Newly old man question - vision correction and cameras

[MFstooges]

Noob question : I now wear glasses to help with close sight. The far sight isn't so bad although not as good as before. My pictures from MF camera still come out OK focuswise but I notice the viewfinder numbers are blurry. If I wear my reading glasses would that mess up my distant focusing? Should I put '+' diopter correction on my camera? But how that will work with distant focusing?

 

[MattKing]

Thread title tweaked.
Because "old man question(s)" and the sub-forum name "Miscellaneous Equipment" makes one think of many, many, many non-photographic things ......

 

[mshchem]

Welcome to the wonderful world of freaking glasses. You'll figure it out.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Noob question : I now wear glasses to help with close sight. The far sight isn't so bad although not as good as before. My pictures from MF camera still come out OK focuswise but I notice the viewfinder numbers are blurry. If I wear my reading glasses would that mess up my distant focusing? Should I put '+' diopter correction on my camera? But how that will work with distant focusing?

wearing your prescription glasses is all you'd need to do. If that doesn't work, back to the optometrist!

 

[MFstooges]

wearing your prescription glasses is all you'd need to do. If that doesn't work, back to the optometrist!

So you're saying I should bring the camera to optometrist?

 

[Nitroplait]

So you're saying I should bring the camera to optometrist?

The optometrist will need to know your working distance to what you want to see and where it is located relative to your face/eye position to make the best lenses for your use-case.
If you can’t articulate that in words and gestures, then yes, bring the camera.
You only need to put diopters on your cameras if you don’t want to wear glasses while loooking through the finder, otherwise the glasses are your diopters.

 

[snusmumriken]

Sooner or later you will need glasses for slightly further distances, and eventually for distance too. My recommendation is to go for good quality (eg Zeiss) varifocals sooner rather than later. Wearing glasses all the time is a bore, but taking them on and off is worse.

 

[IMoL]

I wear contacts for distance and add reading glasses for real close up work. I specifically have the prescription in my right lens set to give the sharpest vision at approx 1 meter distance (which is the "effective distance" of many eye-level viewfinders) - this means that I can use my eye-level cameras without adding viewfinder corrective lenses or using my reading glasses.

 

[guangong]

I wear contacts for distance and add reading glasses for real close up work. I specifically have the prescription in my right lens set to give the sharpest vision at approx 1 meter distance (which is the "effective distance" of many eye-level viewfinders) - this means that I can use my eye-level cameras without adding viewfinder corrective lenses or using my reading glasses.

Yes! Contact lenses are the way to go. Eye can get close to finder window. The importance of picking a very skilled optometrist should be emphasized. As in all other professions, not all are equal. A qualified optometrist should also examine the eyes’ overall health. I wear two pairs of contact lenses piggybacked and have perfect vision with no need for spectacles. ( except for the microscopic texts on prescription containers).

 

[Donald Qualls]

two pairs of contact lenses piggybacked

Not really photography related, but how does that work? One prescription in one eye, and another in the other, or one set of lenses over the other?

 

[MFstooges]

I guess I'm really noob in this glasses issue. I couldn't understand how the lens for close sight will help me looking at numbers in VF without messing up lens focusing on distant object. Then I just tested wearing my reading glasses while looking into VF and all the numbers became clear and I can still focus into the distant without problem.
I may just get diopter piece in the future since I don't wear contacts.

 

[abruzzi]

I guess I'm really noob in this glasses issue. I couldn't understand how the lens for close sight will help me looking at numbers in VF without messing up lens focusing on distant object. Then I just tested wearing my reading glasses while looking into VF and all the numbers became clear and I can still focus into the distant without problem.
I may just get diopter piece in the future since I don't wear contacts.

when you look through a pentaprism, your eye is not focusing on the distant object, but rather the image on the ground glass, which is optically at approximately the same distance from your eye as the numbers and other indicators are. or are you using a rangefinder?

 

[Dan Fromm]

Sooner or later you will need glasses for slightly further distances, and eventually for distance too. My recommendation is to go for good quality (eg Zeiss) varifocals sooner rather than later. Wearing glasses all the time is a bore, but taking them on and off is worse.

Do you wear Zeiss varifocals? In the US we call them progressives. I tried progressives decades ago, hated them and went back to trifocals.

Progressives' power varies across the field. Variable magnification changes the shape, as seen, of objects. Circles become ovals. I found this intolerable.

So, if you have the Zeiss eyeglass lenses, do you see, say, circular coffeecups as ovals?

 

[wiltw]

When you view 'distance' with your normal vision, you are viewing at Infinity distance.
But when you view 'Infinity' on the SLR focus screen your eyes are really focused [somewhere between 30" away up to 1 meter] away!

Most camera viewfinders, depending upon brand, have eyepieces that place the focusing screen and any in-viewfinder text/symbols at a virtual distance of 30" to 1m. So young eyes can adjust themselves to see well both at Infinity and 8" away, while eyes older than 45 years typically can see well (with or without glasses) at Infinity yet cause difficulty for more folks 'at reading distance'...why drugstores so often sell reading glassess, as a very affordable way to give folks the ability to see more clearly at very close distances!

Bifocal lenses or trifocal lenses came about due to the desire to correct for BOTH distance and reading in a single lens.
Camera viewfinders with adjustable diopter viewfinders are a way to allow the photographer to see at distance, with the nake eye yet not have to don a pair or reading glasses to focus and set the camera using the in-viewfinder text/symbology.

 

[BrianShaw]

Do you wear Zeiss varifocals? In the US we call them progressives. I tried progressives decades ago, hated them and went back to trifocals.

Progressives' power varies across the field. Variable magnification changes the shape, as seen, of objects. Circles become ovals. I found this intolerable.

So, if you have the Zeiss eyeglass lenses, do you see, say, circular coffeecups as ovals?

I call that "geometry failure". It was really annoying initially but my brain seems to have (mostly) adapted. More than anything I notice the weird pattern and where the corection stops working. And that is after having discussion with the optician about alternative patterns and picking the one that seemed best for my visual tasks. But none were ideal. At first he wsa seeminly unwilling to talk pattern options but after I expressed minimal knowledge that they existed he complied. I'll likely go back to bifocals next time.

 

[snusmumriken]

Do you wear Zeiss varifocals? In the US we call them progressives. I tried progressives decades ago, hated them and went back to trifocals.

Progressives' power varies across the field. Variable magnification changes the shape, as seen, of objects. Circles become ovals. I found this intolerable.

So, if you have the Zeiss eyeglass lenses, do you see, say, circular coffeecups as ovals?

Yes, I do. Initially I found them annoying for carpentry (nothing looked straight), but either I’ve learned to rely on touch and a straight edge, or my brain has adjusted, because maybe 10 years on I just don’t notice any more. Still have to be a bit mindful going down stairs or under low branches, or doing DIY tasks upside down. My optician was happy to supply a prescription that gave me +3 diopters at the bottom edge for very close work like electronics. I don’t think I could get used to contact lenses at my age.

 

[MFstooges]

when you look through a pentaprism, your eye is not focusing on the distant object, but rather the image on the ground glass, which is optically at approximately the same distance from your eye as the numbers and other indicators are. or are you using a rangefinder?

SLR at the moment. Sadly the camera costs less than accessory diopter.

Do you wear Zeiss varifocals? In the US we call them progressives. I tried progressives decades ago, hated them and went back to trifocals.

Progressives' power varies across the field. Variable magnification changes the shape, as seen, of objects. Circles become ovals. I found this intolerable.

So, if you have the Zeiss eyeglass lenses, do you see, say, circular coffeecups as ovals?

I also don't like progressive. I tried once didn't like it and the opticians can't make one with my preferred distribution. So I use bifocals or just reading glass now.

 

[Tom Taylor]

In my mid-thirty's I discovered one day at a bus stop that I was near-sighted. So I went to an optometrists and got a prescription for distance glasses. Most of my cameras, 135 and MF, are equipped with diopters so I placed rubber eye-caps on the view finder to protect the lens from scratches. However there are no diopters on large format cameras so to focus off the ground glass I had to remove the distance glasses. Then in my 70's I developed cataracts and had cataract surgery for both eyes choosing the distance option with reading glasses. Now when focusing the view camera I have to place the reading glasses on to focus and take them off for distance – the direct opposite of what it was when I was near-sighted!

 

[ic-racer]

...autofocus...

 

[guangong]

Not really photography related, but how does that work? One prescription in one eye, and another in the other, or one set of lenses over the other?

One set of soft lenses smooths out irregularities of cornea; one set of hard lenses corrects vision.
What Is remarkable is that a thorough eye examination by a competent optometrist is the ability to detect other health problems such as high blood pressure, diabetes, etc., as well as condition of the retina, etc. What is interesting to a photographer is how many of the examination instruments are made by Nikon and Zeiss. Much more is involved than buying a pair of glasses.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Much more is involved than buying a pair of glasses.

Oh, yes, I've been getting diabetic eye exams for many years, and seeing a retina specialist for almost ten.

 

[snusmumriken]

One set of soft lenses smooths out irregularities of cornea; one set of hard lenses corrects vision.
What Is remarkable is that a thorough eye examination by a competent optometrist is the ability to detect other health problems such as high blood pressure, diabetes, etc., as well as condition of the retina, etc. What is interesting to a photographer is how many of the examination instruments are made by Nikon and Zeiss. Much more is involved than buying a pair of glasses.

My optometrist is also a photographer and Zeiss devotee. I told him I have Zeiss binoculars, but I don’t like to mention my M6.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes! Contact lenses are the way to go. Eye can get close to finder window. The importance of picking a very skilled optometrist should be emphasized. As in all other professions, not all are equal. A qualified optometrist should also examine the eyes’ overall health. I wear two pairs of contact lenses piggybacked and have perfect vision with no need for spectacles. ( except for the microscopic texts on prescription containers).

I agree. I used contact lenses until I needed cataracts removed, then the implants gave me 20/20 vision unaided for the first time since I was 12 years old.

 

[Donald Qualls]

cataracts removed, then the implants gave me 20/20 vision unaided for the first time since I was 12 years old.

I'll probably need cataract surgery within the next ten years, but I plan to ask them to leave my refraction as is -- I actually find my "microscopic vision" useful and I've been wearing glasses (or contacts, until I gave them up twenty years or so ago) for so long (second grade) I'd feel naked without them. Not to mention I don't have complete trust in Lasik, which is how they usually achieve the excellent vision after cataract surgery.

 

[snusmumriken]

I agree. I used contact lenses until I needed cataracts removed, then the implants gave me 20/20 vision unaided for the first time since I was 12 years old.

Does anyone here have experience of using contacts for the first time late in life (eg 60+)?