Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Zenni optical
I'm just wondering, how come glasses at zennioptical are cheap?  They're like around $8-$30 in zenni while in other stores they cost around 90$
Dear Otter,

Last time I paid for glasses (long time) mine were
$250 for two pair!

An OD is required to give you the prescription -- although
with a Snellen you could figure it out for youself.

Other sites offer minus glasses for $24 and less.

If you are intending to use a minus ONLY when necesary, and
plan to improve so you do not need them, then there is
no good reason to pay $200 to $400 for glasses.

Who do you think gets the $400 - $15 = $385 excess?

Well, I think the cheap glasses aren't good quality sometimes. The frames are on par with sunglasses and reading glasses that you can buy at a drug store like Walgreen's. They fall apart easily.

The lenses are CR-39 plastic which is very thick if you have a strong prescription.

Could be made in labs where workers get very low wages.

Internet businesses don't have to maintain storefront outlets, pay rent, insurance, etc.

Local opticians have to make a profit so they can have income. You can bet if the glasses are so much cheaper that cheap labor is behind it. Not that you can't get glasses online, but sometimes it is better to support a local business instead.

But there are definite retail rip-off businesses, too. Beware of stores that offer two pairs of glasses for the price of one. They are selling the cheapest frames at the biggest markup.

Actually if you show your glasses to an optometrist that you bought from someone else, they will give you a load of crap about how they are low quality "polycarbonate" and you should buy it from them.  They aren't doctors, they are sales representatives.  Their objective is to sell glasses, not cure eyesight problems.

Yes the lenses can be of different quality as they are made from different materials.  Apart from the integrity of the frames, an expensive lens is perfectly round, strong, light and has a smooth surface.  On the other hand a cheap lens may have a bubbly and warped surface that scratches easily.  Such deformations aren't usually noticeable but were known to give headaches in some cases.

Then again there is no point in buying $200 glasses.  In my opinion $20 glasses aren't any more of glasses than $200 ones.  One time i walked into a store and saw several pears or ordinary glasses for $600.  They call them "designer frames", but don't recall seeing anything out of the ordinary about them. 

Otter, as your eyesight is roughly 20/80, you can probably cope without glasses throughout the day.  Of course with the exception of any activities that require good eyesight for safety.

Dear Otter and Paul,

I recognize the "minus" as a necessary evil.  Something
to be avoided.

But if you induce a negative refractive STATE by "stress",
and see 20/50 to 20/60 on your Snellen, then
you must do something about it.

Since Bates recommended "throw away your glasses (minus
in this case) and SEE", then I think that the
best idea is to get some TEMPORARY -1 diopter lenses
EFFECTIVE FOR YOURSELF, i.e., clear the 20/40
or better line -- to YOUR satisfaction and verification.

I would rather "throw away", some $15 from
than $600, -1 diopters in designer frames.

Also, I would rather pay $400 to someone to inform
me an help me clear my Snellen (by various preventive
methods) than to get staircase myopia from that minus -- as
Bates implied.

Just one man's opinion.

Im going to get reduced prescription glasses for around $15.  I will just reduce the prescription diopter by 1.  Is that ok.  Should I remove the axis and/or cylindrical settings?
Dear Otter,

Several suggestions:

1.  Read the Snellen I posted (IVAC)

2.  Post your current prescription.

3.  If the astigmatism is less than 1 diopter -- I would
ignore it.  (Convert to spherical equivalent)  Post the
prescription and I will show you how to do it.

4.  If you drive a car you MUST pass the DMV level
of vision required in your state.  You  must be
"legal" when you drive a car.

Let us know.

I don't know much about the eyeglasses, but if it relates at all, I know that when I bought my new digital camera with a high-quality (Leica) lens and compared the pictures that my friend and I took side by side, the pictures taken with my camera were light years better than his.  Same subject.  Same position.  Same brand of camera.  Mine just had the better quality lens.

If the information getting transmitted to my brain through my eyes and my glasses can be fairly compared to a camera lens, I'd rather see well than less well.  I'll find another place to save a few bucks.

But that's me.
Dear Friend,

Of course, the minus lens is perfect.

Works in five minutes.

Why would anyone wish to "wait" at 20/50, work
with Bates, and clear to naked-eye 20/20.

But then -- why are we on this site?

Just one man's opinion.

I'm not sure who you mean, but my point was that if you need glasses, you should be particularly attuned to getting lenses with good optics.
Im just getting reduced prescription glasses.  I'll post current prescription later.
Dear No-Bones,

With due respect, you sound like a majority-opinion OD.

The entire issue is "need glasses".

And that is the central issue on imagination-blindness.

So what Bates meant, what second-opinion ODs mean,
is that if you pass MOST of the DMV level test (read
your Snellen to verify), you do not "need" glasses in
that range of visual acuities.

Bates strong SUGGESTED the end of the minus lens,
and, in that range you can AVOID using that minus.

So the issue of "need" in that range is a matter of

No one, who checks their Snellen and verifies 20/50,
is PREVENTED from getting a minus.  And you
MIGHT streach it and say "need".

But the real point is this.  If Bates is to be successful,
then that MUST mean clearing your Snellen from
20/50 to 20/20 -- which is the main strength
of the Bates claim.

If you (or people on this site do it) in a matter
of months, then when they get to 20/20, then
do not "need" a minus lens.

I hope this clarifies this point for you.

As always, clearing like this is the second-opinion.



I'm not sure who you mean, but my point was that if you need glasses, you should be particularly attuned to getting lenses with good optics.
I have 3.75 diopters in both eyes, .25 clyndrical in both eyes, but 98 axis in left eye and 118 in right eye.  I'm going to get glasses with diopters of 2.75.  Is that ok?
Dear Otter,

Subject:  Your current prescription.

As you know, I wish you had been informed of the Bates
preventive methods before you got down to -3.75 diopters (with
all due respect.  David's efforts are to get the message
"out" to begin clearing your vision before the minus.

With that understood, your prescription indicates
a Snellen of about -3.75 x 70 or 20/260.  You might
check your IVAC Snellen just to be sure.  Your
OD prescribed for 20/20, or better.  Sometimes
20/15 to 20/10.  (Called "Best Visual Acuity")
If that is the case, you can get a reduced prescription
by 1 diopters, and probably see 20/40 through the
-2.75 diopter lens.  It is important that you
confirm this.  You can not drive a car with the
reduced prescription, but 20/40 will allow you
to do most things (reading, blackboard, with
little problem).  If you do not like this
lens, you are only "out" $15.

More details:

I have 3.75 diopters in both eyes, .25 cylindrical in both eyes, but 98 axis in left eye and 118 in right eye.

The WEAKEST prescription is 1/4 diopters.  You can basically ignore
that amount of astigmatism prescription.  If it was more,
you would have to specify plus or minus, and take 1/2 the
value for the spherical equivalent value.  You can
ignore the axis (98 degrees) also.

I'm going to get glasses with diopters of 2.75

I think you mean -2.75 diopters.  (If you are nearsighed,
then the sign must be minus.  If it were plus, you
would be "farsighted".  I suggest you read your
Snellen to confirm that you are nearsighted.

Is that OK?

Otis> That must be a matter of your judgment.

Otis> I personally use a "reading" lens that is "cut"
by 2 diopters.  That works in the house, and I wear
it about 98 percent of the time.  For driving a
car, I have a minus that give me 20/20.

Otis> The main issue is to help you clear
some of your distant vision.

Otis> Perhaps some others can post their suggestions.

Good luck,

jeez man some equation you got there for converting diopters to snellen.  I can see 20/80.  My cousin can see 20/40 or 20/50 with 1.75 diopters

- Free Eye Chart PDFs

  • 20 ft, 10 ft, and Near Vision Charts
  • Letters Calibrated to Correct Printed Size
Download Now