Why correct distance vision over close up?

[GoodbyeYellow]

OP, maybe it was my cataract thread you're referring to. After a miserable 8 months or so while my cataracts came into full bloom, I was cleared for surgery. Until then, I was planning for living later life with a white cane.

Anyways, I had my left eye done 4 days ago. While the right was done for distance, I (after a lot of dithering) chose "mini-monovision" for the left, which aims for middle distance, actually arms length.

The right eye (done 3.3 weeks ago) recently tested at 20/20 for distance, though it could supposedly improve with a -0.5 Rx in glasses. I can see pretty much everything I need to. I couldn't identify a gnat's gender at 50 ft, but I don't need to.

The left eye, being targeted for arms-length, was deliberately undercut for distance, for a -1.5Rx. I had great doubts going in, but was driven by this urge to not wear glasses at least 90% of the time. I was warned I'd give up some night vision (driving esp) acuity, and maybe some depth perception.

Four days is not enough to truly evaluate the result (my right eye improved every day for at least 2 weeks), but it is already pretty good. I can read subtitles on a tv screen about 8 ft away for instance, and a license plate about 40 ft away. But go much beyond and I will struggle WITH ONLY the left eye.

But combining both eyes gets very interesting. I can read a computer screen (literally arm's length) comfortably. I can see into the distance comfortably. I would not use either to place any bar bets however; there is a slight compromise. I can read a book/phone/tablet at around 12 inches with slight discomfort, so I put on the drugstore readers, but if I don't have them handy when I'm out and about, I'm not totally at sea. I can still read labels of goods on store shelves, even if smaller, but not the little stuff on say the back of a medicine bottle. [-]But I CAN tell which of two ladies in the store is prettier, which is very useful.[/-]

At 63, I've had glasses for over 50 years, and it is truly life changing. I would caveat my choice by saying you need to be comfortable with not seeing "great" at distance or very near. My philosophy in life skews with the 80/20 rule, and I find it is very well addressed with this choice, and perhaps even 90/10 as indicated above. I will probably get a pair of low-cost (eg Zenni) Rx glasses for long-distance/night driving, and keep the readers around.

One completely unplanned drawback happened today, when I was making my way through some hanging fronds of a dwarf palm in the backyard. While, in the past, I'd just walk through them, I found myself ducking, as the glasses weren't there to protect my eyes. No big deal I guess. OTOH, I stepped into the shower the other day, and saying oops, I reached up to remove my glasses. They weren't there.

Highly recommended if you can live with the compromises. Since I haven't yet experienced one thing in life that didn't have tradeoffs, I'm cool with that.

 

[zippy2020]

Was so nearsighted my driver's license listed me as 'blind w/o vision correction', LOL. Slowly developed cataracts and had surgery done, both eyes at once, at age 70.

Spouse had cataract surgery a year earlier and chose the 'close-in' single focus lens as he reads a lot and paints miniatures as his hobby. However, he advised me to get the 'middle distance' aka 'computer' single focus lens, saying he wished he had done that instead.

The difficulty is doctors can't guarantee exactly how much/how little vision improvement you're going to get. You WILL see improvement, but they cannot guarantee you'll be 20/20 with any single focus or multi-focus lens. It's just not possible.

One of the HMO's optometrists told me the ophthalmologists tend to gloss over that little detail, LOL. He said he had fitted four people post-cataract surgery with glasses in the last two months, that were unhappy because the surgery hadn't quite corrected their vision back to 20/20 (at whatever focus distance they chose).

Spouse has mid-distance and long-distance prescription lenses. He did try OTC magnifying lenses (for those very tiny print text, like medicine bottles!) but finally chose to get prescriptive magnifying glasses (we have vision care insurance so he waited until he was eligible for a new pair). For general reading he's fine without glasses.

My choosing the mid-distance lenses worked out very well. In strong clear light I can actually read most texts; otherwise I use OTC 2x magnifiers. I was surprised when I went to the DMV and they said with their charts I was 20/20 and didn't need long-distance glasses at all!

DMV charts must be way too easy, because altho I could drive in the daytime without long-distance prescriptive glasses, I would never be able to do so at dusk/dawn or at night!

Also, our state DMV vision tests each eye separately, so I didn't want to do the "one eye near/one eye far" that some folks chose to do. Even so, my left eye is somewhat better than my right eye after surgery.

HTH.

 

[Katsmeow]

Yeah I guess my post was not the most clear really. I wasn't really aiming to never wear/buy glasses or stumble around half blind.

I had been reading a cataract thread and didn't want to derail since I know nothing about lens types or prices or risks. I just had this vision (pun intended) of getting the wrong lens and being doomed for life to bad vision at all distances and thought given a choice it seems easier to correct longer distance (with glasses). I certainly don't like the computer glasses I have on right now . . .

On the doomed for life to bad vision, there are options. One is to get a Light Adjustable Lens. Another is to replace the cataract lens within a certain period of time if you truly hate the vision you got from the lens.

I had LASIK done 25 or so years ago. I had bad vision and was very near sighted. Everything from about 10' away was blurry. I had to wear glasses or contacts everywhere. The last straw was when I had a small child and I had trouble at the pool. Prescription goggles gave me a headache. Contacts would float out of the eyes. Wearing glasses in the pool meant I couldn't really put my head under water. No glasses meant my child was just a blob. That more than anything caused me to sign up for LASIK. I would never, never, never go back to that.

I have had cataract surgery. Due to prior LASIK surgery there were limitations on the lenses I could get. Also I had a vitrectomy for a macular pucker in my left eye which meant I needed a monofocal lens for that eye. I wanted as good vision as I could get at different ranges.

Right Eye - Vivity Extended Depth of Focus Lens. I can see 20/20 distance with that eye and have good vision to computer distance. For near, I can read something on my iPhone and can read most packages in the kitchen. I do need reading glasses for extended reading.

Left Eye - Light Adjustable Lens. This is a monofocal lens. However, you can adjust it up to about 3 times after surgery to fine tune the prescription. So if you don't like the result then do an adjustment to something better.

That eye was corrected to be very good at computer distance. My near vision with that eye is good but still need reading glasses for extended reading. This is monovision. My left eye does not have great distance vision but my right eye takes over in that situation and my combined distance vision normally tests at 20/20 or 20/25. If people can tolerate monovision it works well. Not everyone can tolerate it.

The comforting thing I was told before surgery that my vision was really off, they could actually go in and switch out lenses for up to 3 months after surgery. For my LAL, of course, I just relied on the adjustments (I adjusted it 3 times). For the Vivity lens, it came out perfectly. However, if it had not then I could have switched for a different lens. That is an undertaking many don't want to do but it is one that can be done for a period of time.