New Sun Glasses help

[Nate540]

So I'm looking for a new pair of glasses and was looking for some input. I have no problem paying for a good pair of glasses my daily sun glasses are Oakleys. I'm looking for a fishing specific pair or something that you guys know are very good. I have looked at some Costas and Smiths but I'm open to anything. also what lens color do you all suggest?

 

[krayfish2]

There's already a 4 pg sunglass thread. Use search feature on page down one page to find it.

 

[pcray1231]

Oakley sucks. 🙂 Well, that's going too far but visual sharpness and top notch polarization is not their thing. Impact resistance and alignment are. Which makes them good for active sports, as you won't lose an eye if you crash on a skateboard and that baseball really is right where it appears. But seeing a fin contrasting against the bottom in a rocky stream with sun glaring, that's not their goal.

Smith and costa both cater to an angling crowd and will suit you fine. Maui Jim, Native Eyewear, Kaenon would be other brands to look at. Note the different material options. Many brands offer choices. Glass is the sharpest optics, and most scratch resistant, but heavy, expensive, and easy to shatter when you are chucking weight but forget the ducking part. Polycarbonate (like Oakley) is the worst optics and least scratch resistant, but cheaper, safer, and lighter. Then there are a bunch of modern, sometimes proprietary plastics that generally fall somewhere in the middle.

Costa offers glass or poly. Maui Jim offers glass, poly, and 2 intermediates. Would have to check on the others.

Mainly, though, fit is everything. Just find a perfect fitting model. Want a gap between bottom and cheek to prevent fogging. But no gap on top or edge to allow light in and give reflections and glare.

Also, light transmission. All companies have a range of tints. But more light transmitted means better in low light but worse in bright light. Some take a specialist approach and get something in the low teens for bright conditions as well as high 20s or beyond for low light. In a Jack of all trades approach, high teens is good.

Stay away from Luxottica brands in general. That includes Ray Ban and Revo, and many others, even Oakley, though only sorta. Fashion, not technical is their focus. Shame cause Ray Ban used to be good.

 

[MKern]

I have a cheap pair of strike kings and an expensive pair of Oakley. The oakleys can be worn anywhere and have glass lenses. The strike kings are definitely for fishing only because the polarization looks weird when, say, driving.

I got my oakleys of the site 6pm at a huge discount. Something like $90 for glasses that msrp'ed for $265. Thinking about getting another pair.

 

[pcray1231]

Your Oakleys are either not real Oakleys or you are wrong about being glass. Oakley has never made a glass lens.

 

[MKern]

They are real. Maybe they aren't glass though. I've only worn them a few times; got them for xmas.

 

[MKern]

You are right, I just checked and they aren't glass.

 

[pcray1231]

Oakleys are straight polycarbonate. They say it's not and call it "plutonite", but it's straight polycarbonate. Optically poor and soft, but very impact resistant. And they do a nice job with injection molding to tight tolerances, advanced shape mapping, and aligning. So, while not "sharp", there's no real distortion either. Which makes them popular with athletes and pilots.

So they have their strengths but those strengths aren't really geared towards anglers. I assume they use decent polarizers though, as most higher end brands do. That's where Wal-Mart cheapos fall way short. Only "sorta" polarized.

I said they were only "sorta" a Luxottica brand. Meaning they are wholely owned by Lux, but still independent supply chain. It's not like it's exactly the same lens as other Lux brands just with a different decal on the side.

 

[MKern]

The polarization is is the best of any glasses I've ever had. I can look at the clock in the truck without any distortion like my other sunglasses.

 

[pcray1231]

I can look at the clock in the truck without any distortion like my other sunglasses.

Are you sure they are even polarized, then?

LCD screens are hit and miss with polarizers. It depends on the orientation of the LCD. However, it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of the polarizer.

Take glasses off, hold at arms length while looking through the lens at your clock. Rotate the glasses. If the clock display does not disappear at any angle, your glasses are NOT polarized. Can do the same test with a computer screen, gas station pump, etc.

Older LCD's generally disappear when the glasses are level, like you'd wear them. Newer ones are made to be viewed with polarized glasses and usually disappear at about a 45 degree angle. But again, that's a function of the LCD itself, not the glasses. ALL polarized glasses will make a LCD display disappear at some angle. Quality of the polarizer will determine whether that display is 100% gone at that angle, or only 98% gone. Whether the angle of disappearance is consistent across all parts of the lens. And how "wide" a range of angles leads to the disappearance. With better polarizers meaning 100% gone over a fairly wide range of angles.

Oakley does sell polarized sunglasses, but most are not. There are a lot of people who need sunglasses and cannot use polarized sunglasses. Pilots, for example.

My confusion, though, is your terminology of "distortion". Distortion has nothing to do with polarization. With distortion, things don't disappear. What may happen, though, is that straight lines appear to be curved. That's distortion. And yeah, cheaper sunglasses tend to have some distortion.

 

[PALongbow]

Just purchased a pair of prescription Costa's w/ the polarized brown lenses but did not receive them yet. Based on all the research I have done Costas are well liked by fisherman and have great customer service.

Ron

 

[pcray1231]

Which lens did you get? 580P (plastic - Trivex), 580G (glass), or 400P (Plastic - CR39).

 

[MKern]

They are definitely polarized; sticker on the lens and labeled on the box.

What I mean by distortion is a slight fuzziness when looking at the LCD display. They is some with my oakleys, but nothing like my strike kings.

 

[PALongbow]

pcray1231 - I ordered the 580P (plastic) I had to order the plastic because they were prescription and the glass would have been too heavy for me, especially on the right eye. They should still be better than something you can pick up in the store.

Ron

 

[pcray1231]

Your 580P's will be Trivex. Trivex is good stuff. Clarity is only a touch below glass, you won't notice it. Much lighter though. The downfall is scratch resistance. I'm sure Costa has a decent scratch resistant coating but that only takes you so far. Be careful with them and you should be good to go. Do NOT clean with a shirt, lol. Microfiber cloth only.

 

[pcray1231]

What I mean by distortion is a slight fuzziness when looking at the LCD display.

Ah, ok. Both your glasses suck but the Strike Kings are worse. Although you have fairly sensitive eyes to pick up on it. You are seeing chromatic aberration. I see it easily too but many don't. A digital display, with it's black white distinction, makes it easier to pick up on. If that was a colored display you may even see different colors in the fringes (primary colors of whatever the main color is).

Poly sucks for aberration. The Strike Kings are stamped. Your Oakleys are probably about as good as poly gets, injection molded and electronically mapped and all that jazz. But it's still poly and you can only do so much with it. Move up to a CR39, Trivex, type plastics and that'll probably go away completely, or if you're ultra sensitive, at least lessen it. Glass will eliminate it for sure. Distance vision will be noticeably sharper as well, so like, the definition on distant leaves. That decrease in definition is happening now but without the sharp contrast you don't see it.

 

[PALongbow]

Yeah have to take care of them. Prescription Costa's are pricey.

Ron

 

[DGC]

A feature that may be unique to my eyes only, is that the glass polarized Smith lens, of which I have 3 different ones, has basically sharpened up details enough that I don't need my RX glasses. Admittedly, that probably stems from my distance RX not being all that strong. But is was a pleasant discovery in relation to other sunglasses. I also need closeup correction, but for that the hat magnifier works fine.

I picked up some Julbo polarized Falcon (Trivex) lens sunglasses at a steep discount, and they are not as sharp and I definitely could tell the difference from the Smith glass. However, this may have been due to the approach to polarization rather than the material. Not sure--I am not that well versed on optics. Definitely more comfortable as regards weight than glass, but that is secondary to keeping my eyeballs happy.

As to the OP's shopping, if I wanted just one pair of shades, I would seriously consider the Smith Glass amber polarchromic. The VLT goes to 30% vs. the 20% for the copper and copper mirror. The latter are too dark at crunch time for me.

 

[pcray1231]

Yeah have to take care of them. Prescription Costa's are pricey.

Well, since you're prescription, I assume you wear regular glasses as well? It is most likely that those are also made out of Trivex. So that gives you a good comparison.

 

[pcray1231]

DGC,

Not sure. Looked up the Julbo polarized Falcon lens. Yeah, it's Trivex. Which in terms of chromatic aberration isn't quite as good as glass but is a fair bit better than polycarbonate. They're photochromatic, though. There are a bunch of different ways to do that, and I don't know how that company does it. But in general, photochromatic lenses tend to be inferior in terms of polarization. It's only fairly recently that you can even get polarization in a photochromatic lens.

So it could be that. And yeah, good polarization helps distance vision. Not technically, of course. But in practice, yes. Because glare is created in the air when light hits dust particles and water vapor. Cutting some of that glare helps the eye discern detail at distance.

Or, if your Smith's are "ChromaPop", there's perhaps another explanation. A newer trend in high end sunglasses is additives to the glass which absorb specific wavelengths of light. Most common is yellow (that's where Costa's 580 thing comes in, 580 is the wavelength, in nm, of yellow light). Carefully choosing colors to absorb that the human eye doesn't see well (like yellow) enhances the color effects of other colors we do. So, remove yellow, and since reds, oranges and greens surround yellow on the rainbow, they appear to be enhanced as your brain separates them better. In essence, adding contrast, which also improves depth perception and gives the impression of sharpness at distances. Smith's "Chromapop", Costa's "580" and "Beyond Polarized", and Maui Jim's "PolarizedPlus2" are marketing terms for the same basic phenomenon. Tying it to polarization as MJ and Costa marketers do isn't technically correct, you can do that in a non-polarized pair too. But it is a neat trick that works. How much extra $$$ it's worth is up to you, but it'll generally enhance colors.

I have noticed, though, at stoplights. Yellow lights don't exist....