you describe it, it sounds very high tech and science-y. I hope you are not disappointed with the results.

[GOTURBACK]

GJM
I'm looking forward to hearing about how well these variluxX lenses work in the wild so to speak after you have had a chance to evaluate them. Did you get any additional coatings?

[GJM]

GJM
I'm looking forward to hearing about how well these variluxX lenses work in the wild so to speak after you have had a chance to evaluate them. Did you get any additional coatings?

Yes, scratch and glare prevention.

[CraigS]

I have been playing the insurance game to get extra glasses. We can get the exam and glasses once per year. The insurance brings the price down some but certainly nowhere near free. I gave up on progressives for my all around glasses and went to trifocals. The next year the prescription had not changed so I got shooting glasses. My astigmatism isn't bad but I am right hand, left eye dominant. My shooting glasses are a couple mms wider than normal to offer a bit more protection. Doc and I worked real carefully on the intermediate distance prescription and the glasses have that in the entire left lens. This really helps because, w/ the trifocals, I was nowhere near fast enough bobbing my head around to get the sights into the intermediate portion of lens. The right lens is bi focal and has the intermediate and distance prescriptions. Now my pistol sights are in perfect focus and the target slightly fuzzy.

[farscott]

I just picked up a new pair of Varilux lenses in a new set of eyeglasses on Thursday. I had them configured so the very top of the lens is distance and rest of the lens is set for computer usage -- or very sharp images for the front sight. I did not buy them with shooting in mind; I bought them with office work in mind. I can wear them for work at my desk and use the top of the lens in a conference room to follow a presentation. This thread inspired me to try them on the range, so I went out in the snow flurries this morning (yes, we are getting flurries in Alabama). When I tried them, they worked well for Bullseye. I would not suggest them for action shooting as much of the field of view when moving is quite blurred.

Fitting is tedious as a device was moved around my while I focused on items at different distances. The measurement took about thirty minutes.

[41magfan]

TL: DR - - - One size doesn't fit all.

I've been through multiple discussions with my eye doc about shooting glasses. He said, first off, accept that there are many variations in people's vision, caused by all sorts of things (eye geometry, starting eye correction, etc.). And that people were often looking for different "solutions": distance to sharpest focus (front sight, best compromise of focus on sight and target, etc), position (tilt) of head, others. In other words, if not endless variables, plenty enough to not generalize or assume that one person's solution might be best for you. Clearly, though, it's up to the shooter to describe what he wants so the doc (and optician) understand, and up to the doc and optician to keep up with what's out there that might work.

I have progressive lenses in my daily wear glasses, and I have a strong correction (+7). They're OK. But there's no front sight focus. Doc let me bring in gun (fake actually, but representative of my typical), and he put various corrections on me so I could see front hard front sight focus did to distance, and several in-between that distance and normal distance lenses.

Then we talked about whether lenses could be ground with a section of what seemed to be best compromise correction to me so that that section was where it needed to be for shooting, and yet I could see normally and read normally in other sections. Just didn't seem it would work - - - for me. I have to wear relatively small lenses, because with the distance correction needed, the grind gets really thick out toward the edges. Making the lens larger, with more curve, makes the problem worse - - - true coke bottle lenses.

So, I ended up with a pair of range glasses that has the right lens corrected just for front sight focus (actually somewhat past front sight, while keeping the sight picture decently sharp). Left lens has normal distance correction. Works OK, but wouldn't on the street. And truthfully, they don't work too well at distances beyond 15 yards or so.

Mostly, though, I'm transitioning to red dots . . . er, PMOs. Still not up to satisfactory speed, but gaining. Accuracy is vastly improved.

My Father was a very successful "Eye Doctor" and I can assure you this post is dead-on .... you might want to read it twice. The inconvenient reality is simply this; There is no magic or Fairy Dust that will make it all better for most people and corrections of any kind are simply an exercise in compromise. You can have a specific solution to address a specific need, but if your visual acuity has degenerated to any significant degree, you will have to make concessions.

[GJM]

Mine arrived and so far very happy with them. Hiked, generally wore them, shot a red dot and iron sights, and they seem an improvement to current progressive lenses.

[MGW]

Keep us updated if you don’t mind. I’m waiting to hear reviews before I commit to them for myself.

[BillSWPA]

Mine arrived and so far very happy with them. Hiked, generally wore them, shot a red dot and iron sights, and they seem an improvement to current progressive lenses.

Good to learn of these results. I am also interested in your continued experience for the next time I need new glasses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JHC]

Mine arrived and so far very happy with them. Hiked, generally wore them, shot a red dot and iron sights, and they seem an improvement to current progressive lenses.

Any observation about visual clarity? I think my Varilux Physio lenses are astounding in that regard?

How about focus flexibility shooting irons? Does the front sight look "decent"?

Most days shooting with my Physio pair, the front sight looks pretty good but not as crystal clear as with a good monovision contact set up with dominant eye dialed in for the front sight. However, I haven't seen this hurt slow fire precision nor speed shooting.

And the plus side for the glasses is the targets are quite clear whereas for my highly near sighted eyes, with the aforementioned mono-vision set up, the target gets blurrier and blurrier each year if I keep the front sight sharp through the prescription.

[GJM]

Another day of shooting a dot and irons with the new lenses. Pleased — they don’t make my eyes twenty years old again, but they seem an evolutionary improvement over my previous progressive lenses.

This morning, I flew a helicopter off airport with them, which is an environment that progressive and bi-focal lenses have not worked well for me in. The Varilux X lenses seemed an improvement and gave me sharper vision peripherally and without constantly shifting my head like with my previous progressive lenses.

[GJM]

Yesterday, I did some direct comparing between the Varilux X, single vision (with a small lined bifocal at the bottom) and my non-Varilux progressive lenses. The Varilux X have a much greater sweet spot than current progressives, giving you sharper vision without having to move your head. They are much closer to single vision lenses for distance use than legacy progressive lenses.

[BillSWPA]

Yesterday, I did some direct comparing between the Varilux X, single vision (with a small lined bifocal at the bottom) and my non-Varilux progressive lenses. The Varilux X have a much greater sweet spot than current progressives, giving you sharper vision without having to move your head. They are much closer to single vision lenses for distance use than legacy progressive lenses.

I appreciate having this information, and at this point I intend to look for these next time I need new glasses.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GJM]

I continue to be thrilled with these lenses — for shooting, flying and life. I enjoy putting them on and like them more than any glasses I have worn.

35202

[Clusterfrack]

GJM, what frames are those?

[nycnoob]

I continue to be thrilled with these lenses — for shooting, flying and life. I enjoy putting them on and like them more than any glasses I have worn.

It is interesting that the glasses look smooth. I would have thought that the hexagon pattern
with the different distance focuses would be more visible in the glass. The glasses look like
other prescription glasses with a smooth lens.

[GJM]

GJM, what frames are those?

Oakley Crosslink

[JHC]

Oakley Crosslink

Mine too. All black. More slimming.

Do you have a visual preference for the clear plastic?

[MGW]

Not sure if you’ll be able to answer this but...

Is there a preferred size frame/lense for the VX? I ask because I tend to like smaller lenses. Wearing Oakley Airdrop now but also like the Steel plate frames.

[GJM]

What I would really like is to have uncorrected 20/20 vision and not need any help reading close print. Unfortunately, I don’t know how to get that. I love contact lenses for distance vision, but they don’t work so well with close stuff, and in recent years, my eyes are often dry during the winter in the desert. A red dot helps with removing the requirement for seeing a crisp front sight, but there are many times I am carrying iron sights. That forces me into some sort of progressive lens as an all around solution to be able to see far, use iron sights, and read phone size displays.

The Varilux X progressive lenses are dramatically better than any progressive, single vision or single vision with a small bifocal glasses I have used. Besides lenses, I want glasses that are lightweight and will stay on my face in vigorous activities like running, hiking, shooting, hunting, and flying in rough air. These Oakley Crosslink glasses meet all my requirements, and the translucent color almost makes the frame disappear in my peripheral vision.

[Norville]

Thanks for the review.

I wear multi focal contacts most of the time, but sometimes glasses are easier or better.

My previous glasses were Oakley frames w standard progressive lenses. Current are some other brand w standard progressives. Next pair will be Oakley w VX once I locate an optician around here that carries both.

[JHC]

GJM

Just got my X glasses this afternoon. Wow, worth every penny.

[GJM]

GJM

Just got my X glasses this afternoon. Wow, worth every penny.

Still love mine!

[Poconnor]

I think I will try a pair of progressives. How are they for reading?

[critter]

GJM

Just got my X glasses this afternoon. Wow, worth every penny.

Any trouble adjusting from standard linear progressives to the X?

[JHC]

Any trouble adjusting from standard linear progressives to the X?


None. I went from contacts, pop contacts out, slip on the V-X and it was love at first sight. ;)

[JHC]

I think I will try a pair of progressives. How are they for reading?

Working great for reading.

[Drang]

Can they do these in trifocal...?

[drjaydvm]

I have an appt with my optometrist next week. He does not carry the Varilux lenses but a local optician does. How does this work? Will the prescription he provides work with the varilux x lenses if I take the rx to the optician? I am mildly near sighted (lasix about 20 years ago), with a slight astygmatism in my left eye and recent presbyopia due to aging. I'm having trouble seeing tennis balls and targets at distance but have no trouble focusing on iron sights and tennis balls close up. My regular progressive lenses are set up for reading and distance and are not helpful for either activity. Interestingly, I think the distance to the tennis racket head and the pistol front sight is fairly close, I'm hoping a can get one pair of glasses for sporting activities that will improve distance and peripheral vision and not affect my near vision. Should I tell my optometrist anything in particular? Bring a racket and pistol to the appt?

[critter]

Everyone still satisfied with the Varilux X progressives? Any problems develop over the past year?

Time for my new glasses. I'm still very interested in these.

[cornstalker]

I am also due and quite interested in some feedback.

[GJM]

Everyone still satisfied with the Varilux X progressives? Any problems develop over the past year?

Time for my new glasses. I'm still very interested in these.

Yes, very satisfied.

[JHC]

Everyone still satisfied with the Varilux X progressives? Any problems develop over the past year?

Time for my new glasses. I'm still very interested in these.

Still thrilled out of my mind with them. No malf's across 12.8 million looks! ;)

[YVK]

Still getting used to. Sometimes lose depth perception and get blurry sight when looking through a wrong part. Dry fired some,seems ok, but haven't shot a match.

[GJM]

Still getting used to. Sometimes lose depth perception and get blurry sight when looking through a wrong part. Dry fired some,seems ok, but haven't shot a match.

I believe you are comparing the Varilux to single vision lenses, where most of us are comparing the Varilux to legacy progressive lenses.

[Erik]

I'm trying progressives right now and can't stand them. Blurry vision, too small an area where what I'm looking at is in focus and after a little while, a headache. For me, they're not working and I'm going to pull the plug and take advantage of the 30-day non-adapter return policy.

[cornstalker]

I'm trying progressives right now and can't stand them. Blurry vision, too small an area where what I'm looking at is in focus and after a little while, a headache. For me, they're not working and I'm going to pull the plug and take advantage of the 30-day non-adapter return policy.

They told me it would take two weeks to get used to them. Nearly a year later I still feel relief when I take them off. (Standard progressives)

[JHC]

I consider myself lucky. My first pair of progressives viewed great the minute I walked out of the store with them. Years later, the Varilux were just more better in all ways with a ridiculous level of flexibility and definition.

[critter]

The most difficult aspect of getting used to standard progressives for me was getting into that habit of looking "with my nose." The Varilux X are supposed to allow much more eye movement focus with less 'head on a swivel' action. I was nauseated for the first month or so.

[JHC]

I may have had an easier time with progressive and then Varilux because I've been super near sighted since I was a lad and had long worn strong prescriptions just to fix that.

[MGW]

I couldn’t adjust to mine. Headaches and eye strain after a couple hours on the computer. Couldn’t drive with them on. Everything looked a little fuzzy. I gave them six months. Just switched to Varilux Physio and so far I like them much better. Everything is nice and clear and the middle of the lens works a lot better for computer work.

In all fairness it’s possible the the X lenses I had were not fit correctly to me. I like the new lenses enough that I can’t imagine the X lens being that much better.

[JAH 3rd]

I have progressive lenses. I like them. But if I am on the computer or reading, I just put on cheap reader glasses. I find readers so much easier to use. With my progressives I find I have to have my head in just the right position to read. With the readers I am not distracted with finding the right spot to focus with.

[BillSWPA]

I am on my third day of wearing Varilux X after years of traditional multifucal. The Varilux X is absolutely superior for reading the computer screen, and about equal for distance viewing. The vast majority of adjusting to the lenses occurs very quickly, but I am finding that a couple of days of wearing them makes a difference.

I am looking forward to seeing how they work while shooting.

They are expensive, but worth it.

[JHC]

I am on my third day of wearing Varilux X after years of traditional multifucal. The Varilux X is absolutely superior for reading the computer screen, and about equal for distance viewing. The vast majority of adjusting to the lenses occurs very quickly, but I am finding that a couple of days of wearing them makes a difference.

I am looking forward to seeing how they work while shooting.

They are expensive, but worth it.

I found them magical for how everything presented in focus as fast as I could look at it ie sights, target etc.

But just one year into them, two pair; one clear, one sunglasses, I have no further use for them. Because . . . cataracts!

10 days ago I had my left eye done. Next day at my check up, I read the 20/15 line. Today at my week+ checkup, I read the 20/10 line. WTF????

Next week, my right eye gets the treatment.

Biggest surprise - 20/10. 2nd biggest, front sight from that eye does not look too bad at all. Good enough. Not a fuzzy blob at all.

[BillSWPA]

I found them magical for how everything presented in focus as fast as I could look at it ie sights, target etc.

But just one year into them, two pair; one clear, one sunglasses, I have no further use for them. Because . . . cataracts!

10 days ago I had my left eye done. Next day at my check up, I read the 20/15 line. Today at my week+ checkup, I read the 20/10 line. WTF????

Next week, my right eye gets the treatment.

Biggest surprise - 20/10. 2nd biggest, front sight from that eye does not look to bad at all. Good enough. Not a fuzzy blog at all.

Glad you got a good surprise and hope the other eye results in the same.

[Clusterfrack]

Unity Via Elite vs Varilux X?
GJM

[GJM]

Unity Via Elite vs Varilux X?
GJM

Not sure, as I have been using Varilux X clear, sun and progressive lenses with complete satisfaction since this thread started.

[Clusterfrack]

Not sure, as I have been using Varilux X clear, sun and progressive lenses with complete satisfaction since this thread started.

Thanks. It's really hard to find any decent reviews comparing them. I'm going to go with the Varilux X. It's a known quantity, and my optician was selling the Via Elite a little too strongly. I bet she gets a better price on them.

Edit: Optometrist confirmed that I am nowhere near needing to wear glasses to shoot. Probably never will. I feel really lucky.

[GJM]

Thanks. It's really hard to find any decent reviews comparing them. I'm going to go with the Varilux X. It's a known quantity, and my optician was selling the Via Elite a little too strongly. I bet she gets a better price on them.

Edit: Optometrist confirmed that I am nowhere near needing to wear glasses to shoot. Probably never will. I feel really lucky.

I DO need glasses or contacts to shoot, but I shoot faster without them. :cool:

[Clusterfrack]

I DO need glasses or contacts to shoot, but I shoot faster without them. :cool:

Use the force Luke...

[rainman]

Hope this isn't too much of a thread-drift, but I'd like to solicit some opinions from those who've had progressive lenses longer than I (first pair last quarter of 2020).

Background...
My overall vision isn't bad, and I'm able to pass driver's exam (no restriction on license)...in fact, my distance vision seems to be holding it's own or improving. My close-in vision is okay for a lot of things (limited reading and computer use), but I had been wearing a pair of 'cheaters' (+1.25 or +1.5) whenever doing some close-in work involving small parts. While driving I simply would look under my glasses and can see the instruments fine, and when at home I would rarely put my glasses on for most things.

One thing I began having increasing difficulty seeing was the front sight. I brought this up with my ophthalmologist, who mostly discouraged me from trying progressive lenses ("you'll hate them"...yeah, that's discouraging). At some point in the middle of last year I decided that I was doing enough computer work that it was time for progressives, or reading/computer glasses.

My journey into progressive lenses...
I got a new Rx from the ophthalmologist and went off to the local specialist in eyewear. I asked about Varilux but was talked into going with Shamir (they handle both, but I'm starting to wonder if they get a better cut on Shamir). Bottom line; I can't see the front sight worth a damn...in fact, it's worse when looking through my progressives. I've taken to shooting without corrective lenses and use wraparound clear safety glasses. I've practiced for 'real world encounters' by looking over the top of my progressive lenses.

When I spoke to the eyewear specialist I was told "progressive lenses won't help you seeing the front sight; you should get special shooting glasses". I don't want 'special shooting eyewear'. I shoot my rifles well enough...RDS works fine with my corrective eyewear, and magnified optics work just fine with a minor diopter adjustment.

I've been preoccupied with a lot of work and family matters for the past several months but finally finding the time to address this issue.

So for those of you with progressive lenses (and it sounds like some of you may have far worse vision than mine, although eye issues aren't always a simple matter), did you have your ophthalmologist make any special corrections for viewing pistol sights, or could this be a matter of a not-quite-right Rx or the wrong brand of lenses?


Thanks...sorry about the long read and the thread drift!



-Rainman