Aging eye issues--post lasik, focus, and astigmatism...

[LowAndLeft]

Not just necessarily just an old age concern, I suppose younger folks might suffer from these too (I'm 63). Anyway...I discovered exactly how goofy my vision is. I got lasik in 2000 and have been pretty happy with it. I ended up with a distance eye and a close eye--we didn't intentionally try for this in the surgery although some folks desire it. I'd always had one eye that was better at distance anyway.

Recently, I was trying to zero my Glocks with Holosun 407Cs with both eyes open, as I shoot that way. I was attempting a 15 yard zero (I'd only zero'd to 10 yards previously) and it was tough at 15--10 had even been tough in the past. I then tried using only my dominant right eye but it's my close distance eye and it has astigmatism--still frustrating to get a good group at 15 yards. After wasting a bunch of ammo and time, on a whim I thought I'd try only my left eye (my long distance eye). Voila! Sharp dot on a sharp bullseye and got my optics zeroed!! However, it felt really weird to shift my head to the right so I could use the left eye. This all said, I'll still shoot defensive pistol with both eyes open but for range fun/distance marksmanship with pistol and rifle, I'll try my left eye only.

What eye issues have you had to address? How did you overcome them?

[rob_s]

I'm interested in this topic as well after recently re-visiting the static range after many years and finding the targets and sights didn't appear quite the same…

I just turned 49 last December.

I've been nearsighted most of my life, then added astigmatism at some point, and been progressive lenses for several years now.

I've been co soldering Lasik again, but don't want to do the opposite eye thing so was thinking I might just correct for distance and keep using glasses for reading. Seems the more universaly helpful approach (albeit maybe not the ideal shooting approach)?

And I'm thinking since we live in the golden age of the RDS, just bite down and go that route for any guns I actually want to shoot decently.

I'm also thinking this may be why I've enjoyed sporting clays more and more over the last few years. The entirely-target-focused type of shooting plays nicer with my aging eyesight than trying to focus on a tiny front sight.

[BillSWPA]

LASIK WILL weaken your cornea permanently. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you. If you do any contact or combat sports, this is dangerous. My wife had LASIK, and endured several years of misery after an accidental eye poke from our then 18 month old son (now almost 14). The eye poke separated some of the layers of her cornea. It is now almost totally healed. I would never, ever take the risk of weakening my cornea.

I wore contact lenses for 30 years. Once the astigmatism and presbyopia reached the point where contact lenses no longer solved the problem, I switched to multi-focal glasses. After trying some with the traditional distance on top transitioning gradually to reading on the bottom, I learned about Varilux D from GJM. These lenses use a hexagonal pattern of close, mid-range, and distance throughout the lenses. Multiple images are projected on the retina, and your brain picks the correct one. This system works really well for me.

If one eye is being optimized for near vision and the other for distance vision, most optometrists like to optimize the dominant eye for distance. Claude Werner argues, and I agree, that optimizing the non-dominant eye for distance and dialing back the dominant eye for near vision is better for focusing on sights for shooting. I have never found dialing back the correction in one eye to work well for me at all, and personally recommend optimizing correction in both eyes. Again, Varilux X is hard to beat.

[flyrodr]

Long story short: Various vision issues (extreme near-sightedness, astigmatism, cataracts, etc.) Tried all sorts of fixes (glasses, contacts, surgery).

Go with the red dot. Prove it to yourself. Shoot a friend's red-dot-equipped gun, or rent one at a range. The investment (time and $$) is well worth the results for most of us.

[GJM]

A definite advantage of a red dot is you don't need to be able to see the dot or the target perfectly to make good hits on target. If you are seeing the dot clearly, it might be that you are focusing on the dot and not your target.

[rob_s]

After trying some with the traditional distance on top transitioning gradually to reading on the bottom, I learned about Varilux D from GJM. These lenses use a hexagonal pattern of close, mid-range, and distance throughout the lenses. Multiple images are projected on the retina, and your brain picks the correct one. This system works really well for me.

Again, Varilux X is hard to beat.

I assume this is T a product that every shopmovfers, nor is it cheap?

I looked up “get an eye exam0 on their website and they have a Dr listed relatively nearby that I suppose I could take a chance on…

[BillSWPA]

I assume this is T a product that every shopmovfers, nor is it cheap?

I looked up “get an eye exam0 on their website and they have a Dr listed relatively nearby that I suppose I could take a chance on…

They are definitely not cheap, but worthwhile in my opinion. I paid roughly $1,700 total for 2 pairs: regular glasses and prescription sunglasses, but my current frames contributed to that total. I spend most of my day looking at a computer screen, so not having to tilt my head is nice. It is also nice not to have to tilt my head way up to read a menu behind the counter at a restaurant. For shooting, your normal head position relative to the sights will always work.

I would certainly be extra careful about not getting too close to a scope or an aperture rear rifle sight at those prices. My shooting glasses from .22 rifle target shooting as a teenager always had a badly scratched corner section from the rear sight, and I am glad those were not prescription glasses.

Not every optical shop carries them, but if you have a glasses prescription from your regular optometrist or ophthalmologist, bring that to any optical shop which carries them.

[rob_s]

Thanks for that

I have two identical frames that I swap back and forth each time. Current most recent prescription and last prescription.

Would probably just do the one and just do the lenses.

[JohnO]

If you are seeing the dot clearly, it might be that you are focusing on the dot and not your target.

Exactly my thought. Especially since he said he was having difficulty with his "close eye".

[rob_s]

LASIK WILL weaken your cornea permanently. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you. If you do any contact or combat sports, this is dangerous. My wife had LASIK, and endured several years of misery after an accidental eye poke from our then 18 month old son (now almost 14). The eye poke separated some of the layers of her cornea. It is now almost totally healed. I would never, ever take the risk of weakening my cornea.

been thinking about this over the last few days...

The issue for me is the tradeoff of simply not having to rely on physical glasses. I'm pretty tired of always being worried about where are my glasses, did I pack a spare, does this place we're going have goggles/masks that are compatible with my glasses and waiting for my transitions to change to dark and then change back...

I'm not likely to start any combat sports at this point in my life. Baby pokes are in my past but obviously anything can happen so it's a concern for sure.

I just don't see a way to end my reliance on glasses without a possible risk, but I'd love to find one if it exists.