New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sunglass Lenses - Page 2

post #31 of 47

Thats just it, I have tried new sunglasses even have a few pair....none work as well...some are better than others, but nothing is quite like that visual you get in a pair of Vaurnets.  That being said, I only ski on goggles too.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ske-Bum View Post


There is no better sunglasses then Vaurnets?? Really??  Ok, while you were living in the '80s there was this thing going on called technology. Technology is to blame for vast advancements in sunglass lenses, leaving behind those great 80's Vaurnets, with their 70's technology. Have you tried the new sunglasses, they work and don't even turn everything yellow, like Vaurnets do. Leave the 80s, behind.

 

Personally, I ski in Scott googles, never in sunglasses, have two pairs with 2 different colors of lenses for each.  As for sunglasses, Maui Jim's, Smith, Oakley, Persol, everyone is making really nice glasses these days. 


 
post #32 of 47

I followed the link to the Opticus web site and thought this was an interesting quote from a company that specialized in eye care products for high altitude and mountain climbing activities. Having worn glasses for over 50 years I agree that there is nothing like glass for clarity but it's hard to get today. I've never had a broken lens - it may happen tomorrow but it hasn't yet. I agree that a blow that's strong enough to break a lens would probably do a lot of other eye damage without the lens.

Seems like all the top brands consider their particular version of polarizing to be a key marketing advantage. I'm sure it is particularly helpful on water but I find it annoying for everyday use because it conflicts with some instrumentation. I also know there is a debate about polarizations' benefits on snow. Maybe that's why some of the old glasses are still favored by many of us. My favorite everyday lens is the Ray-Ban G-15, yes it's glass, yes it's a 60 year old design and no it's not polarized. Never worn them skiing - I'm 100% goggles on the slopes.

 

"OPTICUS

This Filter Is Also Available In Polarized Or Non-Polarized Versions. Polarized Is Not Recommended Where Accurate Judgment Of Surfaces And Terrain Are Critical, But Is Ideal For More Leisurely Hiking And Other Outdoor Activities. "

post #33 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post


 


The LL Bean Glacer Glasses that got recalled were made by Bolle'  I remember that much.  That's why I bought them in the first place hahah.  Hope the guy was OK, but yep those glasses were pretty lightweight.  I could see ski pole top or bottom breaking any kind of glasses.


I received Bollé pro forms every year for probably a decade and I don't remember ever seeing a glass lens offered.  "Worth protecting, worth Bollé." was one of their slogans back then. 

post #34 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ske-Bum View Post


There is no better sunglasses then Vaurnets?? Really??  Ok, while you were living in the '80s there was this thing going on called technology. Technology is to blame for vast advancements in sunglass lenses, leaving behind those great 80's Vaurnets, with their 70's technology. Have you tried the new sunglasses, they work and don't even turn everything yellow, like Vaurnets do. Leave the 80s, behind.

 

Personally, I ski in Scott googles, never in sunglasses, have two pairs with 2 different colors of lenses for each.  As for sunglasses, Maui Jim's, Smith, Oakley, Persol, everyone is making really nice glasses these days. 


 

I've got two pair of Oakleys like this, the other pair is Bk/Gy

Oakley.jpg

 

They are fairly recent models, as are the 8 different pairs of RayBans.  The Oakleys are pretty good for driving, and OK for skiing.  But neither comes close to enhancing depth perception in flat light like old skool Vuarnets do.  There is something about the combination of amber lense with just the right shading and mirror combination at the top and bottom of the lenses.  You'll never know what you are missing.  But, I can guarantee you are missing it if you don't own some.

 

Goggles are better for precip and trees, but that's about it.  I've gone through top of the line Smiths, Scotts, and about four other brands over the past 20 years.  Glass is still the clearest and lowest distortion.  That's why all the best cameras and scientific instruments still use it.  And, Vuarnet made the best ski glass hands down.

 

REALLY!

 

 

Isn't Maui Jims just a knock off imitator of real sunglasses?
 

post #35 of 47

But neither comes close to enhancing depth perception in flat light like old skool Vuarnets do.  There is something about the combination of amber lense with just the right shading and mirror combination at the top and bottom of the lenses.  You'll never know what you are missing.  But, I can guarantee you are missing it if you don't own some.

 

 

Maybe for most but not for all. We are talking about eyeballs here. Some perceive differently than the next guy.

post #36 of 47

Cdirt, Those Oakleys are going to cut your cheek! Dontcha think a frame between that sharp lens edge and your face is a good idea? Hunh?

 

I dunno... I guess you aren't the kind of skier who face plants much anymore. Be safe! Haha :D

 

Ritchie, you even cut your face with goggles, you definitely don't need to ski in shades. Model's face is money. That would be like me risking my knee$ by skiing in fixed heel bindings.

 

 

Double gradient? Not sure what that does for depth perception. I was born with a  lazy eye. I read the 20/15 line with my good eye when I was young and could have read a couple lines further down if asked, but now both my eyes are weak.

 

I looked through Vaurnets back in the day when my one eye was good. I know what you guys are talking about concerning the clarity and lens quality overall. 

 

Love polaroid, but because of the special effects that are a cause of concern (they make some windsheids, road signs and various other stuff look cool). They will black out ATM screen and possibly I suppose instrument panels as mentioned in a recent post.I don't think polarizing effects can cause problems seeing snow surfaces as suggested.

post #37 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post



I've got two pair of Oakleys like this, the other pair is Bk/Gy

Oakley.jpg

 

They are fairly recent models, as are the 8 different pairs of RayBans.  The Oakleys are pretty good for driving, and OK for skiing.  But neither comes close to enhancing depth perception in flat light like old skool Vuarnets do.  There is something about the combination of amber lense with just the right shading and mirror combination at the top and bottom of the lenses.  You'll never know what you are missing.  But, I can guarantee you are missing it if you don't own some.

 

Goggles are better for precip and trees, but that's about it.  I've gone through top of the line Smiths, Scotts, and about four other brands over the past 20 years.  Glass is still the clearest and lowest distortion.  That's why all the best cameras and scientific instruments still use it.  And, Vuarnet made the best ski glass hands down.

 

REALLY!

 

 

Isn't Maui Jims just a knock off imitator of real sunglasses?
 

To each their own, it is a free country and you can do as you see fit. I ski a hell of a lot of days, living 15 minutes from the ski hill does that, and the new googles work very well for all light conditions. However it is a moot point because, I don't ski in sunglasses because I wear a helmet and that combo doesn't work very well. Secondly I agree glass is the best for lack of distortion, but I don't mountain bike in glass and sure as hell won't ski in glass, for one simple reason it shatters. Now before you say, oh that can never happen to me, is that something you are willing to bet your eye sight on? I get some of my sunglasses directly from a sunglasses rep and he flat says don't ski or mountain bike or do sports with possible high impacts in glasses with glass lenses.

 

Go out there and kill it in your Vaurnets, while rocking your K2 710s, I don't care. But sunglass technology has come a long way from the 70's when those were designed, plus I don't like see things in yellow.  Maui Jim's are nice shades, but again to each their own. 

 

 
 

post #38 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ske-Bum View Post

Go out there and kill it in your Vaurnets, while rocking your K2 710s, I don't care. But sunglass technology has come a long way from the 70's when those were designed, plus I don't like see things in yellow.  Maui Jim's are nice shades, but again to each their own. 


 


LOL, I don't still have the K2 710s, wish I did.  I did spend  some time on VOs last season ( but mostly PEs and CaBrawlers from the K2 side of the quiver). 

 

Even with goggles, you greatly increase risk to your eyes every time you head in to the trees, but that is acceptable risk right?  Even the most indestructible glasses lens is only as safe as the security of the attachment to the frames and how strong the hinges and arms are attached.. 
Those Oakleys have removable and interchangeable lenses.  I can put the Bk/Gy in the brown frames and vice versa.  A side hit could easily knock the arm off the front of the frame and send the corner of the frame in to my eye.

 

Phobia of glass on our face is unfounded in my opinion

Don-t-shoot-your-eye-out-a-christmas-story-3189191-800-600.jpg

post #39 of 47



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ske-Bum View Post


Go out there and kill it in your Vaurnets, while rocking your K2 710s, I don't care. But sunglass technology has come a long way from the 70's when those were designed, plus I don't like see things in yellow.  Maui Jim's are nice shades, but again to each their own. 

 

 
 


1950's not 1970's. The Skilynx lens was developed in 1957. Sunglass technology has not improved on it in the past 53 years.
 

post #40 of 47
Thread Starter 

I have face planted 100's of times in my old glass Vuarnet's and poly Oakley's and never broke a lense yet. But I have had 2 pairs of goggles that have shattered during face plants and I have the forhead scars to prove it. With the right impact anythig can break.

 

I wear goggles in bad or cold weather but prefer sunglasses whenever possible, and the must be an amber lense because no other color gives the depth perseption and clarity I demand. My favorite lenses are Vuarnet Skilynx and Oakley Gold Iridium.

post #41 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbtbakkes View Post

I have face planted 100's of times ..


You really need to be kinder to your face

post #42 of 47

I will say something about you Vaurnet guys, you are brand loyal there is no doubt about it. LOL. Yeah, in 53 years no one has improved on sunglass technology, yeah ok, whatever. Wear your vaunets in peace guys, guess what neon is back also. 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by goblue View Post



 


1950's not 1970's. The Skilynx lens was developed in 1957. Sunglass technology has not improved on it in the past 53 years.
 

post #43 of 47

I like glass and I like dark.  My next serious purchase will be Varnet.

post #44 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbtbakkes View Post

I have face planted 100's of times in my old glass Vuarnet's and poly Oakley's and never broke a lense yet. But I have had 2 pairs of goggles that have shattered during face plants and I have the forhead scars to prove it. With the right impact anythig can break.

 

I wear goggles in bad or cold weather but prefer sunglasses whenever possible, and the must be an amber lense because no other color gives the depth perseption and clarity I demand. My favorite lenses are Vuarnet Skilynx and Oakley Gold Iridium.


Funny you mention this, back when I was a kid in the 80's and was all into the BMX freestyle scene, Vaurnets were the eye wear to have and Van's were the footwear to have; Oakley was a BMX soft goods maker and made one pair of glasses that were designed to mimic the look of their BMX goggles, later they made some Wayfarer looking glasses that I think were called Frogskins, cheap stuff. But I digress I had many crashes wearing my Vaurnets on concrete no less, thankfully none resulted in broken glass.   Fast forward to 2003 or so, I am at Killington with the best ski googles Uvex made at the time, cost me $125, took a pole butt to the face, split the frame and cracked the polycarbonate "shatter proof" lens and cut me right in between the eyes, have a scar there as a souvenir, thank God thats all that happened.  

post #45 of 47
Thread Starter 

Yup! I have never broken a sunglass lense in my life. I have broken some frames though. The only lenses I have ever broken were "unbreakable" goggle lenses, weird huh!?

post #46 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie-Rich View Post
 ...Fast forward to 2003 or so, I am at Killington with the best ski googles Uvex made at the time, cost me $125, took a pole butt to the face, split the frame and cracked the polycarbonate "shatter proof" lens and cut me right in between the eyes, have a scar there as a souvenir, thank God thats all that happened.  


Thank God that you weren't wearing your Vaurnets, you may have damaged them!

post #47 of 47

What was it ZZ top said ( that would be ZEEEE ZEEE, not ZED ZED, one roles one dont!! ) ??

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion