prescription glasses and shooting again

[roval]

I just had my eye check up and was wondering if I would get glasses configured for shooting.

i have progressives and I can get the front sight sharp if I put my neck up at an unnatural angle for shooting. I've always shot with blurred front sight since I shoot in the distance part of the lenses.

I have the focal length for 24 inches which should give me +/- 6 inches with good focus at that distance.

my question is what configuration did you have your glasses at. 1)i.e dominant eye single vision for front sight and non dominant with progressive or just single vision for distance.

2)my optometrist mentioned double d glasses(not as sexy as it sounds) where you have bifocal closer distance at top of lens and bottom and distance in middle. apparently chopper pilots in the military would use this so they can see their instrument panels overhead and below. I had asked about glasses where close vision was in the top of the lens(like what some plumbers used and what some high power shooters used accdg to a coworker) when he mentioned this.

one configuration might be cheaper like 1) so if it works for some might get it.

 

[ku4hx]

I did. All I had to do was hold up my arm and show what focal length I wanted and that was that.

But far cheaper than that, I just use Wal Mart readers under plastic shields. At the distance from my eye to my hand all I really need is a +2 diopter fro my dominant eye.

 

[Sunray]

If you get 'em specifically for shooting, will you also have a set for everything else? Kind of a money thing, more than just a shooting thing.
You really need to be able to focus on the front sight. Blurry isn't good.

 

[RKRCPA]

Last time I had new lenses made I spoke to the tech about it and they ended up placing the "reader" part a "scooch" (yes, that's right, "scooch") higher. It not only helps with shooting, it also helps a little with the computer monitor on my desk. Keeps me from lifting my head as much to see the sights. I can tell it's time for new lenses when I strain to see the sights.

 

[ku4hx]

If you get 'em specifically for shooting, will you also have a set for everything else? Kind of a money thing, more than just a shooting thing.
You really need to be able to focus on the front sight. Blurry isn't good.

Yep most likely. I have shooting glasses, computer glasses, driving glasses and reading glasses. I have glasses laying around all over the house and in my range bag; so does my wife. I'm not a candidate for the popular vision correcting surgery (wouldn't even if I could) so I have no other choice. I also take medication for essential hypertension. hypothyroidism and for degenerative age related spinal nerve and bone damage. You do what you have to do or you just give up. I choose not to give up.

Given the cost of even a single quality handgun, rifle or shotgun (and the pleasure derived from all) the cost of a pair or two of shooting glasses isn't even a consideration.

 

[BaltimoreBoy]

If you get 'em specifically for shooting, will you also have a set for everything else? Kind of a money thing,

Not if you do it right.

Check out information like this:

http://glassyeyes.blogspot.com/

Particularly look at the background material.
Had my eyes examined at Walmart and took the perscriptions to places of the sort mentioned in this blog. Quite cost effective.

 

[Captain33036]

Similarly with Ku4hx, I had a pair of glasses made to a specific distance.

My initial use was for seeing the computer. As it happens, that length is almost exactly what I need to shoot a pistol.

They work great. I have much less eye strain when I spent long hours working on the computer, and I can use the same glasses for shooting.

If I need a bit more fine tuning for precision distance shooting (14-25 yards), I use the Merit eye piece.

You could get glasses made specifically for shooting...but they might be less useful for anything else, such as computer work (whereas the reverse is a workable solution).

I have also tried contact lenses and cheaters...but if you have any irregularities in your eye, contacts and cheaters cannot correct for that.

Hope this helps

Best
J

 

[Jim Watson]

For me, it is: 1) dominant eye single vision for front sight and non dominant with single vision for distance.

I have a set of distance lenses for shooting rifle and shotgun.

I wear progressives daily and while I can bob my head to get the sights for a few shots, it is neither fast nor comfortable. I do practice with carry guns and these daily wear glasses. At the ranges involved, I am not too bad.

 

[W.E.G.]

Try a pair of "computer glasses" with a 0.50 diopter

http://www.computerglassesdirect.com/ordernow.html

Perfect for crisping-up pistol sights when pistol is held at normal arms-length distance.
You might be amazed.

You can't find lenses this "weak" at the drug store.
Weakest the drug store ever caries is 1.00

 

[hso]

I did. All I had to do was explain the purpose and requirements and the optometrist was happy to have a set made up.

 

[jrmiddleton425]

apparently chopper pilots in the military would use this so they can see their instrument panels overhead and below.

Military pilots don't wear glasses...you would be ineligible for pilot training if you had less than 20/20 uncorrected vision. That's not to say that in the past some pilots didn't memorize the eye chart...but you get my point.

 

[roval]

It would be purely for shooting . Ill have my regular progressives for everything else.

Its the configuration I'm wondering about. Ill ask the eye clinic how much for single vision distance and 24 inches vs the double d. The double d was similar in price to my progressive.s.$500+.

I shoot ok with a blurry front sight with pistol and m1a iron sights but wondering if ill do better. It will make the small distant targets more blurred though.

Just not sure if it's a $500 question I need to answer.

 

[ku4hx]

It would be purely for shooting . Ill have my regular progressives for everything else.

Its the configuration I'm wondering about. Ill ask the eye clinic how much for single vision distance and 24 inches vs the double d. The double d was similar in price to my progressive.s.$500+.

I shoot ok with a blurry front sight with pistol and m1a iron sights but wondering if ill do better. It will make the small distant targets more blurred though.

Just not sure if it's a $500 question I need to answer.

If you're paying $500 for a single pair of progressives, you need to shop around.

Some good info here on expected cost ranges: http://opticianworks.com/consumer-information/

My opinion is progressive lens are a ripoff, but that's just an opinion and it only counts for me.

 

[hemiram]

I think I would shoot a lot better if I had bifocals, but I've tried them a couple of times, and they drove me nuts. The last time, I gave them 10 days before I put them in the drawer and put on my old glasses again. The first time, about 10 years ago, I barely made it one day. Both my parents hated them too, so I guess that's where I get it from. My dad had "normal", "reading", and "driving" glasses. I don't know what the difference between the "normal" and "driving" ones was. For me, driving was horrible, the worst part of bifocals. And that was with the no line type. If I had a line on them, it would have been worse. I went back and had reading glasses made, but I never wear them, they annoy me almost as much as the bifocals do. I will soon need new glasses again, and I'm just buying single lenses and that's it. I look like I'm almost blind reading a book, I take off my glasses or look over them and hold the book about 6" away from my face. But it's still better than reading it with glasses. I have no problems reading a computer monitor with my regular glasses though. Most of my friends have bifocals of some kind, and almost all of them have no problems with them.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

You can get a prescription pair specifically set up for shooting. Just describe to your optometrist what it is you'll be doing and the distances in which you need to be able to focus.

I've a brother who has a pair of bifocals specifically for work while sitting in front of his computer because the focal distance between him and the screen in different than for many other typical working experiences. This is because, as you age, presbyopia (the ability to focus on closer objects) become more prevalent. So a specific pair made for certain uses CAN be called for, especially if you spend any amount of time doing something like sitting in front of a computer, on the range, reading, or whatever.

So yeah...get a pair made specifically for shooting if you feel the need.

Personally, I'm about ready to get a pair specifically for work when I'm sitting in front of a computer for extended periods, as well. Just part of getting older, I suppose.

 

[Jim Watson]

My opinion is progressive lens are a ripoff, but that's just an opinion and it only counts for me.

I have not worn anything but progressives since I went presbyoptic so can't comment on their features vs regular trifocals, but can say that not all progressives are created equal.

My first pair were Varilux brand. My next pair, I took the generics provided by my agency insurance. They gave me headaches. The next set gave me headaches. No adjustment of frames made a difference with either pair of generic lenses. I coughed up the extra money for Varilux and have been comfortable since.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

^^^^

My last eye appointment was it for me...I needed bifocals. I chose progressives for a few reasons. One, of course, is esthetics. I think they look better. The other is that lines/scratches on lenses drive me nuts, so I did NOT want lenses with obvious bifocal cuts in them.

I fully expected to have an adaptation time with my glasses...and I did. Didn't take long, and it was noticeable to me even after I got used to them for a short while. But like the contact lenses I used to wear, I adapted pretty quickly.

Here's my take: if you have to go bifocals, do NOT scrimp on the quality lenses. Your eyes will have a difficult enough time adapting as it is, no sense going low quality. I ended up paying the insurance difference for the highest quality lenses, plus I had the doc toss in anti-glare coating and transitions. They were great!

Unfortunately, I need new ones again, as I can tell my vision has changed since then. Sucks getting older!

 

[B!ngoFuelUSN]

^^^^

My last eye appointment was it for me...I needed bifocals. I chose progressives for a few reasons. One, of course, is esthetics. I think they look better. The other is that lines/scratches on lenses drive me nuts, so I did NOT want lenses with obvious bifocal cuts in them.

I fully expected to have an adaptation time with my glasses...and I did. Didn't take long, and it was noticeable to me even after I got used to them for a short while. But like the contact lenses I used to wear, I adapted pretty quickly.

Here's my take: if you have to go bifocals, do NOT scrimp on the quality lenses. Your eyes will have a difficult enough time adapting as it is, no sense going low quality. I ended up paying the insurance difference for the highest quality lenses, plus I had the doc toss in anti-glare coating and transitions. They were great!

Unfortunately, I need new ones again, as I can tell my vision has changed since then. Sucks getting older!

I went the same way. Many years back, and fearing the USN Pensacola vision test I tested at 20/10 and 20/15 (each eye) and gave me the confidence to dance through the aviator eye exam (most candidates found the depth perception part the real killer).
But oh how far I have fallen. I can't possibly read without readers or progressives and now with an astigmatism my long range needs a push.
So I also got a pair of progressives with everything on 'em about two years ago. They are still in perfect condition (I tend to be careful with my stuff and I assume the coatings help). But it took me a very long time to really adjust to them and even today, I hate them. Part of it is resenting having to wear glasses after having eagle eyes for more than four decades, and when I look down while walking (e.g. going down a flight of stairs) the depth perception is off. I actually tripped and fell six months ago because I couldn't judge the height of a curb. Felt really old...
B

 

[roval]

my uncorrected non dominant eye actually has the front sight in perfect focus and of course distance is blurred. I will try shooting with the non dominant eye for a few strings next time although I do not have any other nonprescription eyewear at this time.