The biggest optical ripoff

Geoff45 (Geoff) · #1 09-12-2008, 12:14 PM

From time to time people in these forums point out what they regard as ripoffs by telescope shops. However, to my mind the biggest ripoffs are glasses. You can easily pay more for something with a flimsy, fall-apart metal frame with moulded plastic lenses of dubious optical quality than you can for a Televue Nagler, which has far more quality workmanship and much less of a mass market.
Opticians perpetuate the myth than glasses are especially made to an accurate prescription "just for you", when in fact that just pull a pair of plastic lenses of the shelf and fit them in some frames. The fact that you can go into a convenience store and buy a working pair of reading glasses after trying a few shows the real skill level involved.
Geoff

PS I have just had to get new glasses, hence the rave.

xelasnave · #2 09-12-2008, 12:25 PM

It is good that you have come here to vent your feelings.
Getting glasses can be somewhat stressful because of a variety of reasons.
But I must point out that all businesses professions trades etc have areas that we can see as a rip off and as such may be well described as such ...but now that you have them be very happy we live in an age where they are at our disposal... in time look for better value but what is the value of being able to see clearly the wonderful world before one.

I had a wonderful score when with the crazy lady in Brisbane..we stopped to clean up an industriela bin near her place kids had knocked over and there must have been about 100 pairs of glasses..all mag's, quality frames and sunnies galore... I have a range of glasses for every distance and sunnies for any mood or image.... so I am truely blessed yet again.

alex
alex

andrewk_82 (Andrew) · #3 09-12-2008, 12:42 PM

I also didn't like paying around $500 for new glasses that were probably lower in optical quality and workmanship than my GSO plossels.

That being said, I'm glad I can now see further than 10m in front of me and I can see stars better because it corrects my astigmatism.

bojan · #4 09-12-2008, 04:25 PM

What you see on my head are two pairs of plastic reading glasses.. $5 worth.
I never go to optician to be ripped off (only to check dioptry and general condition of my eyes every two years or so, on medicare of course.

Having said all that, I also have to add that I do not have astigmatism or short-sight-ness.. It would have been completely different story in that case..

Satchmo · #5 09-12-2008, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghsmith45

You can easily pay more for something with a flimsy, fall-apart metal frame with moulded plastic lenses of dubious optical quality .....The fact that you can go into a convenience store and buy a working pair of reading glasses after trying a few shows the real skill level involved.
Geoff

I've compared the views recently between a properly optically polished pair of lenses from the optometrist and a $5 cheapy from the Newsagent. The cheapies have such ripply surfaces you can see the roughness just by looking at a light at grazing incidence. The cheapies are not polished properly and the material quality is poor so the view is hazy and nowhere near the quality and optical contrast of properly polished CR39 lenses, aside form the eye strain issues of wearing glasses that are not correctly configured for your near -focus inter-pupilary distance.

Sure the cheapies will help you to read the newspaper for $5, but why would you compromise your vision for the sake of a few dollars. Fortunately for the makers of this optical rubbish, so many people think that they are `good enough' and continue to `self medicate' with pairs of cheap glasses instead of having proper eye care.

The fact is that the inside of your eye is the best window to so many medical conditions that threaten the rest of your well being as you age , including cancer, claucoma and high blood pressure just to name a few. Anyone over 50 should have a yearly eye examination, and give their eyes the best optical aid they can afford.

No I'm not an optometrist, but I saw a member of my family die due to ailmaents that would have been picked up with ergular eye examination.

acropolite (Phil) · #6 09-12-2008, 07:23 PM

Quote:

You can easily pay more for something with a flimsy, fall-apart metal frame with moulded plastic lenses of dubious optical quality than you can for a Televue Nagler, which has far more quality workmanship and much less of a mass market.

As Mark said the quality of the lenses supplied by an optician is superior to those of the typical reading glasses offered in $2.00 shops and chemists. Having a relative in the industry I can confirm that the mark ups on lenses could best be described as obscene, the mark up on frames doubly so.

Glenhuon (Bill) · #7 09-12-2008, 07:27 PM

Where are you getting your specs

I've never paid any more than 250 for mine and I've had to wear them for the last 20years. Its the frames that are the biggest rip off, not the lenses, they are only about 1/3 of the cost of the cheapest frames. The ones I'm using now have had the legs replaced about 3 times using those from the $5 magnifiers

and they are not those flimsy looking "fashion" frames at twice the price. My lenses need to be tailored to my eyes as there is a vast difference between the requirements for the left and right. Never had a bad pair. Shop around, you can save heaps as its quite a competetive industry.

Bill

GrahamL · #8 09-12-2008, 07:28 PM

I think my glasses cost around $ 320 or so all up .. I was lucky to turn the price tag on the most comfortable frames I tried and only find $200.

I do have a pair of cheapies but only use them for starting a nut on a bolt or looking for something I've dropped

bojan · #9 09-12-2008, 07:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satchmo

No I'm not an optometrist, but I saw a member of my family die due to ailmaents that would have been picked up with ergular eye examination.

Well, I do not have problems with cheapies at all. And I do not think I will die because of them :-)
I am not someone who do not understand optical issues (being one of "us" amateur astronomers :-), and working with optics part time)
Cheapies are good enough for me, has been for years now - I am 1.5 since mid '90ies (it happened quite suddenly, when I was 45, from 0 in no time). And yes, I am regularly loosing and breaking them.. and I do not think I would be more careful if wearing something worth $200 on my head :-)
Optometrist glasses are better quality, I agree, but it is ovekill IMO.
And $200 or more is definitely ripoff.. again, IMHO.
My daughter used to wear glasses, prescribed lenses (because she was -3.. no negative cheapies in Reject Shop) and one of her frames were identical to mine! ($5).
Go figure..

astroron (Ron) · #10 09-12-2008, 07:49 PM

I just replaced a Contact lens,$175:00. and they are only tiny bits of mainly water and plastic.
Ron

Ian Robinson · #11 10-12-2008, 01:02 AM

My wife and I are both over 50 and are now finding reading fine print in poor light hard , a magnifying glass is used for that.

We probably should both get our eye's tested (check for maccular degen and to see what we need by way of bifocals (for reading and fine work only). Never seem to get around to it.

Are prescription bifocals bulk billed to Medicare ?

Laser treatment is way outside our means and from what I read not suitable for us anyway.

BTW dental work is a total rip off too - I've spent over $2500 on my wife's teeth this year (not quite done yet - one more filling , one more extraction and an extension to a 2 tooth crown (was two front teeth - had it been me - I wouldn't have bothered , would have had the last of the old 30 year old cap and supporting pin extracted , the hole plugged (she broke it biting an apple ,so much for "an apple a day ....") and would have put up with a gap , women !!!!) ===> lots of $s , not insured , but still way cheaper than paying private health insurance premiums for ever.
One dentist charged us near $90 just to talk to him (can't have been more than 5 minutes), never even took Xrays or looked properly at her teeth - she had a tooth ache at the time too (no difference to him) and then told us he is only in Belmont on Thursdays !!! paid him , made my feelings known and ditched that dental surgery like a hot potato , found one in Hamilton who is good with dental cowards (my wife to a tee - me too).and said guaranteed PAINLESS (until he hits you with the bill) .... Too bad the old guy and his son on Hunter Street have both retired - they were superb and very nice (could even spread out the bill over a month or two if needed.

GrahamL · #12 10-12-2008, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Are prescription bifocals bulk billed to Medicare ?

I think they are billed the normal way to Ian Robinson.

Your doing well if over 50 and havn't had to get glasses yet... well I'm not an optomitrist but something sounds a little wrong about useing a magnifing glass ( long term) vision wise to read and get by .

Satchmo · #13 10-12-2008, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bojan

Well, I do not have problems with cheapies at all. And I do not think I will die because of them :-)

I did not say `cheapies will kill you'

My point was just that people who buy cheapies at the newsagent tend not to have there eyes tested as often, and an eye test includes an internal eye examination which can indeed show up sighns of things that will kill you or seriously effect your health and glaucoma is one of them..a result of the ever increasing and so often undiagnosed adult onset diabetes.

Wavytone · #14 10-12-2008, 10:23 AM

... and telescope lenses are mass produced by machine whereas prescription lenses are 1-offs.

Consider the alternatives: when your eyesight deteriorates - this I know from watching my mother who has been slowly losing hers:

(a) Being unable to read a computer screen or a book is bad enough:

- because you will also be unfit to drive, shopping becomes a problem (you pick up sardines with chilli instead of sardines in springwater) and your ability to clean the house effectively deteriorates to the extent you become dependent on other for all these things.

(b) the next step is being unable to see TV clearly, and it implies you will have to forgo may other forms of entertainment such as DVD's and going to movies, but a least you can still get dressed, find your way round the house and use the bathroom, although going outside for a walk becomes risky as you'll probably trip and fall, or get lost.

By this stage you're dependent on others for basically everything and need supervision a lot of the time.

(c) being only able to tell if its day or night, and not much more.

Sure, if you're a young healthy non-smoking tetotaller, at low risk of diabetes, glaucoma, macular degeneration and a bunch of other things and you know all you need is reading glasses - sure, go to any chemist and pick a $5 pair off a rack made from cheap off-the-shelf molded glass blanks.

All they correct for is short or long-sightedness, and the loss of your ability to focus once you reach 40-something.

A number of more serious optical defects including spherical aberrration, astigmatism, a squint being cross-eyed require prescription glasses made to suit your eye. These are not off-the-shelf moulded lenses, they have to be ground and polished, then hardened and anti-reflection coated. And because of the need to centre the lens over the location of your pupil, the blank used is quite a bit larger than your frame.

If you go to an industrial optician to have a single lens ground and polished, say 75mm diameter including an amount of astigmatism and varying power (lets say it was for a pair of multifocals) then anti reflection coated, you would be in a for a REAL shock if this was made the way we make telescope optics.

And bear in mind its a one-off specially for your eyes, its not possible to mass produce a whole bunch of them.

As for paying a professional for a proper consultation - if you are a bit older there are real risks your eyesight will deteriorate in old age - starting with macular degeneration and glaucoma.

Paying someone to detect these early and give proper treatment than lose your eyesight is appropriate with respect to the risks.

xelasnave · #15 10-12-2008, 10:42 AM

Just a tip if you get caught without glasses and you want some focus..get a business card or similar and put in some pin holes and look at whatever thru those holes..may get you by.
alex

Geoff45 (Geoff) · #16 10-12-2008, 01:43 PM

People seem to have lost sight of the original post. The question is "When we buy specs, is the price we pay reasonable?" Sure eye health is important and el cheapo specs are not the same quality as optometrists specs, but it seems to me that the spectacle makers are using the argument that "people will pay through the nose to safeguard their health, so let's slug them."
Geoff

DJDD · #17 10-12-2008, 01:48 PM

it seems the costs we pay for glasses is mainly in the frames,e specially the name brands.

Ian Robinson · #18 10-12-2008, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightstalker

I think they are billed the normal way to Ian Robinson.

Your doing well if over 50 and havn't had to get glasses yet... well I'm not an optomitrist but something sounds a little wrong about useing a magnifing glass ( long term) vision wise to read and get by .

That's what I suspected : BUMMER !!!

TrevorW · #19 10-12-2008, 05:21 PM

The lens are not a rip offs exept when you want high index lens or photgreys etc standard prescription lenses are $80 a pair, the rip off is the frames $150 up to $500 for designer frames that have about $2 worth of material in them that is the rip off.

avandonk · #20 10-12-2008, 06:10 PM

As soon as I needed glasses for reading when all I did in my youth came back to haunt me I went to a very good Optometrist who not only checks your eye health but can advise you on the best glasses that suit you. I actually got two sets of glasses one for reading and the other for viewing a computer screen at a far greater distance than reading distance.

He at first said it can't be done. I assured it him it could. He worked it out and now lots of his customers have the same needs and they are easily met. He thanked me for bringing the problem to his attention. He now offers this as a service!

Both sets worked very well for what they were intended. It is the Titanium frames that come at a premium. Titanium frames are far better.

I would not be a bit surprised if the Optometrist does not get the lions share of the 'profits'.

We all have to eat!

Bert