lrm Loc: Sarasota, FL

Cataracts coming out. Must decide (1) two distance lens or (2) two near vision lens) or (3) Distance lens in left eye and near vision lens in right eye. Using camera with right eye. has anyone gone through this, and what advice do you have.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

What advise does your eye doctor have posing that question.?

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Here's a recent 10-page thread:
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-663648-1.html

And the outcome: https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-670867-1.html

.

RichardTaylor Loc: Sydney, Australia

. as per Linda's post.

Paul Diamond Loc: Atlanta, GA, USA

Years ago, I had someone suggest a near vision contact lens and a distance vision contact lens to correct my vision. I thought it was terrible. As a photographer, I need my distance vision to be crisp, sharp and contrasty always. And when doing close work, the close vision eye was working too hard and getting exhausted, doing the work of two eyes.

My wife, more recently had lasik done to one eye to give her better vision at distances. She was not happy. When she recently had to have 2 cataracts removed, she chose distance correction for both eyes. She is very happy and doesn't complain about wearing reading glasses for the computer or reading. - She also had a bit of astigmatism that was corrected in both eyes with the slightly more expensive lenses for astigmatism.

Suggest you have a complete eye exam to get the best vision possible at distances in both eyes. I had lasik over 20 years ago to correct for astigmatism and near sightedness. I have been very happy that I chose one of the best eye surgeons in metro ATL for my lasik and for my wife's catarcts. And I will use him when I need to replace my cataracts, in the future.

RichinSeattle

I had both eyes done several years ago and opted for "distance" as I wanted to continue playing tennis. (You need both eyes for sports.) I use my left eye (the better one) with the camera and need reading glasses only for close-up work (computers, reading, etc.).

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

Thanks, Linda. As you know that was me.

To the OP, please feel free to PM me. I'm kind of an open book on this right now.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

What do you look at the most? Things far away, or things close?
If 90+% of your viewing is distant, cheaters for close may work.
There's a diopter in the camera viewfinder, so that would just leave the controls.
If you get the near lenses, then you'd need correction for viewing vistas?
Your call.
(Looks like I'll be doing it (deciding) in the future...)

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

Click on the 2 links in Linda's response above. The first one is the topic I started in anticipation of my own cataract surgery. The second link is my thank-you to my fellow hogs, my choice of lenses, and the outcome.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

As a photographer I opted for two distance lenses. They are totally effective for anything from infinity down to normal TV viewing distance.

I am accustomed to using glasses for reading and computer work and that’s not a problem since they are sedentary activities.

User ID

Just completed both eyes and fully recovered with “normal” lens in my dominant eye and +2 diopters form my other eye. This a popular choice which I also “invented” on my own years ago for my regular glasses.

Another option is matched eyes, with quad-focus lenses for both eyes. That requires your brain’s perception and attention abilities to cause the best focused imagery to be what gets processed at any moment. This is terrific for many patients but is irreversible and so must be carefully ruled out for whomever it will be terrible.

It was verrrrry quickly determined that quad-focus lenses were absolutely NOT suitable for me. I am way too conscious of my own visual functionality and so I would never allow my “visual brain” to disregard the 3 out of 4 versions that are not in best focus. Quad-focus lenses are ONLY for patients whose mind deals only with the “reality” that they are looking at and have no consciousness of their own visual “mechanism” at work.

Photo thing: my surgeon thought the view through a camera eyepiece is basically at infinity focus. He was verrrrrry grateful to be corrected about that. Surgery is his expertise, photo hardware is not.

FYI (and now his ... ) images in SLRs, LVs, and RF viewfinders are placed at ~one meter distance by the eyepiece optics. Only an open frame VF with no optics shows your framing at actual subject distance. The GOOD news is that a normal focus replacement lens that provides full distance vision for the patient actually provides sharp focus from “arm’s reach” to the night sky stars ... even with your eye’s pupils fully open in dim light. So a normal (long distance) lens in your dominant eye will let you sharply see your VF image. My VFs now all have their diopter adjustments set to zero :-)

Be aware that the +2 diopters for the non dominant eye has limited DoF except in daylight. Indoors I need +2.5 diopter “over the counter” reading glasses. That puts one eye at “book/phone” focus and the other at “computer” focus. You can walk around while wearing such reading glasses but it’s disconcerting. You might prefer the “half lens” style where you just look over the reading lenses to walk around, even though that style makes you look much older ... LOL.

In addition to cataract removal and new lenses, I also had Lasic laser correction applied for my long time astigmatism. This was perfect. Instead of that, you can opt for replacement lenses that include this correction.

Either way, astigmatism correction is expensive and insurance companies declare it NOT a medical necessity cuz you can get eyeglasses to do that job, and wearing glasses all day is perfectly normal. IOW, not needing glasses for astigmatism is a luxury at $3,000 or more. (Skip that 50MP camera upgrade and you break even.)

I think I’ve touched on every aspect. I strongly suggest that you print this reply and get your surgeon to elaborate on everything that I’ve mentioned. Most important: Your choice is irreversible !!!

User ID

If you get “normal distance” lenses in both eyes, you will need reading glasses, but your viewfinder image will be sharp, by naked eye, with minimal or no correction dialed in on the camera eyepiece. The VF image is about one meter from your eye (optically speaking), and normal distance lenses are fully sharp from about 3/4 meter on out to the horizon and the stars.

I have only one eye set for distance (my dominant eye) and all my VF eyepieces are now set to zero diopters (both SLRs and LVs). My other eye is set for about 1/2 meter, and is barely close focused enough to read external camera dials in dim light. It’s pretty good for the playback monitor but I had to break the habit of pulling the monitor closer for a really close look. That just doesn’t work.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I won't tell you or even suggest to you what to do. If your ophthalmologist does, I'd suggest changing doctors again, regardless of his affiliations or recognitions, unless he can call out a really good medical reason for his counsel. I will tell you that I know of a number of people who opted for dual vision. Some liked it, most did not. The problem seemed to be that the correction matched their dominant eye for one of the cases (near or far), but not the other. So their brains were having to work overtime to straighten things out at least half the time. Either driving or reading required a lot of extra work.

As you decide, keep in mind that the vision that you have right after surgery may or may not be the vision that you will have 3, 5, or 10 years down the road. My vision was nearly perfect right after surgery (3 1/2 years ago), with lifelong astigmatism corrected as well. But over time, some of the astigmatism has returned in one eye, enough to need external correction. Other folks have reported similar experience in discussions. You my end up having to wear glasses anyway. And your state may require two good eyes for distant vision for your driver's license to meet their depth perception standards.

You don't say what your pre-surgery vision is like. If you are near-sighted and have the first eye corrected for distant vision, you will sort of be able to see how split correction might work for you. (Or if you are far-sighted and for some reason decide to go for near correction.)

pendennis

Without surgery, my astigmatism was at 4.50. When I had cataract surgery, I opted for a toric lens, and the upcharge was $2400, not too much cheaper than Lasik, but my vision is great now, and the colors are the most livid i can remember. I use a 1.5 diopter setting on my viewfinders, and focus using my left eye.

User ID

Although I don’t play tennis, in decent light conditions my depth perception is perfect with my dominant eye for distance and my other eye optimized for 1/2 meter (IOW +2 diopters).

In any daylight conditions I can flip back and forth by winking my eyes and the dom eye is terrific while the other eye seems equally sharp unless tested against reeeeally fine details. So, for activities requiring 3D vision and flawless merging of left and right images there’s simply no problem at all.

I wonder if duo vision patients with a complaint in that area have opted for an actual “book reading” correction in their “off” eye ? My off eye is not quite that closely focused at +2 diopters and its distance vision in good light is 95% as fine as my dom eye. I did discuss 2.5 or 2.75 for my off eye for a “book reading” eye without glasses. My surgeon was verrrrrry convincingly against anything beyond 2.00. So I wonder if the duo vision patients with complaints had opted for 2.5 or more, and were not warned away from it by their surgeon ?

Point is, your surgeon’s experience with various patients seems hugely important to the advice you’ll get. I insisted on the max he would comfortably agree to, being 2.00 max. He kept suggesting I go for only 1.5 and got really adamant about a 2.00 limit. 2.5 or more was, per his advice, too specialized to recommend ... great for naked eye book reading but at the expense of many other needs.