specific gravity: 02:30 chemical resistance: 04:50 ABBE value/optical clarity: 07:55 tensile strength: 09:48 drilling: 15:40 index of refraction: 18:12 impact resistance: 19:45 uv protection: 25:05 tinting: 26:02 price/avail: 28:18 summary: most of the performance of a given material as opposed to the other is more dependent on the COATING than the inherent qualitative difference of the material.
During the heat testing, I couldn’t help but notice that you were using an infrared sensor to measure each lens through the oven’s glass window. Since tempered glass (typical for ovens) is opaque to infrared, you would only be measuring the variations in the glass surface temperature and not that of the lenses themselves. Unless, of course, your Oster toaster oven came specially equipped with either Calcium fluoride, UV fused silica, magnesium fluoride, N-BK7, potassium bromide, sapphire, silicon, sodium chloride, zinc selenide or zinc sulfide glass.
Hi Laramy, let me first introduce myself and mention that I am a customer, and not an optician or optical professional. That said, I am a bioengineer with experience in physics and lots of experience wearing glasses! Regarding the first test - weight. You conclude that 0.5g is not significant, and that this is regarding the entire blank. First, we should note that with higher scripts the weight difference will be more pronounced (you test -3.00). It seemed that you decided that 0.5g was not significant in weight savings to the patient, I am not sure how you determined that. In my personal case with a -4.5 rx and ultra-lightweight frames, a poly lens caused the frame to constantly be falling down the bridge of my nose about 50-100 times per day. Simply unwearable. Moving to Trivex stopped this issue completely. No other differences in the lens. So, while that 0.5g may not have been important to you, on a real world user with an ultra light weight and smallish frame (Mykita Claas) the lighter material prevented all slippage on the bridge. Just an FYI point. Also, I should note that I believe the Abbe test is very subjective, especially because we here in the audience are seeing a video recording. From my real life experience, the clarity of Trivex blows away poly. I will never use poly again simply for that reason. Center clarity, periphery...medium and large frames.
Matthew Engel in ref to the weight- was it the same frame with the same fit? Obviously there are a lot of other factors to slippage in addition to the weight of the lens. Just curious
A great and informative video. I run my own optical lab in the uk, and have had many experiences with these lens materials over the years, and concur with your results. Well? maybe not all. With the greatest respect, and I can only speak from my own experiences, but I do find the index of the material can somewhat be misleading, especially in its uncut stage. I have found personally if the aesthetics are of importance to the customer (in a prescription lens above a +/-2.00 ds), above other factors. Out of the 2 options (Trivex / Poly), I would always sway towards poly. The outer lens measurements on a -3.00 ds lens is fine, but once you cut into that lens (polycarb), the angle I find drops more significantly towards the centre thickness usually giving a lot thinner appearance. So, in many personal experiences I have seen that Trivex is not always the better option for aesthetics, sometimes looking slightly bulky towards the centre. I suppose you have to weigh up the pro's and cons with every customers requirements, and what type of frames the lenses are going into. However, saying all of that, I find Trivex lenses the most reliable for everything else. More so, the peace of mind that a customer has a lens of longevity, and quality. This is in no way a dig at your results, more a point of my own personal experiences. I respect the work and effort you've put into your tests, and have enjoyed watching your other videos too. Please keep up the great work
Gotta admit I never thought much about surface(d) angles. If you track it and and you can notice it then it is well worth considering. Thanks for pointing it out. John
@@LaramyKOptical No thanks required, I was just throwing ones personal experience out there. Pleasure to chat with somone in this small optical world. Lee
Wow! I was glad you had fun with these tests. Thank you for going above and beyond. Got my eyes so perky, especially about the reducing strength due to lens coating!! DANG, up to 65%.
Good point! I doubt we will ever get to a Part II but that would certainly be something to test again using that method. We were pretty careful on cable lengths and the bar was welded to the top of the jack and they were equal distance from the C/L of the jack but always room for improvement. Thanks! John
Actually the Laramy-K OpticianWorks UA-cam channel is trending right behind Tiger King for binge watching! You are not alone. Beer and popcorn are suggested. John
I appreciate the attempt at comparing Trivex and Polly. However, the "tensile strength" test was not tensile strength but yield strength. You testing has more to do with the toughness of the material not it's tensile strength. Rubber is tougher than a diamond. Toughness is the total energy required to pull something apart. Tensile strength is the amount of deflection for a given force not the force to pull it apart.
Got new glasses ordered at my optometrist today, i requested trivex again, no cost difference in trivex or polycarbonate. I was happy. I went to order a new pair of safety glasses from sportrx, they charge 60 more for trivex.
CR-39 and Trivex have excellent optical clarity, but I don't see any comparisons between the two online. One is fully covered by insurance, one isn't. Interesting.
They are very, very close in optical quality and Abbe Value too of course. One has been around 50 years (CR39) the other barely 20 now. CR-39 is the cheapest thing available on both the retail and wholesale sides. Trivex is kind of pricey. Between price, availability and newness they can consider Trivex an "upgrade" and charge accordingly. And, I'd even say that it is. I don't think that insurance companies or vision plans care one bit about optical quality - just the bottom line on cost. My two-cents... John
I ordered 2 pairs of the same frame and Rx from two different opticians. One felt lighter than the other on my nose. It turns out one of the opticians had made an error and used Polycarbonate instead of my ordered CR-39. My Rx is a mere -1.00.
Haven't tried Trivex lenses, but I did have polycarbonate lenses made and had to replace them because of the chromatic aberration (low Abbe value), reading text on a computer was terrible, with color fringes just a few cm away from center ☹
I am using my husbands account to watch these videos but have to say....This guy is my optical super hero and super talented at teaching in manageable chunks.
How about simulating the effect of an air bag hitting a person in the face wearing poly eyeglasses vs Trivex lens eyeglasses? That would be a real world test instead of shooting a pellet at each type lens.
I have heard of air bags breaking glasses frames and cutting a person's face, I have not heard of a lens breaking. Although I would also like to see a proper test of this as I do believe it to be possible in the right situation.
Have you done a video on "poly non-adapts?" I feel like it's a placebo ingrained from the early days of poly but would love to see someone put it to an empirical test.
Can't say I've had enough of them to draw any conclusions. That would be one, expensive test to try to run. Keep in mind that you can actually SEE a difference in how crisp the mires are in the lensmeter for glass vs. poly. BUT Yeah - I agree used to be a thing and now it is one of those one in a million, well we've tried everything else let's try material change.
NOOOOO! That was kind of the point of the video! Trivex is Trivex. Poly is poly. It is the coating(s) that make the difference in performance. I'm sure you meant to say, "I think your trivex has a coating that reduced impact resistance." Right? ;-) Never sell any lens as safe unless it is a safety lens in a safety frame. John
I work with electronics and have to read numerical reading on various RF Test Equipment (Spectrum and Network Analyzers). I have had lens with Trivex and Poly. I find that Trivex gives me much less distortion and I don't have to hold my head in a finely tuned position as I run my tests and record the test results. My issue is that the optics provider almost refuses to use Trivex. One company made three glasses before giving me Trivex, so I stopped going there. Now I have one where they did give Trivex on second pair after I refused the poly (2017). Now they are resistant to give Trivex and have tried three versions of Poly and even requested a second exam. While the last (third set) are better for average use and walking around, I still have frustrating trouble focusing on the Test Equipment screens. Why are these companies so willing to throw out multiple pairs of glasses instead of just making what I ask them to on the first pair? Thank you for the video. I enjoyed it and see more that look interesting.
"Why are these companies so willing to throw out multiple pairs of glasses instead of just making what I ask them to on the first pair?" Well - I'll leave the mean and angry remarks to the side... Sounds like you just need to find a good independent optician! They should be able to get you exactly what you need in the material you desire. Door is open here - Anderson, SC.
I tried looking for a videos on youtube about polycarbonate eyeglass scratch resistance tests or study and found nothing but eyeglass bussiness commercials, or how to remove eyeglass scratches ? just information blackout? Is UA-cam filtering or removing those videos?
Email me through the OpticianWorks website with your specific question about poly and scratching and I'll see what I can do. Not really much to say I suppose --- all poly lenses must have a scratch coating applied immediately after creation. So you are really concerned with the coatings over the material. John
That video is creeping up on 6 years old now. If Trivex and poly are running close in price and availability now you have another great reason to choose Trivex - as long as you aren't doing the finishing work. ;-)
Chemical resistance is a big thing for me. I am a diesel mechanic, I try my best not to, however a drop of Chemicals can get on my glasses, parts washer solvent, diesel fuel, many penetrating oils, alcohol, and the worst one, brake cleaner. I do not know if trivex can handle it but I know polycarbonate will be ruined by brake cleaner.
Well, yeah - glass is the only material that is chemical resistant. Brake cleaner is some nasty stuff. If it is a huge problem I'd toss on some of those cheap, soft goggles over the glasses when working with that stuff. (I was a Safety Keen parts washer guy for a few years.)
What would be the best material-coating combo for shooting glasses? I currently use Rudy Project ImpactX and ImpactX 2 lenses, but would like to get non-Rudy prescription lenses.
As far as I know the RP ImpactX series is the highest rated for impact. If they claim that for their Rx lenses as well you are getting the best protection you can. But you are (probably) also dealing with a wrap which is never the best for great optics. A more traditional ray-ban style "shooter" should be better. Give me a few to work on this, it brings up some great questions. (sorry it might a few weeks I'm hitting the road for a bit) John
Lenny, DOH! I should have finished my coffee first. The only lens that you can trust for optimal protection is a lens-frame combination that is marked as safety. Any other combination lens-frame has no guarantees. You would be looking for a real safety frame stamped with the Z-81 standard and then have a high quality (Trivex) safety lens with a great high-end AR on it placed in the frame. The lab must grind the lens to safety thickness and do routine QA testing to be sure they pass. Safety frames ain't what they used to be so all kinds of shapes and styles out there. A frame shaped closer to normal dress will give you better optics than any wrap style will. Get a good optician to take measurements and you should be good to go. John
@@LaramyKOptical I'm looking forward to the results of your research. I'm always looking for better safety glasses for shooting. One thing I've found in looking for ever better glasses is that there don't seem to be any Trivex (or NXT or whatever) lenses available that meet MIL-PRF31013, which I understand is a more rigorous standard than Z87. I'm wondering if this is because they can't meet those standards for some reason, or if manufacturers just haven't bothered to get them tested. I'd think with the chemical resistant properties Trivex has, the military market would be big, but every single lens on the APEL list is polycarbonate. Also, btw, while my Rudy Magsters wrap, they actually have remarkably good clarity and lack of distortion (using plano lenses).
I know there is a lot there to wrap your arms around. The underlying message is that a lens like an Oakley "ballistic" series HAS BEEN TESTED and does meet the requirements of that specific standard. Hence, no need to test anything or make any comparisons. Goodness I hope it would perform as expected! It is all the UNTESTED stuff that is out there and we assume (incorrectly) that it is "safe" because it is "poly" or Trivex is the stuff you have to careful of. John
MR-8 should be Mitsui (chemical company) resin 8 which has an index of 1.6. Trivex 1.53, poly 1.568. Every material has its advantages and disadvantages. There is no "best." We have started a few videos about materials but never finished one yet. It gets a bit overwhelming quite quickly. John
@@LaramyKOptical Thank you for your reply. I've purchased Kodak Clean & Clear MR-8 lens (R.I. 1.6). So can you please tell me it's advantages and disadvantages? One more thing, how do I understand that my lens is MR-8 or Trivex or Polycarbonate or something else?
@@PretamManna If properly chosen the Mitsui 1.6 should be a great lens with no disadvantages. For lens material see: ua-cam.com/video/Mi32WOzAgP4/v-deo.html
I am having a hard time trying to figure out whether choosing a Transitional/photochromic polycarbonate lense will put me at risk more than a standard polycarb lens. Using this for sports where there is an off-chance of blunt impact. Anything you can aid to make my decision? As far as I can tell, transitional lenses are photochromic chemicals dosed within the structure of the polycarbonate, so unlike the ARC stack process, there should not be anything that weakens the structure of the material itself other than the thinning while creating the prescription. Am I on the right track?
The underlying message to the video is, "You can't claim impact resistance on ANY lens/coating combination unless it is specifically made as a safety lens/frame combo. " Your best bet for most sports is contacts and sport eyewear from someplace like Rudy Project. John
@@LaramyKOptical I'd love to see a more comprehensive series comparing the results of these tests on different coatings/materials. Obviously nothing is conclusive but it would be interesting to see how different coatings alter the properties of these materials. Maybe you've already done these tests and I simply need to dive deeper into your channel. Keep up the good work!
@@arbitraryalias9825 No we have not. A bit too random to really discover anything meaningful. 5 materials and a 100 different coating stacks. I think the company notes say everything you need to know. BUT - I agree it would be fun to be able to do it!
Comment about your "tensile" test. It is not a tensile test! Look at the nature of the break. If it were true tensile, the lens would have broken at right angles to the pull direction. Break looks more like a combination of tensile & shear. To do true tensile test, you need rod or bar fastened at the ends. Easier way would be to crush lens between 2 plane surfaces (as in a press). The periphery of the lens is placed in tension as the lens is flattened. If tensile failure occurs, the lens would split like a pie-section.
Next would be basic plastic or "CR-39" followed by Trivex. Non-glass, non-eyewear lenses (camera, cheap binoculars, etc) are often CR-39. No perfect answer I'm afraid. John
Poly lenses have an index of 1.58 while teivex is at 1.53. That equates to poly lenses being about 10% thinner for the same prescription. So while the specific gravity is also almost 10% more, the index difference evens them oout weight per prescription wise.
@LaramyKOptical I saw it all lol just wished that the index section referenced the gravity section from earlier and that's why they were even despite the difference in specific gravity. In the gravity section it was said that trivex "should" be the winner but the explanation for them being even was not given in either section, only that the difference is negligible, which is true! There's no real necessity to point out that information, just that extra tid bit of correlation that adds to people's knowledge :)
Hi..greetings from Ireland... great vid thanks ...ive got a high prescription with a stigma in my eyes ...are polycarbonate lences safe to wear daily ? ...it’s € 400/ € 500 per frames with glass lences / prescription for glasses in Ireland ...rip off... if the polycarbonate lences were safe I’d get them...just researching how they affect the eyes & how safe they are ? I talked to a company in the states today they said I don’t need to get my polycarbonate lenses tinned Down... so how does it work ? I just send them my prescription ..do i need to get a coating ? is it possible to get a tint on polycarbonate lenses ?...any info would Appreciated .. thanks again Jay...
If you can get a pair of glasses online from the US that you can afford then do that. No material is any safer than another, just go with what they recommend. Polycarbonate (unless specialty coated) doesn't tint so I doubt any online place will do a tinted poly. John
Are Trivex lenses somewhat easier to clean than polycarbonate lenses?? Ive noticed some lenses get cloudy from facial oils and harder to clean than other lenses ive owned.. please help me find an answer?
Logan, That has to be the coating on the lens. Either the scratch coat or any AR coat if you get that. Poly cannot leave the factory without a scratch coat so you are never really dealing with the raw material there. It would be pretty rare but not impossible to find an uncoated Trivex. My mantra is always the same, if you have to choose between cheap AR and no AR choose none. And, sadly even the greatest AR in the world is only great for a year... then it is good for a year and then it is not-so-good. Hope that helps - let me know. John
Thank you so much! This helps so much! As a man o scince and your personal preference which type of lense would you recommend for me? I am very OCD about keeping my glass lenses clean yet I don't want them to scratch TOO easily, and the less cloudy/foggy material would be a lifesaver lol, I would love to hear your opinion on this! what do you think??
Which Lens Material do you think would be easier to clean in the slightest, as well as which one would be more resistant to scratches naturally? Whats your opinion on those newer, High Definition Lenses? are they worth it? or are they less scratch resistant material/harder to clean? any disadvantages? or are they just a Gimmick?
Material will all depend on the lens power(s). Scratch resistance all comes down to the coating(s). Yes, in progressive lenses free-form or hi-def is important and worth every penny. You might want to run through some of the other videos on our UA-cam channel. John
Maybe you missed something? Trivex is a good material with quite good optical properties. If you have trouble it probably isn't because of Trivex. John PS: It is about all I wear myself..
@@LaramyKOptical Sorry I was talking about the progressive part. I see so many reviews how terrible it is. I hope it works for me! I see the Trivex part is excellent. I haven't gotten my new glasses yet. I have to wait two weeks. Just a bit nervous now for the progressive part.
@@LaramyKOptical Well let's hope that is the case. She didn't tell me anything about the lenses when I got them. So here is to hoping! If nothing else I will use my current glasses for driving. I see fine with distance ie. driving. I am farsighted, astigmatism, lazy eye (corrected by surgery when I was 3) and now can't see to read :(
@@JaredHasACamera Whoa! OK didn't mention that part... if your eyes don't move in near perfect sync with each other or deviate at all from the normal patterns of what is called convergence a progressive lens will (PROBABLY) never work for you. You would want a lined bifocal maybe even one with a larger than standard width. You might want to check out the other videos I have done on progressive lenses. John
Thanks! Very good video and it is informative., ABBE vallue clarity ; impact resistance ; uv protection: ; tinting: and especially the price. Im planning to buy a new one what can you please suggest a good value to my hard earned money. Im checking on prescription safety glasses poly plastic photochromic with clip on magnifiers which I think is cheaper for me or with the same prescription safety frames with Standard Glass 1.53 and a higher price one. Both Lined Bifocal FT-28. Please give me the best care to my eyes and the best value. Thank you, waiting for reply....
Sorry - we are a wholesale optical lab not a retail store. We don't sell direct to the public. I think you will find that safety eyewear is much, much less expensive than "designer" or branded eyewear is. I do Trivex or polycarbonate with a FT-28 in my own safety eyewear. [for the weight - not the impact resistance since a safety lens is always safety thickness] John
@@LaramyKOptical In the video you showed everything that you know, In this field right! So, you have the knowledge if the glass or safety glass was good, better and cheaper. Is there something wrong to ask a good suggestion from the expert or knowledgeable person like you in this field? What is the purpose of your video? Well, thank you also for being selfish. Maybe others can..., for just a suggestion!!!
Very limited availability. Very limited information on them. Even as a wholesale lab we struggle to get them. It wasn't worth the time. I did mention them in lens material ID but not here.
That is all in the coating not the material. Some may say that Trivex being "harder" may hold a coating better hence be a little more scratch resistant.
@@LaramyKOptical Thanks for the reply. One more question if I may. Can you have the scratch coating and transition coating at the same time? On Trivex. The VA is telling me, no.
@@ed-jf3xh Never heard that. Any good AR or non-glare coating has a scratch layer and they are recommended for Transitions. They may be using some combination of products that makes one incompatible with the other. But it certainly is not a case of "can't" be done. And it gets complicated since some changeable tints are in the material while some are a coating. And a true stand-alone aftermarket upgrade scratch coating (by itself) is a unique product.
Do Trivex transition lenses have the photochromic material in the lens or is it a thin film coating? Recently two pairs of transitions have begun peeling from the edges. Those are polycarbonate. I have never experienced peeling over the decades I have been wearing them. I have also assumed the lens itself was photochromic and not the result of a coating. I cannot get any definitive information from the eye doctors staffin fact they have been vague.
Without knowing a lot more I can't say for sure - but - it seems like you have diagnosed the issue on your own. If you have a front surface film lifting from the lens and it appears either darker or lighter where it is missing then you have a changeable tint coating issue. Some lenses work with the reaction agent within the lens, others work as a coating. If you were sold "Transitions" by name then they should have come with a certificate and a care card. If they are a big-box bargain brand then anything is possible. Regardless it seems that if they are less than a year old they should make good on a new set of lenses for you. More than a year that would depend on the fine print. John
@@LaramyKOptical What more do you need to know? I purchased 4 pairs of polycarbonate lenses and 2 of them are peeling 28 months after they were purchased. The other two pair are in storage and I have not been able to inspect them. However I have been wearing Transitions for over 30 years and have never experienced this peeling. Some of the lenses I purchased years ago have lasted for more than 5 years and I wore them throughout several tours in Iraq. The lenses I bought in the Philippines also lasted for years. They never peeled. The lenses I bought in Florida are shedding the transition coating like a bad case of dandruff. The diagnosis was rather obvious however the sales lady at the eye care center was very good at dissembling. She pretended not to understand what I was talking about. How do I specify a lens with a non-coated photochromic material? Are Trivex Transition lenses supplied as a photochromic blank lens? Are "Transition" proprietary or is it just a coating sprayed on a lens blank? Can you do a video explaining how Transitions are manufactured and the differences between a transition coating and a lens blank transition? The problem was easy to diagnose. When I was a young man I worked in a custom optics lab and I deposited thin film dielectric coatings on laser optics everything from AR's to partial transmission and 100% reflective optics that were comprised of 90+ layers of high and low index coatings. I just need to understand how to order what I want to pay for as it seems I'm being given a ration of bs by the Eyecare center.
@@_arrgh976 I would need to know things that you can't find out like brand and actually see the lens packets they came in. I'm checking on the new NeoChrome from IOT and will get back to you. John
Hello, my name is Cosmo Frank Guarriello Jr. Im looking for big frames, glass or trivex lenses and I also want to do a eye exam., the size I'm looking for is 60-18-150. The lenses I want are glass lenses or trivex, brown transitions the latest tech, 2year warranty, super hydrophobic, scratch resistant, UV protection, blue light, anti fog, durable, anti water, anti oil, anti smudge also very important I want thick lenses not shaved down or thin, very thick is what I want. Which one do you recommend for what I want?
Sorry - We are a wholesale optical lab that makes eyeglass lenses. We don't do retail or any direct to consumer work. You need to ask around and find a good optician.
@@LaramyKOptical the main question is should I go for trivex or glass. I need it for nearsightedness and looking at my cellphone for many hours daily. I'm 42 years old.
Looks like Trivex too much marketing skill I found the fact only 2 reason 1.abbe value (human can't see the different) 2.more light (but Poly 1.59index)
Not sure what MR is? MR could mean Mitsui Resin? Which could be any index they make. MR-1.X Sorry - but I doubt we will get to another one these comparisons again. Do you have a specific question about a specific material? Maybe we can help. John
for example www.aliexpress.com/item/1-67-Index-Trivex-MR-7-Aspherical-Optica-Free-Form-Progressive-Anti-blue-Ray-Prescription-Reading/32838093510.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.695a4c4dYjJDtO
@@LaramyKOptical MR8 is a 1.6 lens material by Mitsui Resin which is widely using now a days by major Japanese companese. Carl Zeiss having all their 1.6 lenses in MR8.(finished and semifinished). From our experience, it is an amazing material in allmost of the cases but a bit harder for tinting when we compare it with regular 1.6 material.
TENSILE STRENGTH TEST = HORRIBLE. you get an F on that testing. 3 huge problems with it: > #1, there's no way to make sure that all 4 cables = exact same length. longer cable will have less force applied to lens. Also the ferule joint slipping would have caused reduced tension on the poly lens compared to the Trivex lens. Precision machined solid steel bars with grade 5 (or even grade 8) bolts through the holes in the lenses should have been used. > #2, there is no way to make sure that the bar up top does not shift (& thereby changing results) while increasing the force while doing 2 at same time.... leads to #3 > #3, a force gauge should be used to accurately test tensile strength, test the lenses one at a time till failure, then compare the results.
I wish you had used a lens strength where it matters. -3 is nothing. People who really care about lens material are going to be in much stronger Rx where the differences become a little more obvious.
If I get Trivex for the same price as polycarb lenses, would that be a no brainer? Sorry I haven't the time or patience to go through this 30 min video. Just looking for a quick comparison. Thanks...
I almost can't wrap my mind around the impact resistance findings. So basically, for a safety lens, you'll want the least amount of treatments possible for to achieve optimal impact resistance? I'm assuming thats due to the curing processes that fuse these various coating to the lenses. The heat must be weakening the molecular bonds that compose these materials . Just wow, mind blown. Thank you for the content and now on to my own digging! Lol
Mmmmmm.... no. For safety you want a lens that has been impact tested (by a good engineering lab) with the SPECIFIC coating(s) chosen. Think about the environment of safety glasses - you can't get an uncoated poly for instance. The safety in most safety lenses comes more from thickness than the material. Of course the frame design also comes into play which is why they have the ANSI standard and markings. John
Most polycarbonate has an Abbe value of like 30, which is horrible, isn't almost everything better? I mean, even ultra high index has better optics than poly. Why is poly still used on anything but safety glasses?
Because it is inexpensive, readily available, comes in every lens style known to man, is relatively easy on equipment, the list goes on. Better optics is a subjective concept for the wearer. A few billion people wear poly and are perfectly happy with it. Would I want my spotting scope or telescope made from it, no. Would I want my -1.00 SV readers made from it, sure. John
It’s a very inexpensive material for use to make my $1000 eyeglasses... ergo higher profit margins. I mean, who cares if you see color fringes from chromatic aberration in something you wear every day of your life... right?
@@jdillinger2307 In some ways I envy those that are either not sensitive enough, or, have such a low prescription that the Abbe value of poly ISN'T an issue. I would love to have glasses that didn't cost $500 a pop
You seem to have completely missed the point of the video. It is the coatings that a material gets that determines its impact resistance. Trivex and poly in their raw form are both highly impact resistant. A poly lens with a different coating may well have shattered just as the Trivex did.
Not fair. You should have started with the words "IT ALL DEPENDS". So, many people wouldn't have spent 30 minutes to find out they just wasted weekend time. That's the only "wow" the video deserves.
specific gravity: 02:30
chemical resistance: 04:50
ABBE value/optical clarity: 07:55
tensile strength: 09:48
drilling: 15:40
index of refraction: 18:12
impact resistance: 19:45
uv protection: 25:05
tinting: 26:02
price/avail: 28:18
summary: most of the performance of a given material as opposed to the other is more dependent on the COATING than the inherent qualitative difference of the material.
You sir are a god damn hero.
During the heat testing, I couldn’t help but notice that you were using an infrared sensor to measure each lens through the oven’s glass window. Since tempered glass (typical for ovens) is opaque to infrared, you would only be measuring the variations in the glass surface temperature and not that of the lenses themselves. Unless, of course, your Oster toaster oven came specially equipped with either Calcium fluoride, UV fused silica, magnesium fluoride, N-BK7, potassium bromide, sapphire, silicon, sodium chloride, zinc selenide or zinc sulfide glass.
Hi Laramy, let me first introduce myself and mention that I am a customer, and not an optician or optical professional. That said, I am a bioengineer with experience in physics and lots of experience wearing glasses! Regarding the first test - weight. You conclude that 0.5g is not significant, and that this is regarding the entire blank. First, we should note that with higher scripts the weight difference will be more pronounced (you test -3.00). It seemed that you decided that 0.5g was not significant in weight savings to the patient, I am not sure how you determined that. In my personal case with a -4.5 rx and ultra-lightweight frames, a poly lens caused the frame to constantly be falling down the bridge of my nose about 50-100 times per day. Simply unwearable. Moving to Trivex stopped this issue completely. No other differences in the lens. So, while that 0.5g may not have been important to you, on a real world user with an ultra light weight and smallish frame (Mykita Claas) the lighter material prevented all slippage on the bridge. Just an FYI point. Also, I should note that I believe the Abbe test is very subjective, especially because we here in the audience are seeing a video recording. From my real life experience, the clarity of Trivex blows away poly. I will never use poly again simply for that reason. Center clarity, periphery...medium and large frames.
Matthew Engel in ref to the weight- was it the same frame with the same fit? Obviously there are a lot of other factors to slippage in addition to the weight of the lens.
Just curious
A great and informative video. I run my own optical lab in the uk, and have had many experiences with these lens materials over the years, and concur with your results. Well? maybe not all.
With the greatest respect, and I can only speak from my own experiences, but I do find the index of the material can somewhat be misleading, especially in its uncut stage. I have found personally if the aesthetics are of importance to the customer (in a prescription lens above a +/-2.00 ds), above other factors. Out of the 2 options (Trivex / Poly), I would always sway towards poly. The outer lens measurements on a -3.00 ds lens is fine, but once you cut into that lens (polycarb), the angle I find drops more significantly towards the centre thickness usually giving a lot thinner appearance. So, in many personal experiences I have seen that Trivex is not always the better option for aesthetics, sometimes looking slightly bulky towards the centre. I suppose you have to weigh up the pro's and cons with every customers requirements, and what type of frames the lenses are going into.
However, saying all of that, I find Trivex lenses the most reliable for everything else. More so, the peace of mind that a customer has a lens of longevity, and quality.
This is in no way a dig at your results, more a point of my own personal experiences. I respect the work and effort you've put into your tests, and have enjoyed watching your other videos too. Please keep up the great work
Gotta admit I never thought much about surface(d) angles. If you track it and and you can notice it then it is well worth considering. Thanks for pointing it out. John
@@LaramyKOptical No thanks required, I was just throwing ones personal experience out there. Pleasure to chat with somone in this small optical world. Lee
Best video with common sense and fantastic tests for a layman to understand! Really, really appreciate this video, soooo cool!
Wow! I was glad you had fun with these tests. Thank you for going above and beyond.
Got my eyes so perky, especially about the reducing strength due to lens coating!! DANG, up to 65%.
As far as experience in drills, I have never seen Trivex "crack" around the drill points but I have seen it in Poly.
If interested please email me and I'll see if I can find the drilling best practices piece I mentioned.
I have seen this as well.
I’m just a consumer but I found this video very entertaining. Thanks.
I absolutely love watching all your videos! This is one of my favorites! I appreciate the time you took to do the testing, very eye opening.
Thanks - That one is one of my all time favorites too! John
Very interesting and thorough video. How does a CR39 do in comparison.... maybe an idea for Pt. II of this series?
This is excellently comprehensive.
Great video! For tensile strength if you put the lenses in (cable-lense-cable-lense-cable) then they will both get the same force applied.
Good point! I doubt we will ever get to a Part II but that would certainly be something to test again using that method. We were pretty careful on cable lengths and the bar was welded to the top of the jack and they were equal distance from the C/L of the jack but always room for improvement. Thanks! John
Not sure if I am hard up for entertainment during COVID, but your content is fabulous!!!
Actually the Laramy-K OpticianWorks UA-cam channel is trending right behind Tiger King for binge watching! You are not alone. Beer and popcorn are suggested. John
So should I spend the extra $20 for the trivex lens?
Yes.
Hope you did. It’s $50 now
I appreciate the attempt at comparing Trivex and Polly. However, the "tensile strength" test was not tensile strength but yield strength. You testing has more to do with the toughness of the material not it's tensile strength. Rubber is tougher than a diamond. Toughness is the total energy required to pull something apart. Tensile strength is the amount of deflection for a given force not the force to pull it apart.
Hello Mr. Laramy, I'm here again, listening and watching your interesting videos of glasses, this is something, that I had never seen...thank you
Great video comparing the two materials. Thank you!!
Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for watching.
Got new glasses ordered at my optometrist today, i requested trivex again, no cost difference in trivex or polycarbonate. I was happy. I went to order a new pair of safety glasses from sportrx, they charge 60 more for trivex.
Oh wow... this is exactly the vid I was looking for, many thanks
CR-39 and Trivex have excellent optical clarity, but I don't see any comparisons between the two online. One is fully covered by insurance, one isn't. Interesting.
They are very, very close in optical quality and Abbe Value too of course. One has been around 50 years (CR39) the other barely 20 now. CR-39 is the cheapest thing available on both the retail and wholesale sides. Trivex is kind of pricey. Between price, availability and newness they can consider Trivex an "upgrade" and charge accordingly. And, I'd even say that it is. I don't think that insurance companies or vision plans care one bit about optical quality - just the bottom line on cost. My two-cents... John
The Abbe value of CR-39 is 59, Trivex is 44, and Poly is 30. Trivex is not as close to CR-39 as people would have you believe.
It is all about coatings! So important!
That rocket launcher effect was pretty good. Made me laugh out loud.
I ordered 2 pairs of the same frame and Rx from two different opticians. One felt lighter than the other on my nose. It turns out one of the opticians had made an error and used Polycarbonate instead of my ordered CR-39. My Rx is a mere -1.00.
Yeah the difference in weight between poly and CR is pretty dramatic! No surprise there.
Excellent video. Thank you for making this. Very informative and just the info I was looking for.
This is hugely informative.
That’s a nice garage set up you got going on there homie.
😂 Just realized this video is 6 years old.
Thanks! Yep video is old and so am I now!
Haven't tried Trivex lenses, but I did have polycarbonate lenses made and had to replace them because of the chromatic aberration (low Abbe value), reading text on a computer was terrible, with color fringes just a few cm away from center ☹
same here, I almost threw up when using my phone...
I am using my husbands account to watch these videos but have to say....This guy is my optical super hero and super talented at teaching in manageable chunks.
Thank you so much 😀
How about simulating the effect of an air bag hitting a person in the face wearing poly eyeglasses vs Trivex lens eyeglasses? That would be a real world test instead of shooting a pellet at each type lens.
I have heard of air bags breaking glasses frames and cutting a person's face, I have not heard of a lens breaking. Although I would also like to see a proper test of this as I do believe it to be possible in the right situation.
Have you done a video on "poly non-adapts?" I feel like it's a placebo ingrained from the early days of poly but would love to see someone put it to an empirical test.
Can't say I've had enough of them to draw any conclusions. That would be one, expensive test to try to run. Keep in mind that you can actually SEE a difference in how crisp the mires are in the lensmeter for glass vs. poly. BUT Yeah - I agree used to be a thing and now it is one of those one in a million, well we've tried everything else let's try material change.
21:45 I’ve done this test, i got the opposite results, Poly didn’t put any resistance. I think your trivex is a low quality one. I use a 9mm
NOOOOO! That was kind of the point of the video! Trivex is Trivex. Poly is poly. It is the coating(s) that make the difference in performance. I'm sure you meant to say, "I think your trivex has a coating that reduced impact resistance." Right? ;-) Never sell any lens as safe unless it is a safety lens in a safety frame. John
Even here in the future this is a hidden gem really eye opening.
thanks for the test! Which one is used more for sports e.g. basketball?
Absolutely fascinating, awesome job John! :)
Thanks again!
So would safety lenses with AR and Anti-scratch coatings be self defeating?
No not at all. The safety in a safety lens comes almost entirely from its thickness.
Thanks, best "practical" video on this topic by far...
Thanks!
Hi
I just want to know. What is the material of these lenses. Glass or plastic?
Hello, what do not test all trivex and poly lens on hand in the uvmeter?
Great video ! Triacetate polarize from polaroid sport sunglasses for example , is impact ressistent ? How much ?
I work with electronics and have to read numerical reading on various RF Test Equipment (Spectrum and Network Analyzers). I have had lens with Trivex and Poly. I find that Trivex gives me much less distortion and I don't have to hold my head in a finely tuned position as I run my tests and record the test results. My issue is that the optics provider almost refuses to use Trivex. One company made three glasses before giving me Trivex, so I stopped going there. Now I have one where they did give Trivex on second pair after I refused the poly (2017). Now they are resistant to give Trivex and have tried three versions of Poly and even requested a second exam. While the last (third set) are better for average use and walking around, I still have frustrating trouble focusing on the Test Equipment screens. Why are these companies so willing to throw out multiple pairs of glasses instead of just making what I ask them to on the first pair?
Thank you for the video. I enjoyed it and see more that look interesting.
"Why are these companies so willing to throw out multiple pairs of glasses instead of just making what I ask them to on the first pair?"
Well - I'll leave the mean and angry remarks to the side...
Sounds like you just need to find a good independent optician! They should be able to get you exactly what you need in the material you desire.
Door is open here - Anderson, SC.
I tried looking for a videos on youtube about polycarbonate eyeglass scratch resistance tests or study and found nothing but eyeglass bussiness commercials, or how to remove eyeglass scratches ? just information blackout? Is UA-cam filtering or removing those videos?
Email me through the OpticianWorks website with your specific question about poly and scratching and I'll see what I can do. Not really much to say I suppose --- all poly lenses must have a scratch coating applied immediately after creation. So you are really concerned with the coatings over the material. John
For polarized SV would trivex be that much better over Poly for clarity?
Much better no. Better yes. If you have a choice go with the Trivex.
Alcohol and acetone are both polar solvents. You should try non-polar solvent, something like gasoline...
Great video. I have found prices now to be almost a dead heat most of the time between the 2.
That video is creeping up on 6 years old now. If Trivex and poly are running close in price and availability now you have another great reason to choose Trivex - as long as you aren't doing the finishing work. ;-)
Chemical resistance is a big thing for me. I am a diesel mechanic, I try my best not to, however a drop of Chemicals can get on my glasses, parts washer solvent, diesel fuel, many penetrating oils, alcohol, and the worst one, brake cleaner. I do not know if trivex can handle it but I know polycarbonate will be ruined by brake cleaner.
Well, yeah - glass is the only material that is chemical resistant. Brake cleaner is some nasty stuff. If it is a huge problem I'd toss on some of those cheap, soft goggles over the glasses when working with that stuff. (I was a Safety Keen parts washer guy for a few years.)
Does AR stand for abrasion resistant coating or anti reflective?
anti reflective AKA non-glare
Can you please elaborate,
Trivex Vs Xirm 1.58
What would be the best material-coating combo for shooting glasses? I currently use Rudy Project ImpactX and ImpactX 2 lenses, but would like to get non-Rudy prescription lenses.
As far as I know the RP ImpactX series is the highest rated for impact. If they claim that for their Rx lenses as well you are getting the best protection you can. But you are (probably) also dealing with a wrap which is never the best for great optics. A more traditional ray-ban style "shooter" should be better. Give me a few to work on this, it brings up some great questions. (sorry it might a few weeks I'm hitting the road for a bit) John
Lenny, DOH! I should have finished my coffee first. The only lens that you can trust for optimal protection is a lens-frame combination that is marked as safety. Any other combination lens-frame has no guarantees. You would be looking for a real safety frame stamped with the Z-81 standard and then have a high quality (Trivex) safety lens with a great high-end AR on it placed in the frame. The lab must grind the lens to safety thickness and do routine QA testing to be sure they pass. Safety frames ain't what they used to be so all kinds of shapes and styles out there. A frame shaped closer to normal dress will give you better optics than any wrap style will. Get a good optician to take measurements and you should be good to go. John
@@LaramyKOptical I'm looking forward to the results of your research. I'm always looking for better safety glasses for shooting. One thing I've found in looking for ever better glasses is that there don't seem to be any Trivex (or NXT or whatever) lenses available that meet MIL-PRF31013, which I understand is a more rigorous standard than Z87. I'm wondering if this is because they can't meet those standards for some reason, or if manufacturers just haven't bothered to get them tested. I'd think with the chemical resistant properties Trivex has, the military market would be big, but every single lens on the APEL list is polycarbonate.
Also, btw, while my Rudy Magsters wrap, they actually have remarkably good clarity and lack of distortion (using plano lenses).
This gentleman is a gem
How we can determine the coating choices for Trivex?
You need to talk with the lab providing you with your lenses.
Lab control experiments don't always work out under real life condition both have their strength and weaknesses, like most things in life.
Could you do a test of trivex vs the proprietary okley lenses?
I know there is a lot there to wrap your arms around. The underlying message is that a lens like an Oakley "ballistic" series HAS BEEN TESTED and does meet the requirements of that specific standard. Hence, no need to test anything or make any comparisons. Goodness I hope it would perform as expected! It is all the UNTESTED stuff that is out there and we assume (incorrectly) that it is "safe" because it is "poly" or Trivex is the stuff you have to careful of. John
Difference between MR-8, Trivex and Polycarbonate lenses and which is best?
Pls do reply
Pls make a detailed video on it.
MR-8 should be Mitsui (chemical company) resin 8 which has an index of 1.6. Trivex 1.53, poly 1.568. Every material has its advantages and disadvantages. There is no "best." We have started a few videos about materials but never finished one yet. It gets a bit overwhelming quite quickly. John
@@LaramyKOptical Thank you for your reply. I've purchased Kodak Clean & Clear MR-8 lens (R.I. 1.6).
So can you please tell me it's advantages and disadvantages?
One more thing, how do I understand that my lens is MR-8 or Trivex or Polycarbonate or something else?
@@PretamManna If properly chosen the Mitsui 1.6 should be a great lens with no disadvantages. For lens material see: ua-cam.com/video/Mi32WOzAgP4/v-deo.html
Very much informative , very technical good information for us. Keep it up .
Thanks!
Thanks! John
This video was so very interesting, and I'm just a lay person.
I am having a hard time trying to figure out whether choosing a Transitional/photochromic polycarbonate lense will put me at risk more than a standard polycarb lens. Using this for sports where there is an off-chance of blunt impact. Anything you can aid to make my decision?
As far as I can tell, transitional lenses are photochromic chemicals dosed within the structure of the polycarbonate, so unlike the ARC stack process, there should not be anything that weakens the structure of the material itself other than the thinning while creating the prescription. Am I on the right track?
The underlying message to the video is, "You can't claim impact resistance on ANY lens/coating combination unless it is specifically made as a safety lens/frame combo. " Your best bet for most sports is contacts and sport eyewear from someplace like Rudy Project. John
@@LaramyKOptical I'd love to see a more comprehensive series comparing the results of these tests on different coatings/materials. Obviously nothing is conclusive but it would be interesting to see how different coatings alter the properties of these materials. Maybe you've already done these tests and I simply need to dive deeper into your channel. Keep up the good work!
@@arbitraryalias9825 No we have not. A bit too random to really discover anything meaningful. 5 materials and a 100 different coating stacks. I think the company notes say everything you need to know. BUT - I agree it would be fun to be able to do it!
Thanks!
You are welcome! John
Comment about your "tensile" test. It is not a tensile test! Look at the nature of the break. If it were true tensile, the lens would have broken at right angles to the pull direction. Break looks more like a combination of tensile & shear. To do true tensile test, you need rod or bar fastened at the ends. Easier way would be to crush lens between 2 plane surfaces (as in a press). The periphery of the lens is placed in tension as the lens is flattened. If tensile failure occurs, the lens would split like a pie-section.
I am from India,
Please tell me,
Difference Between Trivex & Xirm 1.58 ?
Sorry no idea. Xirm sounds like a brand name that is not here in the US.
Which melts faster? Poly or trivex?
I can't remember! I think they both started to melt at about the same moment. John
What material has the best optical quality besides glass?
Next would be basic plastic or "CR-39" followed by Trivex. Non-glass, non-eyewear lenses (camera, cheap binoculars, etc) are often CR-39. No perfect answer I'm afraid. John
@@LaramyKOptical Thanks Laramy! Much Appreciated!
hi John..would it be possible to have a precription trivex lense for eye protection?
Yes, if made as a safety lens in a safety frame.
@@LaramyKOptical is there a way to private message you?
Hi John..are you able to install lenses for me if I provide you with a frame? are you able to do commercially?
@@JauGoo No I'm sorry but we are a wholesale optical lab not a retail store. Any good optician can handle a safety frame and lenses. John
Poly lenses have an index of 1.58 while teivex is at 1.53. That equates to poly lenses being about 10% thinner for the same prescription. So while the specific gravity is also almost 10% more, the index difference evens them oout weight per prescription wise.
Looks like you need to keep working through the video library!
@LaramyKOptical I saw it all lol just wished that the index section referenced the gravity section from earlier and that's why they were even despite the difference in specific gravity. In the gravity section it was said that trivex "should" be the winner but the explanation for them being even was not given in either section, only that the difference is negligible, which is true! There's no real necessity to point out that information, just that extra tid bit of correlation that adds to people's knowledge :)
@@aaronjenkins223 There are 3 other videos that dig into that much more. Index, Specific Gravity and Abbe.
@LaramyKOptical Oh my bad, ill check those out! I thought you meant within this video itself. Sorry about that!
Hi..greetings from Ireland...
great vid thanks ...ive got a high prescription with a stigma in my eyes ...are polycarbonate lences
safe to wear daily ? ...it’s € 400/ € 500 per frames with glass lences / prescription for glasses in Ireland ...rip off...
if the polycarbonate lences were safe I’d get them...just researching how they affect the eyes & how safe they are ?
I talked to a company in the states today they said I don’t need to get my polycarbonate lenses tinned Down... so how does it work ? I just send them my prescription ..do i need to get a coating ? is it possible to get a tint on polycarbonate lenses ?...any info would Appreciated ..
thanks again
Jay...
If you can get a pair of glasses online from the US that you can afford then do that. No material is any safer than another, just go with what they recommend. Polycarbonate (unless specialty coated) doesn't tint so I doubt any online place will do a tinted poly. John
Are Trivex lenses somewhat easier to clean than polycarbonate lenses?? Ive noticed some lenses get cloudy from facial oils and harder to clean than other lenses ive owned.. please help me find an answer?
Logan, That has to be the coating on the lens. Either the scratch coat or any AR coat if you get that. Poly cannot leave the factory without a scratch coat so you are never really dealing with the raw material there. It would be pretty rare but not impossible to find an uncoated Trivex. My mantra is always the same, if you have to choose between cheap AR and no AR choose none. And, sadly even the greatest AR in the world is only great for a year... then it is good for a year and then it is not-so-good. Hope that helps - let me know. John
Thank you so much! This helps so much! As a man o scince and your personal preference which type of lense would you recommend for me? I am very OCD about keeping my glass lenses clean yet I don't want them to scratch TOO easily, and the less cloudy/foggy material would be a lifesaver lol, I would love to hear your opinion on this! what do you think??
Which Lens Material do you think would be easier to clean in the slightest, as well as which one would be more resistant to scratches naturally? Whats your opinion on those newer, High Definition Lenses? are they worth it? or are they less scratch resistant material/harder to clean? any disadvantages? or are they just a Gimmick?
Material will all depend on the lens power(s). Scratch resistance all comes down to the coating(s). Yes, in progressive lenses free-form or hi-def is important and worth every penny. You might want to run through some of the other videos on our UA-cam channel. John
@@LaramyKOptical Wow. Only a year!
I just bought trivex progressive lenses after 8 years of the same glasses. I hope I can use them. I have had headaches and blurry vision.
Maybe you missed something? Trivex is a good material with quite good optical properties. If you have trouble it probably isn't because of Trivex. John PS: It is about all I wear myself..
@@LaramyKOptical Sorry I was talking about the progressive part. I see so many reviews how terrible it is. I hope it works for me! I see the Trivex part is excellent. I haven't gotten my new glasses yet. I have to wait two weeks. Just a bit nervous now for the progressive part.
@@JaredHasACamera Ah, OK. Latest versions of progressives when fit properly should be just fine.
@@LaramyKOptical Well let's hope that is the case. She didn't tell me anything about the lenses when I got them. So here is to hoping! If nothing else I will use my current glasses for driving. I see fine with distance ie. driving. I am farsighted, astigmatism, lazy eye (corrected by surgery when I was 3) and now can't see to read :(
@@JaredHasACamera Whoa! OK didn't mention that part... if your eyes don't move in near perfect sync with each other or deviate at all from the normal patterns of what is called convergence a progressive lens will (PROBABLY) never work for you. You would want a lined bifocal maybe even one with a larger than standard width. You might want to check out the other videos I have done on progressive lenses. John
Now do CR39.
Thanks! Very good video and it is informative., ABBE vallue clarity ;
impact resistance ; uv protection: ; tinting: and especially the price. Im planning to buy a new one what can you please suggest a good value to my hard earned money. Im checking on prescription safety glasses poly plastic photochromic with clip on magnifiers which I think is cheaper for me or with the same prescription safety frames with Standard Glass 1.53 and a higher price one. Both Lined Bifocal FT-28. Please give me the best care to my eyes and the best value. Thank you, waiting for reply....
Sorry - we are a wholesale optical lab not a retail store. We don't sell direct to the public. I think you will find that safety eyewear is much, much less expensive than "designer" or branded eyewear is. I do Trivex or polycarbonate with a FT-28 in my own safety eyewear. [for the weight - not the impact resistance since a safety lens is always safety thickness] John
@@LaramyKOptical In the video you showed everything that you know, In this field right! So, you have the knowledge if the glass or safety glass was good, better and cheaper. Is there something wrong to ask a good suggestion from the expert or knowledgeable person like you in this field? What is the purpose of your video? Well, thank you also for being selfish. Maybe others can..., for just a suggestion!!!
Make a video about HiVex lenses too
Very limited availability. Very limited information on them. Even as a wholesale lab we struggle to get them. It wasn't worth the time. I did mention them in lens material ID but not here.
Scratch resistance?
That is all in the coating not the material. Some may say that Trivex being "harder" may hold a coating better hence be a little more scratch resistant.
@@LaramyKOptical Thanks for the reply. One more question if I may. Can you have the scratch coating and transition coating at the same time? On Trivex. The VA is telling me, no.
@@ed-jf3xh Never heard that. Any good AR or non-glare coating has a scratch layer and they are recommended for Transitions. They may be using some combination of products that makes one incompatible with the other. But it certainly is not a case of "can't" be done. And it gets complicated since some changeable tints are in the material while some are a coating. And a true stand-alone aftermarket upgrade scratch coating (by itself) is a unique product.
@@LaramyKOptical Okay, thanks again. Have a great day.
Do Trivex transition lenses have the photochromic material in the lens or is it a thin film coating? Recently two pairs of transitions have begun peeling from the edges. Those are polycarbonate. I have never experienced peeling over the decades I have been wearing them. I have also assumed the lens itself was photochromic and not the result of a coating.
I cannot get any definitive information from the eye doctors staffin fact they have been vague.
Without knowing a lot more I can't say for sure - but - it seems like you have diagnosed the issue on your own. If you have a front surface film lifting from the lens and it appears either darker or lighter where it is missing then you have a changeable tint coating issue. Some lenses work with the reaction agent within the lens, others work as a coating. If you were sold "Transitions" by name then they should have come with a certificate and a care card. If they are a big-box bargain brand then anything is possible. Regardless it seems that if they are less than a year old they should make good on a new set of lenses for you. More than a year that would depend on the fine print. John
@@LaramyKOptical
What more do you need to know? I purchased 4 pairs of polycarbonate lenses and 2 of them are peeling 28 months after they were purchased. The other two pair are in storage and I have not been able to inspect them.
However I have been wearing Transitions for over 30 years and have never experienced this peeling. Some of the lenses I purchased years ago have lasted for more than 5 years and I wore them throughout several tours in Iraq. The lenses I bought in the Philippines also lasted for years. They never peeled. The lenses I bought in Florida are shedding the transition coating like a bad case of dandruff.
The diagnosis was rather obvious however the sales lady at the eye care center was very good at dissembling. She pretended not to understand what I was talking about.
How do I specify a lens with a non-coated photochromic material? Are Trivex Transition lenses supplied as a photochromic blank lens? Are "Transition" proprietary or is it just a coating sprayed on a lens blank?
Can you do a video explaining how Transitions are manufactured and the differences between a transition coating and a lens blank transition?
The problem was easy to diagnose. When I was a young man I worked in a custom optics lab and I deposited thin film dielectric coatings on laser optics everything from AR's to partial transmission and 100% reflective optics that were comprised of 90+ layers of high and low index coatings.
I just need to understand how to order what I want to pay for as it seems I'm being given a ration of bs by the Eyecare center.
@@LaramyKOptical
You said
"Some lenses work with the reaction agent within the lens, "
What BRAND of lenses are those please!
@@_arrgh976 I would need to know things that you can't find out like brand and actually see the lens packets they came in. I'm checking on the new NeoChrome from IOT and will get back to you. John
@@LaramyKOptical
Do Trivex photochromic lenses have the photochromic material in the lens or is it a thin film coating?
Hello, my name is Cosmo Frank Guarriello Jr. Im looking for big frames, glass or trivex lenses and I also want to do a eye exam., the size I'm looking for is 60-18-150. The lenses I want are glass lenses or trivex, brown transitions the latest tech, 2year warranty, super hydrophobic, scratch resistant, UV protection, blue light, anti fog, durable, anti water, anti oil, anti smudge also very important I want thick lenses not shaved down or thin, very thick is what I want. Which one do you recommend for what I want?
Sorry - We are a wholesale optical lab that makes eyeglass lenses. We don't do retail or any direct to consumer work. You need to ask around and find a good optician.
@@LaramyKOptical the main question is should I go for trivex or glass. I need it for nearsightedness and looking at my cellphone for many hours daily. I'm 42 years old.
@@cosmoguarriellojr3479 Trivex for sure.
Nice clip
Thanks
Thanks Agate Lense!
Looks like Trivex too much marketing skill
I found the fact only 2 reason
1.abbe value (human can't see the different)
2.more light (but Poly 1.59index)
Can you compare MR vs Trivex lenses?
Not sure what MR is? MR could mean Mitsui Resin? Which could be any index they make. MR-1.X Sorry - but I doubt we will get to another one these comparisons again. Do you have a specific question about a specific material? Maybe we can help. John
@@LaramyKOptical MR-8 vs Trivex on optical clarity and durability. Is MR-8 better for drill mounting? And is one more resistant to scratching?
@@VigneshBalasubramaniam Sorry, but I don't know what MR-8 is? Can you send a picture of the lens packaging please?
for example www.aliexpress.com/item/1-67-Index-Trivex-MR-7-Aspherical-Optica-Free-Form-Progressive-Anti-blue-Ray-Prescription-Reading/32838093510.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.695a4c4dYjJDtO
@@LaramyKOptical MR8 is a 1.6 lens material by Mitsui Resin which is widely using now a days by major Japanese companese. Carl Zeiss having all their 1.6 lenses in MR8.(finished and semifinished). From our experience, it is an amazing material in allmost of the cases but a bit harder for tinting when we compare it with regular 1.6 material.
TENSILE STRENGTH TEST = HORRIBLE. you get an F on that testing. 3 huge problems with it:
> #1, there's no way to make sure that all 4 cables = exact same length. longer cable will have less force applied to lens. Also the ferule joint slipping would have caused reduced tension on the poly lens compared to the Trivex lens. Precision machined solid steel bars with grade 5 (or even grade 8) bolts through the holes in the lenses should have been used.
> #2, there is no way to make sure that the bar up top does not shift (& thereby changing results) while increasing the force while doing 2 at same time.... leads to #3
> #3, a force gauge should be used to accurately test tensile strength, test the lenses one at a time till failure, then compare the results.
Thanks, Shawn for tips! Next time, we'll do better. ;)
I wish you had used a lens strength where it matters. -3 is nothing. People who really care about lens material are going to be in much stronger Rx where the differences become a little more obvious.
??????????
Stronger = thicker
Thicker = safety thickness
My poly lenses were destroyed after six years of use. Totally white and milky and spotty, and I don't even know what I did wrong.
Acetone makes polycarbonate instantly brittle.
A "pushing" force would be compressive strength not tensile strength
And that, as they say across the pond, would be --- "a fair cop..." John
25:01 that was funny!!!
THATS A BAD ASS VIDEO.... HOW BOUT POLY VS HIGH INDEX??!!!!
Thanks, Jarrad!
If I get Trivex for the same price as polycarb lenses, would that be a no brainer? Sorry I haven't the time or patience to go through this 30 min video. Just looking for a quick comparison. Thanks...
Why does everyone say "thiiis" like Doug DeMuro these days? I wish we could go back to the old way.
I almost can't wrap my mind around the impact resistance findings. So basically, for a safety lens, you'll want the least amount of treatments possible for to achieve optimal impact resistance? I'm assuming thats due to the curing processes that fuse these various coating to the lenses. The heat must be weakening the molecular bonds that compose these materials . Just wow, mind blown. Thank you for the content and now on to my own digging! Lol
Mmmmmm.... no. For safety you want a lens that has been impact tested (by a good engineering lab) with the SPECIFIC coating(s) chosen. Think about the environment of safety glasses - you can't get an uncoated poly for instance. The safety in most safety lenses comes more from thickness than the material. Of course the frame design also comes into play which is why they have the ANSI standard and markings. John
Ah okay, thank you! I got so caught up in the experiment that I forgot about the thickness of safety lenses lol
Tried both. Preferred Trivex. Stick to Trivex.
Most polycarbonate has an Abbe value of like 30, which is horrible, isn't almost everything better? I mean, even ultra high index has better optics than poly. Why is poly still used on anything but safety glasses?
Because it is inexpensive, readily available, comes in every lens style known to man, is relatively easy on equipment, the list goes on. Better optics is a subjective concept for the wearer. A few billion people wear poly and are perfectly happy with it. Would I want my spotting scope or telescope made from it, no. Would I want my -1.00 SV readers made from it, sure. John
@@LaramyKOptical Makes sense, sometimes I forget prescriptions go so low 😁
It’s a very inexpensive material for use to make my $1000 eyeglasses... ergo higher profit margins. I mean, who cares if you see color fringes from chromatic aberration in something you wear every day of your life... right?
@@jdillinger2307 In some ways I envy those that are either not sensitive enough, or, have such a low prescription that the Abbe value of poly ISN'T an issue. I would love to have glasses that didn't cost $500 a pop
Trivex lens sucked with shooting test it failed. We don't need manufacturer gibberish to disprove that. Polycarbonate was winner in shooting test
You seem to have completely missed the point of the video. It is the coatings that a material gets that determines its impact resistance. Trivex and poly in their raw form are both highly impact resistant. A poly lens with a different coating may well have shattered just as the Trivex did.
Not fair. You should have started with the words "IT ALL DEPENDS". So, many people wouldn't have spent 30 minutes to find out they just wasted weekend time. That's the only "wow" the video deserves.
Fake polycarbonate.
Robot voice. Try speaking at a normal pace.
Does not compute.