UKC

I’ve had my first pair of varifocals for about a week now. I’m mainly wearing them indoors but have been out in town a few times with them. They’re driving me spare, being outside feels like I’ve taken a mild dose of mushrooms, everything in my peripheral vision is warped and if I want to see anything sharp in the distance (3m+) I have to look straight at it which means moving my head rather than just my eyes. I nearly fell down some steps yesterday and I wouldn’t dare drive with them.

For the most part having separate distance and reading specs is not an issue. It is occasionally a pain at work or if I want to read labels in shops.

I’m sure many of you on here have varifocals, and a few friends swear by them, though all of them said that they took to them immediately. Anyone got any experiences they’d share? My concern is that if I do actually get used to them they will permanently change my eyesight and I’ll be unable to wear normal distance specs.

In reply to 65:

I've been wearing them for maybe 10 years now, the first week or two was a bit odd & like you I struggled a bit with stairs, especially the steep stairs in the building I was working in at the time & found myself clutching the bannister more tightly than usual for a while. At the time I rarely drove so not sure if that would have been a problem. At first I used to change to my old specs for climbing but don't anymore.

My prescription sunglasses are not varifocals & I can change between the two pairs without problems & I think thats normal from talking to a couple of opticians.

In reply to Doug:

Thanks, that's good to know. 

In reply to 65:

Never worked for me; got headaches and eye strain and the brain couldn’t adjust. Tried on and off for more than five years! I’ve since been using a limited range pair (up to 2-4m, meant to allow reading to watching tv with glasses on) but they don’t work either for me; can only use the reading part and remove for looking up to anything a a further distance than that and for moving about.

The reason I still use a limited range pair is it does give a small flexibility for the distance of where the book/paper/pc is sited, but I get eye strain every day, and whether it is connected or not I have had dry eyes since I originally started on them. Need eye drops for that.

Think I’m just one of those that can’t adapt, so next time I’ll be looking to go back to just reading glasses. I don’t really need anything for distance as the prescription is negligible fortunately for me.

In reply to 65:

Been wearing varifocals for years. I honestly can’t remember ever having an issue. I took to them straightaway. I find ridge walking a little more intimidating than I used to. But I’m not convinced that’s the specs, and more to do with age and fitness etc.

I’m not sure that’s in any way helpful, but it might ease your frustration knowing that for some, they’re  a breeze. Have you always worn spectacles? I have, so not sure if that’s also a factor.

In reply to 65:

Got them a few years back. Adjusted in a day or so. Find the varifocal contacts a bit harder as they can correct astigmatism so get a little bit of double vision.

In reply to 65:

Well my wife is an optician so I was definitely an early adopter, been wearing them for best part of 20+ years. Even when I didn't need much help with distance vision I still found them so much more convenient than taking specs off and on all the time, and am still amazed at people in meetings who have to scrabble around for specs when they want to read something. Now I need help with my distance vision as well they're mostly a no-brainer.

BUT I have a few provisos. I STILL find them rubbish walking downhill, especially on rough ground; I almost invariably take them off before descending, and put up with the blur. Ditto when I play table tennis; I have found it easier to not be able to focus on the ball, but know where it is, than to have it pin sharp but not quite where I expect it! And finally, the bad news - not all varifocals are the same, and neither are opticians. The more you pay for lenses the better the design is  likely to be; and the better the optician, the better they will accurately assess your vision, make subjective adjustments based on your experience and discussion, and the more accurately they will take the measurements that will ensure an optimum result. It's also worth noting that any optician under 40 doesn't  have personal experience of varifocals, and also the business model of large chains is focused, pardon the pun, more on relatively unskilled staff punting large volumes of simple, single vision lenses than on more experienced staff spending more time selling more expensive lenses to more - ahem - discriminating clients. 

In reply to 65:

I love mine except for hill walking where looking at the ground through the 'reading' part is a pain.

In reply to 65:

Firstly, a week isn't long. If you haven't adapted to them after 3-4 weeks, it's probably not going to happen, and then hopefully your optician will change them for the equivalent value in single vision specs. Go see them again after giving them a really good go for 3 weeks if it hasn't clicked.

The majority of people who try varifocals adapt to them, but it's a sizable minority who don't. You don't know yet if you're in that minority. It is much easier to get used to them if you start with them in your late 40s when there isn't much variation down the lens, and build up to the "full varifocal" required at the age 60 gradually. If you go straight in when you need a reading add of +2.00 or more (late 50s or older), that is going to be more difficult, but still totally possible given time and perseverance. Could always try a bifocal if it doesn't work out, but that requires a bit of adaptation too.

Also, there is a big difference trying to adapt to a basic varifocal compared to trying to adapt to £500 Zeiss lenses, which are the dog's bollocks (although other lenses e.g. by Essilor are also very good). The Zeiss etc ones are a lot lot better than the cheapos. Much more of the lens is in focus, the peripheral distortion is minimised and pushed into the bits of lens you don't look through.

You should have no problem using different glasses for different things, if you successfully adapt to the varies. Glasses don't change anything about your brain or eyes in any destructive way, using different lenses is basically learning different skills. It takes time, and it's a lot easier with good tools rather than crap ones.

Hope that's useful - best of luck, they really are very good technology offering a lot of convenience if you can get used to it.

Jon (optom)

In reply to 65:

I've had them a few years now and I'm on my second prescription, having upped the reading part a bit as I deteriorate. A few points I think are considering:

I have worn glasses for short sight all my life and apparently this makes it a lot easier to get used to varifocals. I'm used to the distortion of strong lenses, and the reading bit is actually less distorted than I'm used to. On the other hand, my wife went straight to varifocals and she found it really hard work getting used to them. Although she got the hang of them eventually.

I heard that expensive lenses are a lot better, so that's what I got. I haven't tried cheap ones but if you got yours from Specsavers it might be worth trying something better.

I don't have a problem switching to my old single vision specs or contacts - either single vision or multifocal. But I can't wear my previous varifocals for some reason. It takes me days to get used to them. They are the same distance prescription, just a bit more add on the reading part, but they are a different brand and just different. It's a pain as my plan was to keep them as spares.

In reply to 65:

I've had a pair for a few months, and did a lot of complaining when I first got them. However, they are abs brilliant for driving as they solved all of the problems about either being able to see the instruments or other vehicles. I was previously having to cope with peering over my glasses to see anything except how fast I was going (nice big numbers) - not great. If only for that reason, they are worth it for me.

So I persevered and don't really think about them any more, although comments about walking downhill on rougher terrain are very true; however I haven't got around to taking my old specs on a walk for a comparison.

In reply to 65:

Stories about specs? You've clearly entered your anecdotage.  

In reply to 65:

A few more personal points to add to the good advice above. I first got varifocals in my mid-40s, Essilor lenses from a decent small opticians. It took me a good 3 or 4 weeks to adapt but I certainly wouldn’t be without them now. As a teacher I was previously taking my glasses on and off so much I was breaking frames regularly.

Others have mentioned difficulties walking on rough ground, especially descending. Soon after getting my first pair of varifocals, I went to Stanage. Downclimbing Grotto Slab (as I’d done n hundred times before) I missed a foothold and nearly did myself a lot of damage. Since then I climb in plain distance specs. Switching between the different pairs is no problem at all.

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Only half true. I work in a chain and pretty much all our business is selling very expensive glasses to rich old people - that's 'cause I work mostly in Kendal. Was different in the same company in Rotherham, I assure you. I also do a fair bit of NHS work like cataract post-ops and people whinging about their red/sore/itchy eyes that we do on behalf of GPs. Plus all the working age folk and kids, but they're far outnumbered by the oldies. Unusually for my company or chains generally, I work with really experienced staff, some of whom have been there for 30-odd years, and there's a Dispensing Optician who'll take on the more complex stuff and supervise.

I think chains and independents have different pros and cons on an individual basis of each practice. Some are good, some are bad in each parts of the sector. By far the dodgiest and most incompetent practice I've seen has been in the independent sector (some of the crap I've had to sort out is eye watering, pardon the pun), because you can't get away with that in a chain - people are watching! On the other hand, by far the best, most personalised service is available in independents if you've got the money to spend. 

In reply to 65:

Been wearing them about 5 years. First couple of weeks were 'odd' and took a while to trust them driving. Wouldn't be without them now. As you've noticed, there are effectively 3 lenses in one so you MUST move your head fractionally so you're looking through the right part of the lens. My optician really stressed that bit.

I now do that automatically without thinking and, after the initial couple of weeks, I've never had an issue with walking over rough ground or descending. I fell run and trail run quite happily in them.

I'm short sighted, and they're a massive improvement over wearing glasses for distance, then sticking them on my head and holding books/maps/mobile phones 6 inches from my nose...

In reply to Jon Stewart:

I agree that it is worth buying good quality lenses. My old glasses have Nikon lenses, which were more expensive varifocals. I hardly wear them though, apart from getting up in the night, or when I have actual eye problems (hence the fact they are old). This is because I wear multi-focal hard gas permeable contact lenses, which can be a little variable with each iteration, in quality, but my current ones are brilliant, and I hardly ever wear reading glasses with them on.

I actually need to change the lenses on my spectacles, as my myopia has reduced in amount, due to ageing, and possibly this is why my new contact lenses are really good.

So change the lenses in the frames for more expensive ones, or try wearing contact lenses again...Or both.

By the way, I'm not against Zeiss, I have a Carl Zeiss operating microscope at work, as well as Zeiss magnifying operating loupes.

In reply to 65:

I have full varifocals, limited ones (occupational lenses) and long sight ones for driving. I am short sighted. the occupational lenses are great inside and the driving ones for most things outside, but I am quite good at close work without anything. I mention this as the occupational lenses were a real bonus to me.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Good to hear about your employer though I have heard some horror/amusing stories about your employer, though not in Kendal obv; including a exec from an instrument Co  who visited one of your flagship stores on a mystery shopping trip, practically begging to be sold varis... and couldn't find anyone who was interested.

You're right about independents too, I long ago realised that an optom who starts their own practice is likely to spend the next 30 years without anyone to hold them in check or constructively criticise. Not surprising some go quietly eccentric and insular.

In reply to 65:

Switched to my first pair of varifocals about 3 years ago, and had no problems at all.  Most recent eye test recommended news lenses (slight change).  I tried the new lenses and just couldn't get on with them (walking downstairs was horrible, screen work was a lot of head movement when neither was apparently previously), compared to my existing ones.  Went back to the opticians, had a long chat, and they said the positioning wasn't quite right, and they'll get a new pair of lenses made.  Haven't tried the new lenses yet, but moral of story is that if you're not happy, go back and ask for help.

In reply to Graeme G:

I started wearing distance specs when I was turning 40, about 18 yeas ago. I think I needed readers from about 13-14 years back.

Yes, I can imagine that walking along a ridge with varifocals is scary, a bit like seeing it through GoPro vision. I'm quite happy with normal glasses outside, I can squint and read a map well enough with them.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Jon many thanks, great advice especially from the horse's mouth. so to speak. I'll give them a couple of weeks and see if I adjust. It was Specsavers I went to, always been quite happy with them, and I got the poshest lens options they do, however I also see what Rob and others have said about high end glass (not something I even think about saving money on when it comes to photography) so if I don't get used to these I'll get normal see-ers put in them at Specsavers an try the posh Optos down the road, (Malcolm Rifkind's brother, a very good reputation despite familial connections) and see what they can do.

Very glad to hear that they won't stop me using non-varifocals as I have a good pair of prescription sunglasses which I swear by especially for driving. 

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Thanks for all that info Rob, very useful. I'm one of those people who constantly change glasses in meetings!

In reply to Ridge:

That's all good to hear. Although I have an astigmatism in one eye, my distance correction is quite weak but my reading is a bit stronger, and apparently my acuity is exceptional.

Having to move my head slightly might actually be a good thing for me as I have a extremely stiff neck!

Thanks to everyone who replied, very helpful and encouraging.

In reply to 65:

probably safer on a ridge with lenses made upside down.  For mapreading you'd bow your head and look upwards

In reply to 65:

I found varifocals made me feel quite sick, and useless for close reading. I was unable to read more than a few words in a line of a sentence unless I moved my head like a horizontal noddy dog. Also dangerous when driving. If looking at the driver's side quarter light mirror I couldn't focus correctly on the dashboard or front windscreen, or the other way round. 

I now have Bifocals where the prescription lens is completely from left to right for both the top and bottom. I just need to move my eyes and not my head to focus.

I guess it just depends on what works for each individuals eyes. 

In reply to brianjcooper:

I wonder if the might be the answer for me, but I'll follow Jon's advice and give it some time. 

You describe exactly my problem just now. I had hoped they'd be good for driving as with normal see-ers on I can't read the dials very well, especially the kmh part. I get the noddy dog ref as well. 

In reply to 65:

Sorry to hear your troubles with varifocals. I've worn glasses for 70 years and varifocals for the last 25 - I have no problems myself. I've always thought that the size and shape of the lens is important. Mine measure 3.5cm top to bottom which leaves more glass area to allow a more relaxed change of strength. I also have a pair for indoors which are a little stronger all round - good for closer work. I have no trouble wearing them while running off-road. I still trip up from time to time, but used to do so when I didn't bother with the specs. No trouble wearing them for climbing (or down-climbing)

Maybe its just luck? Persevere!

In reply to 65:

I've had mine for 15 years or so. Yes, they were difficult at first. For example, walking downhill, as others have said. I didn't wear them for climbing at first. Feet were out of focus looking through the bottom part, and hands and runner placements were out of focus looking through the top. But I soon enough got used to angling my head to make it work. I found that driving at night was a problem due to enlarged irises in low light needing more of the glasses lens, so peripheral vision was blurred, but I've got used to that now.  My raw vision has never been that bad though - I can climb, read and just about drive (though I shouldn't) without glasses. So I may not be typical.

Martin

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

Answer - don't play table tennis when walking downhill?

In reply to 65:

I don't have direct experience with it, but I think that Specsavers top varifocal isn't bad at all. If you don't adapt to it, I'm not sure it's wise to spend hundreds on a top-end brand expecting it to be a completely different experience. It would be better, but the principle is still the same: the magnification varies up and down the lens creating distortion, and as you go further out, there's unwanted astigmatism in the lens creating another kind of distortion (but in the top end lenses this is cleverly reduced offering a wider area of clear vision).

If you don't adapt, I would get an alternative from Speccies according to your needs, e.g. is it important to have the dash in focus when driving; do you spend any time working at arms length distance at a desktop PC/reading music; do you read for long periods? Then next time round go to a fancy opticians and try a posher varifocal if you want the better convenience, but tell them exactly what your experience was with the last ones and show them the prescription. At that stage, I would consider adjusting your prescription to make it easier to adapt, depending on your experience/requirements/what you've got already.

A general principle to bear in mind: a single pair of varifocals for everything works for many people, but the best vision is always going to be achieved by using different specs made specifically for different tasks. These could be single vision, bifocal, varifocal or occupational lenses (or contacts) depending on what you do with your time.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Missed this response Jon, thanks for your input, very helpful especially as you have clarified a lot of my own thoughts, especially re what I want them for.

I've been out and about with them over the weekend and I'm definitely getting less discombobulated, though I went to see Sanctity of Space (brilliant) tonight and I was aware I constantly rotating my head around, looking at the middle of the screen meant any subtitles were blurred. I also managed to chop a load of vegetables, herbs and garlic without removing any fingers so that suggests improvement. I can see me hanging on to them but for doing things like shopping, work and possibly indoor environments. I'll likely stick to normal see-ers for everything else and readers for when I'm actually reading for more than a minute. 

In reply to 65: I’ve had varifocals for a long time and couldn’t do without them. As others have said go for the best glass and in particular make sure the different zones of the lenses are properly tailored to your eyes/face. It took a few weeks to adjust. For rock climbing I got used to automatically looking through different parts of the lens for finger or toe holds. I used my varifocal prescription to get lenses made up for my Oakley sun glasses too, but still use dedicated reading glasses for reading and computer use.

In reply to 65:

...I'll likely stick to normal see-ers for everything else and readers for when I'm actually reading for more than a minute. 

Not, I think the best plan. Getting used to wearing varifocals is, to my mind, the most important thing. You're training the combination of lens, eye and head movement to work in a particular way. If you then wear other lenses, you will be working against that training.

In reply to Mark Kemball:

Yes, I get your drift and it is/was a concern.

Calling Jon Stewart, any view on this? 

In reply to 65:

If you wear the VFs solidly for a month or so, you'll get through that adaptation period and your experience is unlikely to change much after that. You will find it harder if you keep swapping during that initial period. Lots of people use VFs mainly and then an additional pair of readers.

I'd make the VFs your default pair so you do get really used to them, but you may prefer single vision distance (see-ers) for outdoors (the downhill/rocky ground issue). Driving is generally better in VFs so you can see the dash/satnav (but reversing is harder).

In reply to 65:

Interesting thread, I don’t have very much to contribute as when I got them first I adapted as I walked out the shop, never looked back (sorry). Only marginal downside I’m still aware of is that I have to look down by lowering my head on rough ground, which can give me a stiff neck on the hill.

Only thing that occurs to me is, could the transition zones be misaligned? If the “mid” zone is sitting too high it could make them uncomfortable to use. Some fiddling about (perhaps by your optician) with the bridge pieces might sort that?

In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

,