Spherical goggles worth the premium?

I am in the market for new goggles. My dog ate my old ones. No kidding. So I am reading all about the latest and greatest and most expensive. Seems that there is a considerable premium to be paid for spherical versions of goggles (eg: Smith i/o, Zeal SPPX). Is that premium, that can double the cost of a non-spherical, worth it?
Thanks
David

 Yes. Smith I/O over the Zeal. 

I have some zeal sphericals. Awesome goggles, well worth the price. The lenses started to peal when I was ina ice storm and was rubbing the ice off. Zeal replaced the lenses for free.

I know you like the Smiths. Have you tried the Zeal model with photochromatic lens?
Thanks,
David

Thanks for yours. Do you have the photochromatic version? If so, good stuff?

David

I'm definitely of the opinion that goggles are an area in which you should never skimp. All the equipment in the world is worthless if you can't see where you're going. That being said, I've never been a spherical devotee. Not saying they're not great goggles, but I don't find the spherical shape of the lens to be crucial. I had a pair of Oakley A- frames (the classic spherical) for a season. I liked them, but they got stolen. After that, I bought a pair of anon. Figments, which I have had ever since. The anon.s are not spherical, but the quality of the anon. optics has me sold. The original lens in my anon.s was a gold chrome lens. Having taken pretty good care of my goggles, I have the same lens 5 years later. I also have persimmon, rose, and yellow lenses for them. This offseason, I bought a second pair of figments, to cut down on lens changing.

Long story short, always buy good goggles. Spherical goggles are always going to be high quality, but you don't have to go spherical to get a top notch goggle.

Oh, and the reason my lenses are still unscratched after 5 years is I'm obsessive about proper care. I only use a goggle cloth or a skigee to wipe them off (never my gloves, bare hands, or god forbid tissues), I always take them right off my helmet, wipe them with the bag, air dry them, and put them right back in their bag. They never sit on top of my helmet when my helmet isn't on my head. Meanwhile, I see people 'saving' money on goggles by buying $30 Gordini's, which they trash and have to replace within a month. So by the end of the season, the 'thrifty' guys have spent well over $100 on goggles, which ends up equaling what I spent. But next season, my anon.s will come back out of their bag for another year, while they're back in the shop buying yet another pair of goggles.

I need new goggles and I'm gong to try sphericals this year. Every time I've looked at them in a shop they seem to be better than the conventional lens. My goggles are usually replaced due to an accident or the foam backing breaking down. I agree with 919, properly cared for lens will last a long time.

I have not tried the photochromic lenses. I have tried both the rose and yellow lenses. My friend has two pairs of zeals, he likes them so much. I only have one, and use a cheap pair of oakleys for night skiing. I agree wit the poster above, better optics in the higher end models. Plus zeal look sweet :-). I've used oakley, smith, and zeal before, and i like the zeal best... partially because it is less common.

Big, big fan of spherical lenses. 

In general, Smith is the best.  Phenoms are great and I/Os are pretty much the best goggles out there (except for MAYBE the POCs)  The Zeal photocromatics are interesting, but I'm not too keen on self-changing lenses.  I like it really bright, but that's just me.  

Oakley is ok, but tons of reports of horrible customer service makes me stay away.

I'm big on spending a little extra, but getting alot more.  You get what you pay for.  (unless you get it on tramdock/SAC)     

 I like the spherical.  Smith I/O is good, but drafty.  My google of choice is Oakley Crowbar, great shape, many lens choices, never fogged on me, and overall really solid.  Sometimes you just have to find the goggle that fits your face. 

It always confounds me when people post about how expensive high end goggles are. They are frequently available on tramdock.com for as much as seventy percent off retail; this is no secret either, as people post about it in virtually every thread about goggles. It's almost as if they like complaining about how much they spend on gear.

Spherical lenses are better, and they aren't prohibitively expensive if one is patient enough to check tramdock.com regularly. If you are smart enough to do so, keep it to yourself, it's getting annoying hearing about how expensive goggles are.

I use both Zeal photochromatic and Smith phenoms..  Zeal's for most everyday (awsome) except low light conditions and Phenoms w/sensor mirror in low light..  Both are very good..  To answer your question about spherical yes worth it, I have both Zeals one old non spherical one spherical and there is a difference in visibilty, (at least to me)...

For me, as for many here, it is less the expense than value for $, particularly when "faced" with so many goggle choices.
Thanks for the Tramdock tip.
David

I think the zeals are outstanding. But as noted above, goggles have to fit your face  before anything

Another vote for Smith I/O, I love mine.

Got some I/O last year. Didn't realize how much better they are until I got them. Great for stormy days since they breathe really well and never even come close to fogging.

Hey Freeski919,

  I bought a pair of Figments last year after the season.  Glad you think highly of them

I am very happy with the 2 pair I picked up, both for around 70% off- 1 in Breck Labor Day '08 (no shipping) and another at Tramdock.  Haven't been able to find any deals that good on replacement lenses, but at least I have two options...

I read that the new Zeal SPPX goggles perform better in low-light conditions than previously. Anyone able to confirm/deny this?

Im currently doubting between the I/O and an SPPX model, and I find I need more "goggle assistance" at low light than at high light situations.

ps: yes I know, kind of a necro bump.
edit: actually, going to make a new topic on this

Edited by Frederik - 12/13/09 at 3:31pm