Blended Lenses - Why???

So I just got my first pair of blended lens glasses. I did this to avoid tri-focals, but why can't they make these things with a wider view? If I don't look exactly straight at something, it's blurry. It would seem with all the technology that is out there, that they would be able to make a blended lens that would have consistent magnification across the lens horizontally.
So, does anyone know why they can't do this? I'd really like to know.

I've got the progressive lenses too, but I do not have any issues with the peripheral view being blurry. It might have something to do with your specific perscription. Ask your optometrist. I really like the progressive lenses. They give me much better clarity and range of focus than contact lenses.

I don't know if it makes a difference or not, but my problem is with reading and things up to about 10 feet in front of me. My long distance eye sight is 15/20. So my glasses have no mag at the top, and then gradually transition to a 2.25 mag at the bottom. But regardless of where in the range I am looking (except for the top), I have an extremely small window to see things clearly, and then off to the side is blurry and distorted. People tell me I'll get used to this. It's only been 4 days, but so far I can't see how I'll ever get used to it.

I have had progressive bifocals for many years and still have problems focusing. Going to bifocals was about my worst day ever. And I've had some bad days.

I'm going to try the contact lens version. I wear them to drive, but can't read a damn thing without reading glasses. If I pull them out, can read fine, but can't drive. Sigh.

My wife and I both tried the progressive lenses and neither of us could see. There's just one little bitty band in the middle of the lens that works so you have to turn your head for everything, even reading a book you are continually turning your head from left to right.

When I followed her and watched her weave the car left and right all over the road we went back and swapped the glasses for ones with lines.

Lesley wrote: I'm going to try the contact lens version. I wear them to drive, but can't read a damn thing without reading glasses. If I pull them out, can read fine, but can't drive. Sigh.

I have a different problem than you, but kind of the same. I just want to be able to wear one pair of glasses all the time. I can't use contacts because of the type of problem I have, and I didn't even have to wear glasses at all until I was well into my 40's. I guess I should be thankful for that, but man these things are annoying!

carguy123 wrote: My wife and I both tried the progressive lenses and neither of us could see. There's just one little bitty band in the middle of the lens that works so you have to turn your head for everything, even reading a book you are continually turning your head from left to right. When I followed her and watched her weave the car left and right all over the road we went back and swapped the glasses for ones with lines.

Exactly. But why? I want to know why, when you have this big lens, is there only a small band in the middle that you can see through? I don't know anything about glasses, but common sense makes me question why they can't do a better job than this. I'm going to give them a little more time, but thankfully I have a guarantee where I can exchange them for tri-focals for no cost. Problem is, I don't want those either.

I finally got cheaters at 44. Been wearing them about 6 months. The problems I have are I can't read without them and if I'm multitasking like reading GRM or surfing the web while watching TV I have to peer over my glasses or take them off to see the idiot box. At work I wear an eye loop. The kind you would see an old watchmaker or jeweler wear. It goes against the eye socket and is Held in place by the weight of your eyebrow or a metal band around your head. If I'm reading a tech manual I need my cheaters. When servicing the movement I need the loupe. Switching back and forth is a pain in the ass.

I've found bifocals to work much better than the tri.

They have a much larger sweet spot and I don't have to keep moving my head up and down to get the proper power band as I did with trifocals.

What I do have to do is stand a little further away from the shelves in the store than when I wore the tri's.

My bi's are set up more for computer distance which means I must hold books a little further away to read, but that has worked well for me for years.

In reply to carguy123:

I've had bi's for quite a while, but they just don't do it anymore and I need tri's unless I'm going to switch glasses back and forth a million times a day.

I just went through this getting a new prescription. I ended up with two pairs of glasses. A distance set fo driving and TV watching and what they called a "business progressive" for wearing at the office for computer work, reading, and working in meetings (up to about 7 feet, I'm told).

One of the reasons I did this is because the optician said that the more I tried to stuff into one pair the more compromises would be made. She showed me the "keyhole" of correction and how much narrower it would be if you tried to put long-mid-close ranges in one pair of glasses. You also have to get bigger glasses for more ranges.

Changing glasses will be a pain, but since I use the distance in limited circumstances I don't think it will be too bad.

I haven't picked them up, yet, but I'll let you know how it goes.

I have the invisible bifocals, and you do get used to them, but I won't get them again.

In reply to Wonkothesane:

No, I don't. I had my eyes checked before buying the glasses.

Lesley wrote: I'm going to try the contact lens version. I wear them to drive, but can't read a damn thing without reading glasses. If I pull them out, can read fine, but can't drive. Sigh.

Lesley:

My eye doctor set me up with an oddball but extremely effective solution - I have one regular contact and one multifocal, and both are toric. My distance vision has been corrected to better than 20/20 (about 20/15), but I can still read most fine print. In fact, I just measured, and I can easily read some black-on-white print here that is .050" high (at least under decent light).

My corrections are not extreme, about -4.25/-4.50, but they are not minimal either. The multifocals did not work for my wife, though. They couldn't find a good compromise.

I can only get about 12 hours a day out of the contacts, though. I may get bifocal glasses this time, but the problem is, with the current styles, it's hard to find frames with enough top-to-bottom size to get good field of view.

I just had to get a new pair of glasses (broke all my other pairs) and I hope I don't have the same problem as others here...with peripheral vision. I've had "invisiline" bi-focals for years, and they are both a boon and annoying. When new, they seem to work great, but if the glasses frame is not on your face at THE "right" place, it can be a pain. When I went to bifocals, I also had a pair of non-bifocal prescription sunglasses made as I wanted to see what the difference would be and felt it would be a good idea to be able to see "things" at the beach / pool that weren't "right under my nose". I can SORT of drive without bifocals, but can't see the odometer well enough to know whether I've gone 100 or 110 miles, for example.

My solution is similar to Duke's. Contact lens for dominant eye is for far vision,other eye is for near vision. Works pretty well for me.

In reply to M2Pilot:

That sounds great for those who can use contacts.

The op should go back to his optometrist for more info and solutions.

Duke makes a good point in that current styling trends limit the vertical field of view for blended lenses; rectangular and narrow, FTL.

I still need to wear glasses (usually) after my recent eye surgeries and my astigmatism mandates bifocals; I choose the blended variety. I deliberatley avoid jumping on the style du jour because I don't like the way it compromises how well I can see. Oh, and I don't like the look either.

I was told the depth of the lenses doesn't change the vertical distance of the blended area. Mine aren't narrow anyway. Plus, my problem is horizontal not vertical.
Getting back to my original question, does anyone know "why" they can't make the magnification the same all the way across the lens, or at least wider? Mine seemingly have one exact spot where I can focus clearly in any given situation.

bravenrace wrote: I was told the depth of the lenses doesn't change the vertical distance of the blended area. Mine aren't narrow anyway. Plus, my problem is horizontal not vertical. Getting back to my original question, does anyone know "why" they can't make the magnification the same all the way across the lens, or at least wider? Mine seemingly have one exact spot where I can focus clearly in any given situation.

I recommend going back to your doctor and have the prescription checked. Your glasses may have been made incorrectly.

For the record, my blended lenses don't have the problem you describe and they are sourced from Zenni Optical. Yeah, they're made in China so I'm not a true patriot, but I saved over $300 by not purchasing from my local supplier.

Duke, thanks I will suggest that to my eye doctor. I've got an appointment next month. I've been buying the really cheap cheaters, I've got them all over the house, in my laptop bag, purse and carry-on.

Had progressive bifocals w/ those small trendy frames/ lenses, like looking through a key hole, totally useless for driving/ reading traffic signs. Switched to larger frame/ lenses and no more problem, better peripheral vision too. Still have a small inconvenience welding as I need a diopter lens in the helmet so I must adjust my line of sight to stay in focus.

I wouldn't hesitate to have the lenses checked, they do make mistakes in measuring and grinding.

I tried them ( after many yrs of bi then trifocal ) absolutely hated them... said to hell with it and had Lasik surgery .... was ok for a few yrs , but now I'm back to bifocals

I've been wearing regular bifocals for around 10 years now, they work well for me except for middle-close distance, like 3 - 6 feet. Bugged the crap out of me for playing music - then I got a cheap set of single visions that focus very well at about 4 feet so they are sharp from maybe 2 - 6, and they are great for both reading music and for computer work. Because I didn't need fancy anti-scratch, UV, photogrey, etc, and used a pair of old frames, they were really cheap. A great solution for me.

Most interesting setup my opthamologist told me about was a mechanic who had a set of work bifocals made with the near lenses on top - he was always looking up at cars on a lift, and looking lower for stuff on the other side of the shop, so this "upside down" set worked great for him.

Creative solutions exist.