A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Nikon > Nikon Lenses and Optics > Nikon eyeglass lenses...

Nikon eyeglass lenses question

Mark L. Cooper -- Junction City, Ohio , Feb 03, 2009; 06:04 p.m.

A while back I saw a post from someone, not necessarily in this forum, that mentioned good quality eyeglass lenses making a difference in their vision. I went to make an appointment with the local eye doctor and asked about high quality lenses and they produced a brochure from Nikon regarding their eyeglass lens line.

Has anyone gotten Nikon lenses for their glasses? Is it worth the extra money?

Thanks in advance,


    1   |   2     Next    Last

John Mitchell , Feb 03, 2009; 06:53 p.m.

I wear such glasses.
For the extra features I wanted (thinning, anti-reflections, etc.), the premium was only 10 bucks extra so I just HAD to have the bragging rights of wearing Nikon glasses :)
I have worn glasses for 15 years and really can't tell the difference between these and my previous pairs. If you want my opinion, I suggest you buy the cheapest option that suits your needs! Prescription glasses are overpriced for what they really are anyway...

Alan Huett , Feb 03, 2009; 08:19 p.m.

If the money is as little as 10 bucks, then it is worth it if you wear glasses a lot, IMHO. If you use them occasionally, then probably not. But this is up to you. Some lenses are noticeably thinner and lighter than others depending upon prescription and materials - you might be able to get much lighter glasses with a more expensive lens. Also some frames require polycarbonate lenses, since they bolt directly onto/through the lens, rather than wrapping the lens with a wire/plastic rim. So again, you tend to have more choices of low-profile frames with expensive lenses.
I wear my glasses all day, every day, so comfort and "gettting it right" are important to me. However, my prescription is not too bad (I am short-sighted, so my lenses are thinner in the middle anyway) so I have never gone above anti-reflective (and sometimes photochromatic). I notice the weight of a new frame for the first few days of wear, and then forget all about it. I wouldn't spend an extra hundred dollars on fancy lenses. However, if they fitted directly to my camera I'd probably splurge on anything if it had a new acronym. ;-)

John Crowe , Feb 03, 2009; 08:19 p.m.

It is horrifying how expensive prescription glasses have become since insurance companies, in Canada at least, got involved about 20 years ago. At least that is what I blame it on. From the late 70's to the late 80's I paid $70 for each pair of glasses. Then in the early 90's the same glasses were $250 and they had climbed to $600 by the millenium.

I know my glasses three pairs ago were Nikon and I think these still are. Not that I selected them, just what my local dealer uses. I remember the first time I got them I was told the coatings would not rub off like my previous non-Nikon lenses, well after three years just as much coating had worn off.

My last two pairs of glasses have been replaced under warranty for paint flaking off the frames, so how well these lenses hold up is still in question. In the old days I would not have cared but now that my glasses cost $900 I am more particular about the condition of the frames. Generally I wear glasses until they will no longer stay on my face, about 5 years.

Mark L. Cooper -- Junction City, Ohio , Feb 03, 2009; 08:42 p.m.

I gave the Nikon brochure a quick glance. The main thrust via an illustration, is these particular lenses are 'wider angle' than standard lenses. Now I wish I had gotten a copy of the brochure.

I've worn my current pair of glasses for probably 15 years. They've been sat on so many times that instead of being 90 degrees straight up and down, they're closer to 60 degrees. I do need full time glasses.


Christiaan Phleger - Honolulu , Feb 03, 2009; 10:01 p.m.

I wear and have worn for at least 10 years Zeiss glass lenses, with the Super ET coating, like the T* coatings. Finest, sharpest glasses I've ever worn, and I'll never wear anything else. I have a set with the Umbral coating as sunglasses, and one daily set with Punktal and a special set with Tital. Check the German Zeiss website. Glass is not available in the US, only poly.

Eric Arnold , Feb 03, 2009; 10:05 p.m.

just make sure you get the VRX2 (Virtual Reality/Vibration Reduction) ones with ED (Extra Density) glass. the DX series gives you 1.5x magnification and costs less, while the FX series allows you to see in extreme low light (25,600 ISO equiv.) -- and forces you to upgrade your wardrobe.

Jack Borlongan , Feb 03, 2009; 11:26 p.m.

I can imagine how much they would charge for a pair of Nikon eyeglasses with a circular polarizer :)

Mark L. Cooper -- Junction City, Ohio , Feb 03, 2009; 11:27 p.m.

Jan-Michel - I've been wearing glasses for about 43 years now. The premium on the Nikons will be about $200. I'm going to get them this time to see how they work for me. The store is actually the vision center in the local Super Wal-Mart. I do think they'll look nice while using my D300. I also have a Nikon Laser Rangefinder I use for hunting and it works like a champ. No Nikon rifle scopes yet.

Alan - my current glasses are progressive (variable correction) + transitions (variable tint). I'm near-sighted so I pretty much have to wear them all day.

Christiaan - do you seem to get any longer life from your lenses before they start picking up scratches?

John - I agree the prices seem awfully high these days. Todays glasses do a lot more stuff than did my first pair in the 5th grade.

I asked the person at the store if getting the titanium frames will allow me to sit on the glasses without bending or breaking anything. Their response was less than helpful<g>.

Eric - These new VRX2 units will be mounted on an ED Bone housing. The housing allows for stong whacks to the head, but slows down the transfer of new data to the processor. Throughput does seem to be slowing down every year.


John Mitchell , Feb 04, 2009; 12:50 a.m.

The premium on the Nikons will be about $200

200 bucks, wow! I recall that the difference between the plain glass and the nikon glass was quite big. However, after adding all the extras to the the "regular" glass (thinning, the scratch resist treatment, easier smudge removal and the anti-reflection), the difference came down to 10$.

Since you're making the jump, please let me know what you think of them!
Maybe I don't see the difference because I only use a D40 :p

    1   |   2     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses