trifocals: mid-far-near; anybody tried?

[shu]

Well, I tried trifocals once. Didn't like them. The mid-distance section was not large enough, like looking thru a slit - but at the same time too large, taking too much vision from the distant focus area.

So I use bifocals - for distant vision and reading. For mid distance, computer work and handgun front sight, I have some 3.0 off-the-shelf glasses.

But it occurred to me that with large lenses, there is enough room at the upper part of the lens for a mid-distance section. Let most of the lens be for distant vision, put a close vision section at the bottom, and a mid distance section at the top.

For computer work I can focus on the screen thru the top section (the monitor is rather high on the desk) and - without having to swap glasses - read the fine print on the invoice laying on the desk.

For shooting, my preferred stance being with the head hunched over a bit, the front sight will be in focus thru the top section of the lenses.

Anybody tried an arrangement like that?

-shu

 

[Carne Frio]

I use trifocals made specifically for computer use. Close up on the bottom,
a band for the computer screen just above that, the no-correction on top.
It makes shooting open sights exciting, sometimes. Optics are no problem.
The middle distance part is not very big, about 25% of the total height.

 

[LHB1]

Shu,
When bifocals weren't enough, I changed to progressive grind lenses. With this method, there is a gradual change from distance vision to near vision. By merely lifting/lowering my head, I have a continual choice from distance to mid range (computer screen, dashboard instruments, pistol sights) to close (reading). Worked for me. YMMV.

 

[darkgael]

lens

+1 about the progressive grind lenses.
Pete

 

[WESHOOT2]

blind since birth

I have been wearing progressive trifocals for at least six years (progressive bifocals before).

They're just my regular old 'street' eyewear, whether clear or my sunglasses.

But what they do for me: I wear a hat when shooting, and the brim tucked down a bit forces me to slightly tilt my head up, bringing my front sight into perfect focus through the (unspecified; I can't tell) portion of the lense I'm then looking through.

 

[Kreyzhorse]

Progressive lenses cover distance to close up and all ranges in between. Work well for shooting as well.

 

[Steeler Fan]

I changed to progressive grind lenses.

I went straight to progressives when I was told I would need bi-focals. I've never looked back.

 

[DMZX]

I went straight to progressives when I was told I would need bi-focals. I've never looked back.

+1

I quickly and subconsciously learned to position my eyes and head for different task, e.g reading, using a computer, acquiring a good sight picture, etc.

 

[BillM]

I've worn progressives for 20 years. Usually choose an "oversize" frame,
it makes the zones a bit bigger. I also have the lenses tinted--from a
dark brown in the top 20%, faded to clear for the lower half. Works
GREAT for driving, just tip my head down a bit for bright light situations.

For competitive shooting (IPSC) I've gone to mono-vision. Front sight
focus with the dominant eye, distance with the other. I like it!

 

[Steviewonder1]

Trifocals??

I am using two lens grinds. In the right (dominant eye) I have my reading prescription of 1.75 diopter. This gets the front sight in focus. In the left eye I have a distance focus of 1.25 diopter. This keeps the target in clear focus out to around 25yards. Both are tinted yellow for increased contrast. Works better than plain old clear shooting glass. If I had bi or tri focals I would be dodging my head up and down to get things in focus. This way I just concentrate on the front sight and press.

 

[jal5]

I have been using progressive lens for many years, but just in recent years got into shooting pistols. I still don't get a very clear front sight picture with my lenses...I keep bobbing my head up and down trying to get the "best picture" and it affects my consistency/accuracy. No problem with rifle scopes though, I am fine with those and my normal lenses.

Maybe time to get a pair made up specifically for shooting, open sights.

Joe

 

[shu]

Thanks for the replies. Looks like a lot of fans for progressive lenses. Never tried them. Always have imagined the useable focus band would be too narrow to be really useful. Also, the closer focus would be still be toward the bottom. I just detest the chin-out-squint posture needed to read an elevated computer monitor with bifocals.

(Couple of decades ago, when we had an office supply store, a novel desk floated by and I snagged it for a test-drive. Had a plate glass built into the desk top, and a rack for the monitor in the knee well. Worked nicely, so long as whatever paperwork you might want to be integrating with the monitor was not too large.)

But to the case at hand, when I did a bit of also-ran participation at handgun competitions my natural stance seemed to be hunched over slightly, looking thru the top of the lenses. I used a lick-em-and-stick-em +2.5 plastic lens on upper section of right lens of shooting glasses.

Altho I lead a rather mundane life, and do not frequent places where potential for violent confrontation abounds, I do carry habitually. It would be nice to have on-face spectacles suitable for handgun use, in the unlikely event such need would arise. Alternatively, "Pardon, sir, could you but wait a moment whilst I search for my shooting spectacles before I draw down on you?"

-shu

 

[mrt949]

PROGRESSIVE only way to go.

 

[tipoc]

I wear bi-focals and after some experimentation I settled for what works for me. I have two sets of glasses. Both are fitted with the "Executive" style bi-focal which allow me sharp peripheral vision (which is one reason the Progressives don't work for me).

One set of glasses is my daily walking around set. The top lens is set for long vision (driving, walking, etc.) the focal point of the lower lens is set for my front sights. Also works well for the dash board of a vehicle, keys in my hand, etc. To shoot for accuracy while standing requires that I tilt my head upward a bit. In a pinch the top lens can work for close range speed.

The other set is works best for close up work and also allows me to shoot comfortably off a bench.

This works for me. At work I do use a set of tri-focals but I'm in no rush there.

The progressives did not work well at all for me.

tipoc

 

[Sport45]

(Couple of decades ago, when we had an office supply store, a novel desk floated by and I snagged it for a test-drive. Had a plate glass built into the desk top, and a rack for the monitor in the knee well. Worked nicely, so long as whatever paperwork you might want to be integrating with the monitor was not too large.)

But to the case at hand, when I did a bit of also-ran participation at handgun competitions my natural stance seemed to be hunched over slightly, looking thru the top of the lenses.

Could your hunched natural stance have something to do with the decidely un-ergo computer desk?

I've been wearing progressive bifocals for a while. I rely on my wife to help me pick frames and the last ones I got are smaller than I'm used to. I have to tilt my head back too far to get the front sight in focus. I keep my old glasses in the range bag now.

 

[shu]

Could your hunched natural stance have something to do with the decidely un-ergo computer desk?

Uh - No. Has to do with: a) at 6'2" height and 37" sleeve length lowering the action line of recoil closer to center of body mass and to the pivot point (feet on ground) for better recoil control; b) ditto to facilitate movement, in event that should be necessary; c) presenting a smaller target to adversaries; and d) lowering field of vision to take in more ground and less sky.

 

[schnarrgj]

When I started wearing glasses at 50 about ten years ago, the bifocals did not work for shooting iron sights. Now with the progressive tri focals, I am able to get the front sight in focus and am shooting almost as well as before glasses.

 

[langenc]

Progressive-just wish I could convince my wife.

 

[Sport45]

Uh - No. Has to do with: a) at 6'2" height and 37" sleeve length lowering the action line of recoil closer to center of body mass and to the pivot point (feet on ground) for better recoil control; b) ditto to facilitate movement, in event that should be necessary; c) presenting a smaller target to adversaries; and d) lowering field of vision to take in more ground and less sky.

I did use a smiley.

You are describing a shooting stance much like mine. The ergo quip was about what you called a hunched "natural" stance. In my office now, they want the monitors up at eye level. It took a while for me to convince them that mine need to be pretty low to avoid tipping my head back because of my bifocals.

 

[stevieboy]

Progressive. Still can't see the front sight with perfect clarity but I'll have to live with that. Progressive lenses are better than any other arrangement I can find.