I'm thinking about buying a pair of shooting glasses and because I wear normal glasses, I am going to have to have my lens made to a specific prescription. I was wondering whether the collective wisdom of TT had any recommendations on where to go for inexpensive lenses. It seems like there are at least a few online retailers that will make lenses to your prescription and it'll be cheaper than going to my optometrist.
Also, while I'm asking, does anybody feel strongly about one brand of shooting frames over another? I've seen shooters happy/unhappy with many types with no clear consensus.
And as for the prescription, how much should I adjust it relative to my regular prescription? Any general guidelines?
Thanks!
Cheap shooting glass lenses?
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
Forum rules
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
That last question is the important one, and can really only be answered by an optometrist who can accommodate pistol shooters' needs. The glass must be perfectly spherically ground, and the focal length will be very specific to your eyes, arm length, pistol length to front sight, and perhaps even stance angle. As for frames... I would suggest looking for a type which uses a solid set screw for each clamp rather than tiny thumb screws as the latter are fragile.[/code]
Hi vHoff,
I would suggest that your shooting lens is probably not a great place to save money.
You may find that your normal prescription lens and what you require for shooting may be quite different. On online retailer will simply not be able to provide a lens in the same way an Optometrist will.
Also that cheaper lenses tend to use inferior glass or even plastic. This can lead to distortion of what you are seeing.
My personal suggestion would be to spend a little bit extra on your shooting lens. I couldn't see it being more than $100 extra and even that would be extreme.
It is common to arrange with an Optometrist to bring in say an Air Pistol and have them work out something that will work well for you and last for quite some time.
As far as frames are concerned I use a simple Knobloch frame with no other attachments. I don't have a preference either way.
Good luck
I would suggest that your shooting lens is probably not a great place to save money.
You may find that your normal prescription lens and what you require for shooting may be quite different. On online retailer will simply not be able to provide a lens in the same way an Optometrist will.
Also that cheaper lenses tend to use inferior glass or even plastic. This can lead to distortion of what you are seeing.
My personal suggestion would be to spend a little bit extra on your shooting lens. I couldn't see it being more than $100 extra and even that would be extreme.
It is common to arrange with an Optometrist to bring in say an Air Pistol and have them work out something that will work well for you and last for quite some time.
As far as frames are concerned I use a simple Knobloch frame with no other attachments. I don't have a preference either way.
Good luck
http://archerfish.org/wp-content/upload ... 4_AP60.jpg
I personally think that shooting glasses are critical for rifle shooters. But for pistol shooters, they are overhyped. You do not need Champions, Knobloch, MEC, etc to shoot pistols.
Look at Jin, the world record holder; he wears a "shooting glasses", but not the above mentioned shooting frame.
What you really need to know is your optical prescription. Accurate optical prescription plus +0.75 ( 3/4, invert that would make focal distance 1.33meter), or +0.50 ( 1/2, invert that would make focal distance 2meter, but most people <55 years of age still have ability to accomodate by 1.5 diopter, so front sight at 1meter could still be pretty sharp with+0.5).
Another critical piece of information on your optical prescription is your PD (pupillary distance). This distance is for eyes square looking forward.
If your pistol stance is such that you looking squarely forward, this PD is fine for your shooting glasses. But for most people (probably ALL), we don't look square forward in our NPA stance. Our right eye is slightly turn laterally off center. You have to measure what this lateral PD addition is. For me, it is additional 5mm on top of my right eye PD.
As for the eye frame, find one that hug your face like Jin's. With that frame and laterally relocated PD on your +0.75 prescription, you can get a "shooting glass" as fine tuned as Champion's for much less.
You can get that from Zennioptical.com for a fraction of the price you can get for a Champion's frame.
But if you really want to get a "professional" shooting glasses, I would get it from Neal Stepp at ISSF Fort Worth. He is such a classic guy. He would send you stuff to try out. You can get a Knobloch with glass lens for $250, an Olympic Champion for $350.
But if you know what you are doing, and why are you doing, you can have an excellent "shooting glasses" for much less.
I personally think that shooting glasses are critical for rifle shooters. But for pistol shooters, they are overhyped. You do not need Champions, Knobloch, MEC, etc to shoot pistols.
Look at Jin, the world record holder; he wears a "shooting glasses", but not the above mentioned shooting frame.
What you really need to know is your optical prescription. Accurate optical prescription plus +0.75 ( 3/4, invert that would make focal distance 1.33meter), or +0.50 ( 1/2, invert that would make focal distance 2meter, but most people <55 years of age still have ability to accomodate by 1.5 diopter, so front sight at 1meter could still be pretty sharp with+0.5).
Another critical piece of information on your optical prescription is your PD (pupillary distance). This distance is for eyes square looking forward.
If your pistol stance is such that you looking squarely forward, this PD is fine for your shooting glasses. But for most people (probably ALL), we don't look square forward in our NPA stance. Our right eye is slightly turn laterally off center. You have to measure what this lateral PD addition is. For me, it is additional 5mm on top of my right eye PD.
As for the eye frame, find one that hug your face like Jin's. With that frame and laterally relocated PD on your +0.75 prescription, you can get a "shooting glass" as fine tuned as Champion's for much less.
You can get that from Zennioptical.com for a fraction of the price you can get for a Champion's frame.
But if you really want to get a "professional" shooting glasses, I would get it from Neal Stepp at ISSF Fort Worth. He is such a classic guy. He would send you stuff to try out. You can get a Knobloch with glass lens for $250, an Olympic Champion for $350.
But if you know what you are doing, and why are you doing, you can have an excellent "shooting glasses" for much less.
One reason people buy "real" shooting glasses is that a lot of shooters don't look through the center of regular glasses. This can distort the effective prescription. With a moveable lens, you can ensure that the lens if properly located for your individual head position.
Another thing to be aware of is that the acceptable manufacturing tolerance for a lot of glasses shops is +/- a quarter of a diopter. If you are fussy about your sight picture, that can make a difference. I've bought lenses from expensive shooting glasses vendors that are only a little better. My eye doctor has let me use his measuring instrument to check my lenses, and even the good ones are ~ +/- 1/8th of a diopter. Some are much worse.
Another thing to be aware of is that the acceptable manufacturing tolerance for a lot of glasses shops is +/- a quarter of a diopter. If you are fussy about your sight picture, that can make a difference. I've bought lenses from expensive shooting glasses vendors that are only a little better. My eye doctor has let me use his measuring instrument to check my lenses, and even the good ones are ~ +/- 1/8th of a diopter. Some are much worse.
-
BenEnglishTX
- Posts: 326
- Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 8:34 pm
- Location: Texas
Good point.Gwhite wrote:...acceptable manufacturing tolerance...
One thing I don't see discussed much but that can give some folks fits is diabetes. Blood sugar levels noticeably change your prescription. Generally, eye doctors won't even bother to write a prescription for anyone with uncontrolled blood sugar levels but even well-controlled diabetics can have a bad day.
Iris attachments set too small can help mask the problem but create their own set of problems. I've seen some discussions where shooters swear by those Superfocus variable-prescription lenses. Info here: http://www.superfocus.com/the-superfocus-technology
Has anybody here tried them? I'm tempted, if only as an experiment so I can relay my findings to other shooters. Of course, since I'm just a hobby shooter and not very good, my opinions would hold little weight...but I'm accustomed to that in many parts of life. :-)
I can comment on Superfocus glasses. I have a pair for the past year. Quite expensive. I paid closed to $1000 for my pair.
Quite honestly, it is quite ugly. But functionally, it is superb. I can focus sharply from distance to near reading comfortably.
It also make me aware of what works for shooting.
You need more than one fixed +0.75 lens for shooting!!
There are times you need +0.25, times for +0.50, times even for +1.0.
Your lens focus changes according to ambient light, according to time of the day, according to whether you have been reading something close up recently.
One fixed +0.75 lens for shooting glasses is a good choice, but once you have the options of using other lens, you realize that +0.75 is a good lens but not one for all occasions.
Superfocus is critically ugly, but functionally superb. Their custom service is FIRST CLASS.
Quite honestly, it is quite ugly. But functionally, it is superb. I can focus sharply from distance to near reading comfortably.
It also make me aware of what works for shooting.
You need more than one fixed +0.75 lens for shooting!!
There are times you need +0.25, times for +0.50, times even for +1.0.
Your lens focus changes according to ambient light, according to time of the day, according to whether you have been reading something close up recently.
One fixed +0.75 lens for shooting glasses is a good choice, but once you have the options of using other lens, you realize that +0.75 is a good lens but not one for all occasions.
Superfocus is critically ugly, but functionally superb. Their custom service is FIRST CLASS.
I agree with those who say spend the money.
I blew through not so inexpensive lenses because they were plastic and scratched easily or I wasn't satisfied with the quality.
I eventually worked with my opthamologist to get the proper prescription to focus on the front sight, then found a optics place that would order what I wanted; a lightly tinted glass lens with the appropriate coatings. That place ended up ordering them from Zeiss. Each lens cost $85 18 years ago, but those lenses are still perfect today.
Take the time and spend the money to get something that will last.
I blew through not so inexpensive lenses because they were plastic and scratched easily or I wasn't satisfied with the quality.
I eventually worked with my opthamologist to get the proper prescription to focus on the front sight, then found a optics place that would order what I wanted; a lightly tinted glass lens with the appropriate coatings. That place ended up ordering them from Zeiss. Each lens cost $85 18 years ago, but those lenses are still perfect today.
Take the time and spend the money to get something that will last.
I'm a cheap-glass proponent. Now, granted, I have 20/20 vision and am only 38 so maybe the one-lens option works better for me than for someone who has other issues (I had no idea that a diabetic would have a variable prescription). I did work with an optometrist who had precise grinds of .5, .63, .75, .88, etc... that I was able to test with. Pistol in hand, in his office, I found that a .5 was perfect for me. .63 didn't look any different (and can't be easily ordered) and .75 was too much and made it difficult to focus on my sights.
After finding that they wanted ~$300 for just cheap, basic frames, I decided to go home and order online from one of the under $50 places. Even with custom lenses of the most optically perfect material at that time, all the coatings to protect the lenses, frame and shipping, I came out at about $60. After I got them, I tested against a pair of Champion glasses a friend owned and found zero difference in function.
While I'm now an advocate for using glasses for more than just safety reasons, I wouldn't advise anyone to spend money on the expensive units unless that's what they Really want to buy. Keep even cheap glasses in their case when not in use and they shouldn't get scratched, ever. They shouldn't get broken either. And thankfully, it's stupidly easy to put tape along the outer edges of normal glasses to help you know where the center of the lens, and the most consistent area of grind, happens to be situated. It's nothing to put your head in the right position to use the glasses to the best advantage for pistol. I will agree that rife would be different.
As for the Original question, very few Optometrists grind their own lenses. Most order out, from the same labs that do the "cheap" mail order units. You just cut out the middle-man and get a better price. I hate doing it to someone who provides a service, but I don't have the kind of money it takes to just give it away. And I do pay for the service of checking my eyes anyway...
After finding that they wanted ~$300 for just cheap, basic frames, I decided to go home and order online from one of the under $50 places. Even with custom lenses of the most optically perfect material at that time, all the coatings to protect the lenses, frame and shipping, I came out at about $60. After I got them, I tested against a pair of Champion glasses a friend owned and found zero difference in function.
While I'm now an advocate for using glasses for more than just safety reasons, I wouldn't advise anyone to spend money on the expensive units unless that's what they Really want to buy. Keep even cheap glasses in their case when not in use and they shouldn't get scratched, ever. They shouldn't get broken either. And thankfully, it's stupidly easy to put tape along the outer edges of normal glasses to help you know where the center of the lens, and the most consistent area of grind, happens to be situated. It's nothing to put your head in the right position to use the glasses to the best advantage for pistol. I will agree that rife would be different.
As for the Original question, very few Optometrists grind their own lenses. Most order out, from the same labs that do the "cheap" mail order units. You just cut out the middle-man and get a better price. I hate doing it to someone who provides a service, but I don't have the kind of money it takes to just give it away. And I do pay for the service of checking my eyes anyway...
-
BenEnglishTX
- Posts: 326
- Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 8:34 pm
- Location: Texas
It's possible (nay, easy for some) to change a whole diopter in an hour.Brian M wrote:I had no idea that a diabetic would have a variable prescription
There are lots of factors involved and I started to write a long explanation then I decided not to bore everybody that much.
Suffice it to say that for diabetics the recent availability of adjustable-prescription glasses is a Very Big Deal.
-
RandomShotz
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2010 5:24 pm
- Location: Lexington, KY
I just got an iris for my Knobloch glasses and tried it out for the first time tonight. I had cataract surgery a few years ago and no longer have lenses that can accommodate. The lens in my glasses is usually adequate for AP and FP, but my S&W Model 52 has a much shorter sight radius so I couldn't really get a good clean image of the front sight. The iris does have some downsides and it will take some getting used to but it allowed me to have a greater depth of field, i.e., the zone in which objects are in focus was larger, and I had no problem seeing the front sight on the 52. Is this generally considered a viable option to correct a change in the point of focus for people with normal lens accommodation? At $75 new it is not cheap, but but a much, much less expensive option than a superfocus lens.
Roger
Roger
-
Fred Mannis
- Posts: 1298
- Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2004 8:37 pm
- Location: Delaware
-
ModestoPete
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 7:36 pm
- Location: Northern California
Not so Cheap
According to what Don Nygord wrote, there is no one lens that is right for all shooting conditions.
After you have 20-20 vision (either naturally or with a prescription) you will need 3 different lens depending on the lighting conditions.
+.25, +.50, and +. 75 are generally what is needed. He suggested Champion shooting glasses for ease of switching lens. I use Knobloch but there are also Jaggi-Nova, Varga and others. They are all similar in their function. (although a great difference in price)
To me vision (seeing the sights) is probably the most important thing there is in pistol shooting.
After you have 20-20 vision (either naturally or with a prescription) you will need 3 different lens depending on the lighting conditions.
+.25, +.50, and +. 75 are generally what is needed. He suggested Champion shooting glasses for ease of switching lens. I use Knobloch but there are also Jaggi-Nova, Varga and others. They are all similar in their function. (although a great difference in price)
To me vision (seeing the sights) is probably the most important thing there is in pistol shooting.