I've recently found myself holding tins, packets and newspapers at arms length, the better to read the little print.
A trip to the opticians was booked and the outcome, as expected, was that now may be the time for varifocal lenses in your glasses.
I'm fairly vain but I've always worn glasses and don't have any issue with that.
However, intellectually, varifocals seem like a line in the sand, and beyond that line, lies old age.
Hokum I know, but I'm reluctant - especially with the optician saying there will be distorted vision to the sides of your glasses and you'll need to be careful on stairs and so on - it just makes me feel old! Too old!
I'm considering having two pairs of glasses - one for distance/driving and one for reading.
I think this is what people used to do in the old days - before bifocals and varifocals.
Most of my time is spent on a computer or reading or watching TV or driving. Everything else I have my eyes closed for... sometimes for the driving too.

As writers...and with writers' needs in mind... anyone else come up against this and what did you do?

I need new specs anyway, and cost-wise it would be cheaper not to have bi-focals but not uber-dramatically so.
Although I am quite a tight-wad so I won't spend too much.
Tesco prices for 'buy 1 get 1 free' with varifocals in each and a tint in one pair for driving was £250 minimum ish - nearer £320 ish if you don't want to look like Olive from On the Buses.



Edited by MartinEx at 15:47:00 on 12 October 2013


Edited by MartinEx at 15:48:00 on 12 October 2013

Ah, yes, that's just where I am - except that I'm going from never wearing specs, by way of only-for-the-computer, and now also books, and yes, those packets... But my distance sight is losing its edge too, so I'll need them for driving at some point.

If you find the answer I'd love to know it!

I'm okay with reading print and computer screens but have needed glasses for driving/cycling for some years now (although I can do it without at a pinch). A few years ago, I had my eyes tested again and was talked into buy two pairs of specs: one for driving/cycling and a varifocal pair for, well, distance (at the top of the lens), middle distance (middle of lens) and short distance (bottom of lens). The optician advised this since he thought my short vision would probably get worse with time. The result is that I wear the specs for driving/cycling but hardly ever wear the varifocal pair. They're just too irritating: you have to tilt your head to get the benefit of the distance you want to view at, and then you don't have much to view through anyway. So, next time, I'll get a separate short distance pair if necessary, but won't be mixing focal distances again.

I got the impression the optician was promoting varifocals as a better option than two pairs of specs and, given the prices of the lenses, I couldn't help thinking there was a financial incentive.
Basically, my distance prescription for driving and even watching TV across the room, hasn't changed much at all but my near vision has deteriorated.
But it's not dreadful, only slightly worse than before, so if I was being super pragmatic, I could keep my existing specs for everyday life and buy a pair of reading glasses from the budget range - probably £50 max including single vision lenses.

Google research tells me some people take to varifocals and find them dead easy.
But it did seem about 50/50 with another group of people finding varifocals really hard to get used to.

The optician said maybe a couple of weeks and always be careful on stairs - the nature of the lens means you should move your head rather than just your eyes - or you may take a tumble.
Some suggest that varifocals may figure in elderly people falling over.
Certainly, the optician said older people find them harder to get used to.

The thing is, Google also tells me that once you get used to varifocals it's hard to re-adjust backwards to normal specs.

They may be the crack cocaine of specs and once you're used to them - you'll be committed to expensive lenses for good.

The dispenser/frames adviser at the opticians was quite informative and non-salesy. She had a chart with the 4 qualities of varifocal lens showing the level of distortion you experience according to the quality and price of the lens.
At the cheapest varifocal lens - £45 - it looked like about 25/30% of the side vision in each lens would be distorted/lost.
If you had top quality £159 lenses you might only lose 5% or 10% of the side vision.
They do give you a 30 day refund/exchange option with all varifocals if you can't get used to them, which makes me wonder if it happens quite a bit.

I don't like the idea of being hooked on varifocals - and I'm quite a late adopter with most new things (My only tv was a 14" B/W portable telly up to 2008) - so I'll probably go with two pairs of traditional specs and incur the mocking scorn and general derision of the wider glasses community.

The thing that changed my mind on the TV was trying to watch a video of The Descent (a film set mainly in dark/black underground caves) in a letterbox screen resolution, after a couple of bottles of wine - with the lights off.
On a 14" TV - there was about a 2" horizontal band of film with only an occasional flash of light when somebody screamed and was killed.
We bought a 32" colour the next day.

I'm approaching this point, too - although because I'm short sighted to begin with, I just take my specs off to read small print (escpecially in low light - it just becomes invisible, doesn't it!). But a friend who got varifocals said that they were great for distance and close up, but he just couldn't focus on anything in the middle ranges and they were driving him bonkers.


It reminds me of when my daughter was about 8 and she came home from school and said 'My teacher has fairy vocals.' Her teacher had quite a deep voice and wasn't given to singing, so I assumed she meant varifocals!! But perhaps I was wrong...

I've had varifocals for a couple of years now, and I think they're absolutely wonderful.

No issues at all with peripheral vision, but my tip would be to invest in the best lenses you can afford - this is an instance where you really do get what you pay for, and what you're aiming for is to have minimal distortion around the edges. I had no problems at all getting used to them.

Mine came from Tesco, and I would definitely recommend them.

I have a complex prescription including varifocals and have had to jiggle the prescription over a few years to get the right balance as you can't have too much of a discrepancy between top and bottom. I've ended up having to compromise on the distance to get it spot on for reading/computer work and it's working okay now. Would be good if there were any opticians out there to answer as I've come to the conclusion it's not as precise as we'd like it to be. I couldn't be doing with two pairs as I'm often out without a bag or in the almost-wilds trying to read a map in the rain. For me, if you wear glasses for distance, you accept the additional cost … Sorry this is using you to mean me/I.

Hey, don`t worry about getting old. Actually, I thing that feeling older makes people older.
A positive and dinamic view of life make us younger and a pesimist and complaining way of living give us right the opposite.

Edited by sbunford at 13:19:00 on 23 October 2013


Edited by sbunford at 13:19:00 on 23 October 2013

I gave in and got some specs when I got 'OU eye strain' years ago but I never felt safe around the stock in them and the treads on stairs disapeared when I looked down- I don't know where they are now as I gave up and just squinted harder- I carry a Sherlock style magnifying glass every where as the writing on jars escapes my notice- ditto prices!! In fact I have a dinky floral one in the handbag and I am always tempted to try it as a monical but it would probably give me a bruise! I have decided that I will grow old as big a disgrace as ever and a dire warning to the younger lot.MC