Plusnet:No broadband outage information on the Service Status phone no 0800 917 6714

Discussion in 'Broadband' started by michael adams, Sep 18, 2014.

  1. I'm sure it is a challenge, because some manufacturers can produce
    better ones than others. As for aberrations, some are probably
    inevitable, so you either have to accept them or accept the
    inconvenience of changing your specs whenever you want to look at
    something different. Essentially you just have to accept that you're
    getting old, and there's nothing that can be done to stop that.
    That is the entire point of varifocals. The focal length varies from
    top to bottom of the lens. They couldn't function as they are supposed
    to if it didn't.
    I think bifocals might sometimes confuse me in the same way, which is
    why I didn't choose them. Whatever you choose it will be a compromise,
    and the same compromise will never suit everybody.

    Rod.
     
    Roderick Stewart, Oct 30, 2015
    #61
    1. Advertisements

  2. Exactly my experience too. Not only is head movement required, but
    contrast is impaired because although only part of the lens is
    providing a focused image, the entire lens is collecting light, most
    of which will be blurred and therefore only fogging the part of the
    text you are looking at without contributing to its sharpness.

    You might consider this a bit like looking through a mucky window at
    something in the distance. Because your eyes will focus on the distant
    object, the muck on the window will be blurred because it is closer,
    so up to a point you can mentally "tune it out". However, it will
    still be picking up light which will add to the wanted image,
    effectively raising the brightness of the dark parts of it and thereby
    reducing the contrast.

    If you've been using varifocals, the first time you see a screen full
    of text using proper reading glasses with the entire lens optimised
    for your preferred reading distance will be a revelation.

    Rod.
     
    Roderick Stewart, Oct 30, 2015
    #62
    1. Advertisements

  3. michael adams

    David Hume Guest

    I've been wondering what it would be like to have one lense for near
    vision and the other for further away. I have heard of people doing this
    with contact lenses but I think it would take some getting used to.
     
    David Hume, Oct 30, 2015
    #63
  4. michael adams

    NY Guest

    When I started to need reading glasses as well as long-distance glasses
    (I've reached the age where my eyes no longer accommodate as well as they
    used to), I was recommended to try varifocals.

    I found them horrendous. I found that as I turned my head, vertical lines
    tilted one way or the other, like the rolling shutter effect that you get
    with some video cameras. I persisted for about a week in case it was
    something that my brain would get used to, but it didn't. So the optician
    changed me to two pairs of single-vision glasses (one for distance (driving)
    and one for reading). They didn't actually offer me the choice of having
    bifocals.
     
    NY, Oct 30, 2015
    #64
  5. michael adams

    Rodney Pont Guest

    I too had the world twisted when I first got mine. It made it difficult
    to keep my balance when walking and I bet I was wandering along in a
    drunken stupor :)

    It only took a few days for my brain to compensate though and I did
    wear them all of the time I was up.
     
    Rodney Pont, Oct 30, 2015
    #65
  6. michael adams

    Bill Ward Guest

    My only problem with bifocals before I had my cataracts done was coping
    with the metal strips on escalators.
    Bill.
     
    Bill Ward, Oct 30, 2015
    #66
  7. That was exactly my experience.

    I'm sitting here typing quite happily with a pair of glasses I bought
    for a couple of quid in a charity shop. I have to take them off outside
    (my distance vision is fine) and they aren't really strong enough for
    reading.

    An optician is going to have to produce something _much_ better to be
    worth paying more than 10 times as much.

    Andy
     
    Vir Campestris, Nov 1, 2015
    #67
  8. michael adams

    Woody Guest

    In 2009 the Co payed for me to have an eye test and the resultant
    glasses as I used a computer screen quite a lot in my work (field
    engineer.) I was prescribed reading glasses - they were +2.0 although
    I knew I only needed +1.25 for the screen.

    When I went again in 2011 and he told me he had had his knuckles
    rapped - he should only have prescribed for screen use. I then needed
    2.25 for reading but the +2.0 were and still are good enough for
    reading, and I too was using a pair of off-the-shelf glasses, now
    +1.5 - and I'm still the same today.

    I have consistently found that for ready-made glasses, Foster-Grants
    fro Matalan are optically good and certainly good value. Alternatively
    use an on-line glasses supplier with your prescription data but with
    the magnification you really need. You can get a decent pair with
    anti-reflective coating in perfectly good frames for £30 or less and
    delivered by post in 3-4 days. A bit of Googling will show many
    suppliers - I have in the past used Glasses4Eyes at Silsden near
    Keighley (W Yorks) who were very good but their prices have gone up a
    bit just lately.
     
    Woody, Nov 1, 2015
    #68
  9. You may be doing more harm than good if you use a simple fixed
    correction, diagnosed by yourself, without having your eyesight
    properly measured. If both your eyes happen to require exactly the
    same correction without anything complicated like cylinder correction
    for astigmatism, and your eyes are exactly the same distance apart and
    the same height as the centres of the lenses, then you might find that
    charity shop specs can help, but most people are not that lucky. You
    should really get lenses properly tailored to your eyes.

    Another thing cheap lenses probably won't have is an anti-reflective
    coating. I'm able to compare the performance with and without this
    (because part of the deal I got was a spare pair with no frills but to
    the same prescription) and I can confirm it really does work.

    Rod.
     
    Roderick Stewart, Nov 2, 2015
    #69
  10. michael adams

    Bob Henson Guest

    If you only need magnification and have no spherical or other
    aberrations they will be fine. Before it was decided that I was
    astigmatic, and before one eye needed more magnification than the other,
    I used the "corner shop" specs and they were fine. The danger is that
    people who need more complex specs will use them to avoid the expense of
    a trip to the opticians and damage their sight as a result. However, the
    cost of a standard NHS eye test to find out is minimal, so I'd always
    advise going to the opticians for a test - you don't have to buy from
    them if you don't need to.
     
    Bob Henson, Nov 2, 2015
    #70
  11. Well, last time I had them measured that was pretty much what the guy
    prescribed. I must get around to having them done again.
    I don't have a major problem with this - but then, I don't wear them
    outside, and especially I don't wear them for driving.

    Andy
     
    Vir Campestris, Nov 6, 2015
    #71
  12. Vir Campestris wrote:
    I've used varifocals for driving for more than 30 years now, and
    they've improve with leaps and bounds. I find them very expensive but
    then I always insist on top of the r
    ange Zeiss lenses, that are high optical density plastic, scratch
    resistant, anti reflection, and photo-chromic coating. Fortunatel my
    eyes up until 6 weeks ago were pretty stable and I reckon the average
    time between needing a new prescription was 5 - 6 years. Why 6 weeks
    ago you ask? Well that's when I had my first cataract surgery, the
    second was today, so my extreme myopia is a thing of the past. I can
    now watch TV without wearing glasses, the last time I could do that was
    when I was very young about the time of the 1953 (I think it was)
    coronation. Unfortunately the lens implants don't alter the astigmatism
    I have, so I'll have to invest in glasses when the eyes have fully
    healed and stabilised. Those will be varifocals too as the implants are
    solid and don't cater for both long distance and reading.
     
    Flyiñg Ñuñ 2°15 + on desktop, Nov 6, 2015
    #72
  13. If you wear reading glasses anywhere near a window, or those horrible
    little spotlights that seem so popular now, you'll definitely
    appreciate the difference.

    It happens that the glasses with which I can make the comparison are
    reading glasses. The frames had to be selected from a very small range
    and there are no fancy coatings on the lenses. Also, the lenses
    themselves weren't made from the special "low index" plastic that the
    expensive lightweight ones used, so they're noticeably thicker and
    heavier, and as one of my eyes needs more correction than the other,
    the lens is thicker and heavier on one side.

    Thus I have two pairs of reading glasses which are identical in
    focusing performance but one has all the trimmings and the other
    hasn't, and although the cheap ones do work and are handy as a spare,
    the proper ones are much more comfortable to use.

    Rod.
     
    Roderick Stewart, Nov 7, 2015
    #73
  14. michael adams

    Bob Henson Guest

    Glad the op went well. They mentioned that I was showing very early
    signs of cataracts a while back, but when I had my last test a couple of
    weeks back nothing was mentioned at all, so I hope it is a way off yet.
    My eyes aren't quite as stable as yours were, and I keep getting hit
    with big bills (I too have the best lenses I can get) - but I was told
    there was no change this year so, hopefully, I've hit a stable period.

    --
    Bob
    Tetbury, Gloucestershire, England

    You know you're old when the Doctor warns you to slow down instead of
    the Police.
     
    Bob Henson, Nov 7, 2015
    #74
  15. Bob Henson wrote:
    I was first told by my optician that I had premature opacity in the
    lenses of both eyes back in 1980 when I was just 38. Last year (I was
    then just 73) the optician suggested that I consider getting the
    cataracts done. But as they weren't really troubling me at that time, I
    decide to wait another year. The further persistence of him suggesting
    it again this year, combined with the increased glare I was getting
    from just a normal daylight sky decided me to take the plunge this time.
    After the first op in September I was pretty pleased with the outcome
    and so was looking forward to yesterday's surgery. Immediately after
    the op I was almost distraught as I could barely see through the new
    implant. I persisted in getting an explanation from the surgeon and she
    re-examined the eye. She said that apparently the surface of my cornea
    had been affected by the high iodine content of a sterilising agent they
    had painted onto the eyeball, but insisted that they had washed if all
    off after the stipulated 3 minute period. So to my mind I had swapped a
    cataract on the lens for one on the outer surface of the cornea. I
    wasn't too happy by that, especially as the two patients who had
    followed me had checked out only 20 minutes or so after the surgery
    telling me that their vision was now perfect. In addition to the
    eyedrops I had to apply around 16 times per day for a week then 4 times
    a week for another 3 weeks, she prescribed an additional ointment to be
    applied twice daily for 3 days. Anyhow the good thing is that after a
    good night's sleep the eye was much better and in fact I can say that
    throughout the morning this has continued, and now vision is
    approaching perfection.
    Just a point about your eyes apparently reaching it may be that any
    actual change in the eye is being masked by the effects of the
    cataracts, so no change in prescription would be of benefit. Perhaps
    it is time to have them done.
     
    Flyiñg Ñuñ 2°15 + on desktop, Nov 7, 2015
    #75
  16. michael adams

    Davey Guest

    Absolutely! I had an argument very recently in uk.d-i-y with somebody
    who cannot understand that not everyone needs a smartphone. I have no
    problem with people who do (well, except for some people who shouldn't
    be let out unsupervised..), but for somebody to call somebody else
    stupid for not needing the same equipment as him is nuts.
     
    Davey, Nov 7, 2015
    #76
  17. michael adams

    Woody Guest

    That'll teach you to contribute to UK.d-i-y - probably one of the
    rudest and most unhelp NG's available.
     
    Woody, Nov 7, 2015
    #77
  18. michael adams

    Bob Henson Guest

    I think it is too early in my case - there is no real problem yet.
    However, I'll keep my eye on the situation :)
     
    Bob Henson, Nov 7, 2015
    #78
  19. Make it both of them! Two are always better than one. ;)
    Remember mine progressed very slowly, about 34 years from being spotted
    to needing treatment. But then I was possibly lucky. My neighbour's
    cataracts developed in less than a year and he had been having regular
    eye tests too.
     
    Flyiñg Ñuñ 2°15 + on netbook, Nov 7, 2015
    #79
  20. OK that's good data. Thanks.

    Andy
     
    Vir Campestris, Nov 7, 2015
    #80
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.