Shooting in varifocals

Tarkwin

Prince Of Dorkness
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
American Shoot
I have recently - in the last two weeks or so started wearing varifocal lenses in my glasses.

This seems to have had the effect that I can position my head/eyes such that the pile is relatively in focus so that I can watch it as i settle just prior to the clicker dropping OR I can have the sight ring in focus enough to actually use it. There is a +1 diopter difference between the far and near focus portions of the lenses (ignoring correction for astigmatism)

Because of the design (of mine anyway) there is a fairly narrow 'corridoor' of focus down the centre of the lenses outside of which there is gradually more distortion towards the left and right edges.

It might simply mean a change of head position to accommodate my new glasses. Alternatively I might find that it no longer is an issue when I get used to shooting with a clicker and can set up the shot by instinct rather than concentration.

That out of the way...

does anyone else shoot in varifocals?

is anyone prescribed varifocals but shoot in single vision because of similar issues?
 

greygoose

New member
I have recently - in the last two weeks or so started wearing varifocal lenses in my glasses.

This seems to have had the effect that I can position my head/eyes such that the pile is relatively in focus so that I can watch it as i settle just prior to the clicker dropping OR I can have the sight ring in focus enough to actually use it. There is a +1 diopter difference between the far and near focus portions of the lenses (ignoring correction for astigmatism)

Because of the design (of mine anyway) there is a fairly narrow 'corridoor' of focus down the centre of the lenses outside of which there is gradually more distortion towards the left and right edges.

It might simply mean a change of head position to accommodate my new glasses. Alternatively I might find that it no longer is an issue when I get used to shooting with a clicker and can set up the shot by instinct rather than concentration.

That out of the way...

does anyone else shoot in varifocals?

is anyone prescribed varifocals but shoot in single vision because of similar issues?
Hi Tarkwin,
I normally wear varifocals but find it impossible to shoot with them on due to every thing being out of focus and bits of frame being in the way.
I have just this week started aiming with both eyes open and find it a considerable improvement. I.E. less blur, and less tension due to not having to strain to see the target clearly.
I wish I had tried this years ago.
Greygoose
 

cestria

Member
Fonz Awardee
Hi Tarkwin, my wife Shewolf had a problem with varifocals last year when she was shooting indoors. She got around the problem by having some lenses made for an old pair of big framed glasses (Dennis Taylor style) she had in the draw from years back. This allowed the lenses to be made in such a way that the varifocal didn't cause a problem when she was aiming. Strangely she didn't have the problem outside, this may have been because of the increased elevation of the longer distances or just the increase in light levels.
 

Furface

Moderator
Supporter
I have been shooting in varifocals for a couple of years now. They were a pain at first. Outdoors they felt as if they were upside down - as my position changed for longer distances, I was looking through the lower part of the lens, the short distance part - and indoors the target at 20 yards was bang on the line of transition so was never in focus. However, rather than have a special shooting pair, I have simply grown used to them, and feel that I am less hung up on actual aiming. The target is a blur, the sight is a blur, the pile is a blur so what's the point in worrying?
 

grimsby archer

New member
Talk to your spectacle supplier and get a spare set made for shooting.
Most will be able to make spectacles with the lenses "off center" so as to reduce the distortion near the frame (which is where most archers look)
 

joelondon

Member
Fonz Awardee
Commercial interest warning!!!!!

take with a pinch or punch of salt as you see fit, because as said numerous times before I work for a lens manufacturer. but as I always say I cannot in any way benefit from any increase in sales directly!!! I promise you this!

The company I work for has produced a varifocal specific for sports use, the concept being that the reading portion of the lens is the least dominant factor, it being used infrequently for score cards etc.

I wont go into all the blurb, but have a look here if interested. it is a pdf brochure describing the lens design and the benefits to the sporting public.

Moderators feel free to remove the link if you feel it wrong, in the current online world it may be an issue

http://www.essilor.co.uk/lensinfo/pdfs/Varilux Sport Brochure.pdf

can try to answer any questions you may have in general as I speak with many opticians during my work.

one thing I always say to archers when talaking about sport specific usage is explain it all to your optician, even take your kit with you and demonstrate your viewing needs.

lens design is only now catching up with the changes in our lifestyle and the changes in traditional usage (think of all those computer items u "read" such as blackberries etc which are not held like a traditional book.

SHOW THEM WHAT YOU WANT YOUR LENSES TO DO!!!

also it goes without saying no one lens design will do everything, you wouldn't wear your work suit swimming would you?

cheers

Joe
 

Bunsen

New member
I shoot in varifocals and I don't have any real problems. Varifocals come in different " grades ". The better ( read more expensive ) the lens the smother the change as the focal lenght of the lens changes.

My lenses cost a small fortune but are worth every penny to get the smoth focuschange across the lens.
 

Trunkles

The American
American Shoot
I just shoot in my normal varifocals. Shot 2nd class this year with this pair and improved from 3rd class last year.
Looking to do first class (or better :stirthepo) next year.

Like Furface everything is out of focus.
 

mediumtab

Member
AIUK Saviour
I've been wearing varifocals all day at work/home for the past five years,but never felt comfortable shooting in them.I keep a pair of semi-rimless frames that fit close to the nose,they are single vision for distance.This means I can see the boss through a lens ,without bothering about focusing too much on the nearvision.I always lift them to check accuracy on the target with a scope,etc.Likewise when scoring,I can just see under the lens to get clear vision for writing. :fruitcake
 

Huffy

New member
At my last eye test I was told that I would be going towards the level for varifocals in a couple of year?s time. It was suggested that I would have to consider shooting specs. The guy dealing with me used to be a member of the Colchester club.

My question is has anyone experience of shooting specs and any problems with them (apart from looking weird :raspberry)


Best wishes, Mark
 

joelondon

Member
Fonz Awardee
Shooting Glasses are like any other piece of your archery kit, you need to get them set up for your style of shooting.

the important thing to remember is that you will need to select the distance at which you wish to see clearly (i.e distance, intermediate or near) your optician will be able to work on this, the other consideration to be taken into account is the movement of the lens in a shooting spec changes the back vertex distance (this is the distance from your eye to the back of the lens - think moving a magnifying glass and the effect of that movement) so you really need to get these parameters sorted in the test room with the optcian, as there may be need of modification to your prescription (also taking into account any power on scopes etc).

I am sure a search of the web could through up some shooting specific practices that will help with the dispensing of the correct specs, but all should be able to help - as long as you bring your kit to demonstrate your requirements

cheers

Joe
 

Araglin

New member
Ironman
lens design is only now catching up with the changes in our lifestyle and the changes in traditional usage (think of all those computer items u "read" such as blackberries etc which are not held like a traditional book.

SHOW THEM WHAT YOU WANT YOUR LENSES TO DO!!!

also it goes without saying no one lens design will do everything, you wouldn't wear your work suit swimming would you?
I've had varifocals for 2-3 years now. Total mistake! I still have to take them off to read unless I want to tip my head right back, and I can no longer clearly see the dog-sh*t on the pavement in front of me unless I tip my head forward.

But I don't think it affects my shooting. I can see the arrow point and the target fine. (My inability to send the one to the other is not down to poor sight.)
 

Graham Potts

New member
I have shot in varifocals for a few years now and have no problem at all - for me its all about head position and I have shot to a reasonable level in this time. I would say, however, that it is very much an individual thing, and something you can only try to see if it will work for you.
 
T

taergalger

Guest
What is the significance of seeing the arrow tip or any other part of the arrow for that matter?
This is not rhetorical.
It seems here to be taken for granted, an essential part of good shooting and I?m worried by that because I have been shooting now for about 18 months and have NEVER seen the tip of my arrow during a shot, in fact I never (at least consciously) see any part of the bow, sight or arrow in focus, I see the string ?blur? of course and understand the importance of that to ?line?, but that is all.
My focus from the moment that I present the bow is at all times on the target and I at no time alter my focal length to try and see any part of the bow in focus.
As for the target, given that it is a large, brightly coloured and simple shape of concentric rings with an obvious centre, does it really need to be in sharp focus?

I assumed that since it is referred to as a string ?blur?, one isn?t supposed to see anything in the foreground in focus?
Am I literally, missing something?

As to eyesight in general, there is of course one lens that can do everything, your eyes!
I am not being facetious.
In a different thread I recently referred to how my discovery of the work of Dr Bates (recovering good eyesight through exercise rather than spectacles), not only led me to fully recovering my ageing eyesight but enhanced it beyond levels I can ever remember enjoying.

I have no commercial interest either, but this is a potential life changing issue so I thought it worth mentioning.
 

Tarkwin

Prince Of Dorkness
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
American Shoot
What is the significance of seeing the arrow tip or any other part of the arrow for that matter?
At this point in time I am putting myself through Hell in an attempt to learn to shoot with a clicker. I am having to concentrate on balancing the clicker blade just on the tip of the pile to minimise the amount of expansion i need to provide to get the thing to drop.


In the fullness of time I hope that I will be able to develop such that i will be able to get to that point without watching the last 1-2" of the draw to ensure I don't over or under draw. Sadly at this point I'm not in such a position because I keep packing up just before frustration and anger kicks in.

Simple question, long winded and rambling response.

Sorry.
 

iori jones

New member
As for the target, given that it is a large, brightly coloured and simple shape of concentric rings with an obvious centre, does it really need to be in sharp focus?
I agree with Taergalger, does it really need to be in sharp focus ? I, unfortunately, have astigmatism, advanced glaucoma, the beginnings of cataracts and macular degeneration and my ability to hit or not hit the gold has nothing to do with it. I do not wear glasses when shooting,(sunglasses if the sun is in the wrong position, when I can "white out",) because it is as Taergalger says "a large etc". I have had to paint the belly side of my sight white because, especially in low light conditions, i.e. indoors, there is a severe lack of contrast, but glasses, no thanks! I did try when I was originally diagnosed and my form got so screwed up that I gave up archery!
Cheers,
Iori Jones.
 

joelondon

Member
Fonz Awardee
What is the significance of seeing the arrow tip or any other part of the arrow for that matter?
This is not rhetorical.
It seems here to be taken for granted, an essential part of good shooting and I?m worried by that because I have been shooting now for about 18 months and have NEVER seen the tip of my arrow during a shot, in fact I never (at least consciously) see any part of the bow, sight or arrow in focus, I see the string ?blur? of course and understand the importance of that to ?line?, but that is all.
My focus from the moment that I present the bow is at all times on the target and I at no time alter my focal length to try and see any part of the bow in focus.
As for the target, given that it is a large, brightly coloured and simple shape of concentric rings with an obvious centre, does it really need to be in sharp focus?



I assumed that since it is referred to as a string ?blur?, one isn?t supposed to see anything in the foreground in focus?
Am I literally, missing something?

As to eyesight in general, there is of course one lens that can do everything, your eyes!
I am not being facetious.
In a different thread I recently referred to how my discovery of the work of Dr Bates (recovering good eyesight through exercise rather than spectacles), not only led me to fully recovering my ageing eyesight but enhanced it beyond levels I can ever remember enjoying.

I have no commercial interest either, but this is a potential life changing issue so I thought it worth mentioning.
I'm with you on the first part, and only slightly agreeing on the second!! Lol

I am currently in the middle of a training programme to improve my visual acuity, through training I hope to be able to "see clearer" the effect of arranging blur and the brains use of the information presented by the eye.

with regards to exercising your eyes to improve/maintain sight, this can only go so far, your muscles in your eyes have a certain capability which does deteriate, but importantly the lens in the eye has a gradual hardening process which over time loses flexabilty, thus accomidation.

with regards to many prescriptions the correction required is the phisical shape of the eye (too long/short cylindrical not spherical) which you will spend as much muscle power as you can to "correct" but will not necessarly get to 6/6 vision and in doing so will get eye strain and fatigue.

all the best

Joe
 
T

taergalger

Guest
I'm with you on the first part, and only slightly agreeing on the second!! Lol

I am currently in the middle of a training programme to improve my visual acuity, through training I hope to be able to "see clearer" the effect of arranging blur and the brains use of the information presented by the eye.

with regards to exercising your eyes to improve/maintain sight, this can only go so far, your muscles in your eyes have a certain capability which does deteriate, but importantly the lens in the eye has a gradual hardening process which over time loses flexabilty, thus accomidation.

with regards to many prescriptions the correction required is the phisical shape of the eye (too long/short cylindrical not spherical) which you will spend as much muscle power as you can to "correct" but will not necessarly get to 6/6 vision and in doing so will get eye strain and fatigue.

all the best

Joe
Hi joelondon, I would love to expand on Bates because he uses exactly what you have just said to demonstrate the ill effects of spectacles!
Unfortunately I would get kicked off the forum for boring everyone.
However, whilst Bates methods do include exercises to work the extrinsic muscles of the eyes, that is only a very small part of his methods.
His ?eye? training relies more on an understanding of how the BRAIN sees rather than the eye, so the lens of the eye and its extrinsic muscles are only one small part of the equation and many of his exercises are designed to improve the ?minds eye? as much as the eye itself.
Of course, he recognised that some people, through disease or hereditary malfunction, needed spectacle correction but on the basis of results from his exercises he estimated that 70% of people who use spectacles did so unnecessarily. (he believed that vast commercial interests would ensure that it stayed like this!)
He would argue that we quite rightly exercise and protect from harmful behaviour just about every other part of our anatomy, so why not the eyes.
By the way ?straining? to see is something his exercises go out of there way to avoid, that is one of the core elements of his methods, so for example, half the time you have your eyes closed! Or are sunbathing them!
I could not begin to test the fundamental basis of his theories, but I don?t need to, all I can tell you is that it worked, and spectacularly, for me.
Well worth reading, I found the following book excellent.
?Improve Your Eyesight ? A Guide to the Bates Method for Better Eyesight without Glasses?
By Jonathan Barnes
ISBN 0 285 63508 5
 

joelondon

Member
Fonz Awardee
sounds interesting I will ask around a few academics for info on this and try and get hold of a copy (as I mentioned I am undertaking a process of spectacle avoidance as I can't get on shooting in specs)

I will reserve judgement/comment until I know more, but statements like 70% of spectacle use is unnecessary and the implied commercial conspiracy theory do seem somewhat sensationlist. but hey it helps sell books!! and I guess 30% are happy with our efforts :duck:, and you could equate a lot of the unecessary usage purely on cosmetics/fashion, as we produce a large amount of spectacles for purely fashion needs.

interesting information i will research

cheers

Joe
 

ianh

New member
I canot shoot wering variofocals at all, discused the problem with the optitian best sugestion he had was use a pair of half reeding glases to see up close and look over them to shoot, workes for me.
 
Top