[dbagwell]

I've read and/or heard several times now that you want a fuzzy target and clear focus on the sights, especially the front sight. I'm nearsighted and I'm curious if other shooters with a similar condition have found it better or worse to shoot with or without prescription lenses or contacts. It seems to me that a prescription could be optimized for shooters, but I'm not sure.

[Filishooter]

I'm slightly nearsighted also. my shooting eye correction is 1.75 and my other eye is 1.25. What I do is use the weaker lens in my shooting eye and the stronger one in the non-dominant eye. Its different for everyone though.

[Hi-Power Jack]

For $99 at Sears, I worked with an optician who
gave me a compromise - clear front sight, and
fairly clear out to about 15 feet - little fuzzy at
very near distance, and beyond 15 feet, but
that's what I shoot with now and it really helps.

I can't see the bullet holes past 6 yards or so (9mm)
but the sights look good, and I can see the target
fairly well.

Jack

[GlockerJeff]

On the advise of my gun dealer and my eye doctor, I went to Wal Mart and bought a pair of reading glasses off of the shelf for about five bucks that allows me tosee the front site. I now have two pair, one that gives me a crisp view of the site and not so great distance, for IDPA, and a pair that gives me a very slight out of focus of the front dot and a little better view of the distant target for GSSF and action pistol. Works good for me. I picked glasses by taking an ink pen to the store and holding the top part of the pen out at a distance where my front site would be.

This post has been edited by GlockerJeff: 15 December 2008 - 11:56 AM

[herky]

I have struggled with this for more years than I can recall. Until early this year, I shot fuzzy front sight and clear target, as I can see the front sight in focus without my prescription I changed to clear sight and fuzzy target. Some of the time it was OK, but when the brown targets are on a brown background (sand/gravel) I was out of luck beyond 10 yards. A friend uses "mono vision", strong eye prescription for front sight and weak eye for distance, works for him but not for me. If my open gun runs this year, I will switch to that division, if not, will go back to fuzzy front sight so I can see the target and scoresheet without changing glasses on a regular basis.

[pjb45]

I actually change contacts when I shoot. I want a pretty crisp front sight and the targets are a tad bit fuzzy. If the targets are out past 20 yards they are pretty fuzzy. I do not suffer from accuracy issues on far targets.

[Duane Thomas]

When I went to an optician for my latest prescription update, I was lucky enough to find one who was gun friendly and a shooter himself. Over the phone when I was setting up the appointment, I told him, "I'm a competition shooter, can I bring my unloaded gun into your office with me, so you can set up the focal lengh on my glasses for the distance from my eye to the front sight?" He said, "Sure, no problem," so that's what I did.

[whatmeworry]

Duane,
I asked my former optomitrist about bringing my gun in for the same reason. I thought the guy was going into cardiac failure on the spot as he said NOT ONLY NO BUT HELL NO! So I found another gentleman in Albuquerque who was also an NRA board member. Calling ahead I was told that there would be no problem as he knew what I was trying to accomplish. Yeah right! I carried in my cased Limited gun and showed him that there was no mag in it and that the chamber was empty. Right then one of his new interns walked into the exam room. Her eyes got as big as pie plates and she started trembling. The doc calmed her down and explained what we were doing. We finished the exam and I had to laugh on my way out the door. I went back a year later for another eye exam. The doc asked me to step into the hallway and take a sight picture on a clock at the end of the hall which happened to be hanging in the waiting room. As I was doing so one of the docs older patients, a woman, turned the corner and came face to face with me and my Limited gun. She turned white and started to scream. The doc got her calmed down and again explained what was going on. I still don't think she bought his explanation. I'm due for my yearly exam soon, he might insist on an after hours visit.
CYa,
Pat

[pjb45]

Hey Pat,
Dr Doll at Costco is very gun friendly.
paul

[XRe]

If, when corrected, you can see properly at all distances, you are probably best off using your eyes as nature intended them. Focusing on the front sight will naturally cause you to see a blurry target - there's no reason to "manufacture" that sight picture with a corrective lens. The problem that people run into - and why you see folks messing with monovision prescriptions and the like - is that they need corrections for both myopia and presbyopia (ie, near sightedness, and age induced loss of clear vision on near objects - aka, they're screwed either way). They either have to figure out how to shoot in bi-focals, or work with a prescription that accomodates both conditions (usually, sharp for near objects - the front sight - in the dominant eye, and sharp for distant objects in the weak eye).

I'm nearsighted - -2.00 diopters in each eye - and do just fine shooting irons with contacts in to correct that condition. I can see clearly at all distances. That said, soft lenses really aren't that great for crisp vision. I see better in my glasses. RGPs are wicked sharp - but uncomfortable for me for longer than about 6 hours at a time. Silicone Hydrogels work a little better than standard lenses, but... Shooting in glasses, I'd use a normal correction for my myopia.

My end solution will be implemented in January - having LASIK done. I'll let you know how that works out

[dbagwell]

XRe, on Dec 23 2008, 09:53 AM, said:

If, when corrected, you can see properly at all distances, you are probably best off using your eyes as nature intended them. Focusing on the front sight will naturally cause you to see a blurry target - there's no reason to "manufacture" that sight picture with a corrective lens. The problem that people run into - and why you see folks messing with monovision prescriptions and the like - is that they need corrections for both myopia and presbyopia (ie, near sightedness, and age induced loss of clear vision on near objects - aka, they're screwed either way). They either have to figure out how to shoot in bi-focals, or work with a prescription that accomodates both conditions (usually, sharp for near objects - the front sight - in the dominant eye, and sharp for distant objects in the weak eye).

I'm nearsighted - -2.00 diopters in each eye - and do just fine shooting irons with contacts in to correct that condition. I can see clearly at all distances. That said, soft lenses really aren't that great for crisp vision. I see better in my glasses. RGPs are wicked sharp - but uncomfortable for me for longer than about 6 hours at a time. Silicone Hydrogels work a little better than standard lenses, but... Shooting in glasses, I'd use a normal correction for my myopia.

My end solution will be implemented in January - having LASIK done. I'll let you know how that works out

Good Luck with your LASIK procedure. I'd like to hear how that works out.

[Duane Thomas]

Quote

I asked my former optomitrist about bringing my gun in for the same reason. I thought the guy was going into cardiac failure on the spot as he said NOT ONLY NO BUT HELL NO!

There are just way too many wimps in the world.

Quote

Right then one of his new interns walked into the exam room. Her eyes got as big as pie plates and she started trembling....I went back a year later for another eye exam....She turned white and started to scream.

It's amazing the doc keeps letting you come back, year after year.

[Gary Faulkner]

XRe, on Dec 23 2008, 12:53 PM, said:

My end solution will be implemented in January - having LASIK done. I'll let you know how that works out

It's my understanding that Lasik will not work for nearsightedness. So what's the scoop? Would be nice to have another option.

TIA

[XRe]

Gary Faulkner, on Dec 31 2008, 09:41 PM, said:

It's my understanding that Lasik will not work for nearsightedness. So what's the scoop? Would be nice to have another option.

Gary, your understanding is 5000% wrong Are you sure you're not thinking of farsightedness (or, more properly, Hyperopia)? In certain cases, LASIK works there, too, but its not as common, apparently. LASIK will not correct presbyopia, either. However, its quite common to correct even extremely bad myopia (aka, nearsightedness).

[redmanfixit]

Hey Everybody!!! Don't ignore the potential of a properly fitted progressive add lens!! (No line Bi-focal) And also, remember the simple fact of physical optics, if you try to shoot in darkly tinted lenses as a "more experienced" (read old person) the aperture effect will mess with with you more than a younger shooter that still has strong accommodation reflex. A clear or light brown lens will give you radiation protection, sharper vision and impact resistance (soda lime glass is UV opaque and, chemically tempered is highly impact resistant, polycarbonate and CR-39 both have UV absorbers in them to protect the molecules of the material from photo-degradation) as well as allowing you to have much greater depth of field because of your pupil being constricted. At arms length, the sights end up being in the "Intermediate" range of a progressive lens. Small head adjustments will allow the sights to be in sharp focus. The money you spend on "Flap & Zap" might be better spent on good shooting glasses. (NO permanent side effects, for one thing. If they don't work the way you want, take em' off!!) You MUST have eye protection anyway! Your greatest difficulty here will be to find a competent Optician. Here in the future, they are as hard to find as a really good Gunsmith, actually harder.

"We" (shooters) spend a TON of money on ever cooler gizmos, spiff finishes, doo dads and thingamagigs for our guns. If you can't see you can't shoot well. The equipment for good vision needs to be collected and assembled with as much care as you would spend setting up a gun for competition.

What you saw as far as reactions from other patients in the Doc's office gets into some of the general problems we have in our civilization, at a fundamental level. We are collectively kept in a constant state of fear, simply because fearful, anxious and neurotic people are easy to manipulate and squeeze money out of. This is an inevitable iteration of the character of those aspects of human nature observed in the "Peter Principle". There are only 3 kinds of people in the world, (yah I know another generalization, stick with me here) Sheep, Wolves, and Sheep Dogs. Shooters as a group tend to be more of the Sheep Dog type. (This metaphor is a reference to a speech given at West Point, to a graduating class, if you haven't seen it I'll post it.) The sheep in the Doc's office displayed a natural reaction to seeing what she thought was a Wolf. Ignorance is the basic coin of domination, fear is the whip. Encourage people to banish ignorance & fear, it is a wonderful gift.

ALL human relationships are about power and control.

[Filishooter]

I was considering Lasik and my doctor TALKED ME OUT OF IT after I told him what I was wanting to achieve, my age (41) and my current condition (mild myopia less than -2.0).

Presbyopia, a lack of ability to focus up close (a natural occurrence that strikes us all in our early to mid forties) is offset by being nearsighted!!!

So if I were to correct my current Myopic condition with Lasik, I wouldn't need corrective lenses for distance anymore and things will look great for a while, but as Presbyopia sets in, I would start needing correction for seeing up close since I would no longer be near-sighted! If I got Lasik I'd basically be trading my distance (driving) glasses for reading glasses (which I don't need to see up close right now). Screw that. As it is right now being mildly nearsighted, my front sight is pretty clear without any correction. The rear sight is just slightly crisper so I use the lower than prescription power contact to get the front sight in perfect focus.


I did some research and this article probably best describes what the doc was telling me.

How the Nearsighted Eye Handles Presbyopia
http://dailywellness...presbyopia.html

"If you are nearsighted and approaching presbyopia, have no worries. You are in a better position than probably anybody else out there. If it was possible to prepare yourself for presbyopia, being nearsighted might be the best way to go."


XRe - I hope your procedure works out for you, but after my consultation and doing my own research and considering my current condition and age, I decided I was better off leaving my eyes alone for now.


To the OP:

Nearsightedness is different for everyone. Ideally, shooting and being nearsighted, you would be able to see the front sight perfectly without correction. My vision is almost there but not perfect. I can see perfectly inches from my eye to about arms-length without correction and the front sight is just outside that window. It is still fairly sharp and I could make it work but its even sharper with a low power correction. Full prescribed correction needed for my distance viewing was more than what was needed to see the front sight. (I noticed my near vision is better without my contacts on than with). With some experimentation, a very mild correction worked great to extend my vision to my front sight WITHOUT disturbing my non-corrected close vision. I still use my prescribed distance correction in my non-dominant eye because THAT is the eye that is used to find the target.

As I mentioned its different for everyone and what works for me might not for you, but it couldn't hurt trying less correction in your shooting eye. It took me a while to figure this out...I used to think MORE correction was better when it was actually the opposite.



Andy

This post has been edited by Filishooter: 16 January 2009 - 03:12 PM

[Chris]

I'm near sighted as well and wear contacts daily (-1.50) except when I shoot. I only wear a contact in my left eye (left eye dominant). That gives me perfect focus on my sights (front and rear) of my pistol and target. I do the same for my rifle and shotgun. For the rifle, I just adjust the eyepiece until the reticle is in focus and the shotgun acts the same as the pistol.

Best of both worlds. I'm able to see my sights and target clearly and call my shots on paper as well.

You will get used to wearing one lens pretty quickly. Try it out.

[XRe]

Filishooter, on Jan 16 2009, 03:08 PM, said:

XRe - I hope your procedure works out for you, but after my consultation and doing my own research and considering my current condition and age, I decided I was better off leaving my eyes alone for now.

Andy, I appreciate what you're saying. I did quite a lot of research into this before jumping off, and I'm aware of the slight benefit a myopic person has w/ presbyopia. I'm at -2.00 in both eyes, for reference. In the end, what it came down to is trading off needing reading glasses 5 years earlier than I would've otherwise for a 100% guarantee of ending up in bifocals. There's a chance that, as presbyopia sets in, my myopia may slightly improve, but I'll always require correction of that condition.

A surgery of this sort should not be taken lightly, and everyone's choice may vary for their conditions, etc. The docs will generally talk you out of this procedure if they don't think you're a good fit - sounds like yours thinks that's the case (maybe he's thinking you won't require bifocals, or that with such a mild prescription, you may be difficult to not over correct, for instance)...

[lmccrock]

-2.00? I wish. I am -7.25. And with presbyopia, I could use trifocals (reading, computer, and distance), but I use bifocals then just push them down my nose a little to refocus for the computer.

Judging by the ads, there are lens replacement procedures as an alternative to Lasik. Crystalens, ReZoom, ReStor. These are more extreme.

In my last match, I noticed the front sight is not quite in focus. One option is to have a custom lens ground with the front-sight-distance correction optically centered in line with the front sight (i.e., take gun to optician). Oh, well, there are clip-on computer glasses that give a +1.00 or whatever. Maybe get one of those and break off the left lens. Or, a substantial investment in Open hardware.

Lee

[dbagwell]

Chris, on Jan 17 2009, 12:02 AM, said:

I only wear a contact in my left eye (left eye dominant). That gives me perfect focus on my sights (front and rear) of my pistol and target.

You will get used to wearing one lens pretty quickly. Try it out.

I lost a contact while deer hunting a couple years back. My vision was all messed up! I couldn't focus on anything...pretty much screwed up my afternoon hunt that day. Maybe with more time it would be different...I think there's actually a surgical procedure that does just that i.e. one stronger, one weaker and your brain adjusts. My vision isn't that bad anyway...I guess I thought there would be some magic recipe, but it sounds like there are many schools of thought on this topic.

This post has been edited by dbagwell: 17 January 2009 - 10:24 AM

[eerw]

I talked it over with my doc..who his a hunter and shooter..
so we ended running two different prescriptions for my contacts..when i shoot I have my dominant eye set for a nearer focus distance. my front sight..my non-dominant eye is set for distance. it works really well..the brain puts it all together perfectly..

over time..I just ended up running my normal vision this way..and it works great.

[Filishooter]

XRe, on Jan 17 2009, 05:19 AM, said:

Filishooter, on Jan 16 2009, 03:08 PM, said:

XRe - I hope your procedure works out for you, but after my consultation and doing my own research and considering my current condition and age, I decided I was better off leaving my eyes alone for now.

A surgery of this sort should not be taken lightly, and everyone's choice may vary for their conditions, etc. The docs will generally talk you out of this procedure if they don't think you're a good fit - sounds like yours thinks that's the case (maybe he's thinking you won't require bifocals, or that with such a mild prescription, you may be difficult to not over correct, for instance)...

+1...every case is different, and I didn't mean to say that Lasik is no good for a nearsighted person. I REALLY wanted to do it myself and was disappointed when the doctor suggested not to do Lasik. I may get a second opinion. I know alot of people that have had Lasik and speak very highly of it. None of these people were shooters however. But I think you are right, I'm most likely not going to need bifocals and my myopia isn't that bad, and he did mention that the presobia may even correct the slight myopia that I do have. So right now its wait and see.

[shrek1974]

I have some recent experience with LASIK and all I can say is that it is the best money I have ever spent. It has helped me in my work (law enforcement), and my shooting, and it has truly improved my quality of life.

I had astygmatism in both eyes and was slightly near sighted in my right eye, which is also my dominant eye. I wore glasses for short time, but after after having them fall off on a couple of occasions at work I decided contact lenses were the way to go. Contacts worked ok, but I had two major problems with them. For me 8 to 10 hours was about as long as I could wear them comfortably. The second problem was when I was shooting a stage they would shift around a bit on my eyes which would cause my vision to not be as sharp.....I am certain that during the time I wore contacts when shooting matches I dropped many points due to the lack of visual clarity.

So about two and a half years ago I asked my eye doctor if I was a good candidate for LASIK. He told me to give it a year or two to make sure my vision stabilized. I waited two years and and when my persciption had not changed I asked him again and he gave me the same answer. In the meantime, people I knew who had worse vision than I did got LASIK and had fantastic results. I decided to get second and third opinions from eye doctors who wouldn't gain me as a patient or lose me as a patient if I got LASIK or not. They both told me I would likely be a good candidate and I should get a consultation done by a place that does LASIK.

I found a place here in the Portland area that performed LASIK using all lasers.....no blades used at all. From my research I learned that all laser procedures allowed for faster healing and the problems with night vision were minimal. I went in and got the consultation done and they told me I had a 95% chance at 20/15 vision or better.

So here is the cool part....I got the surgery done and within 5 minutes of completion my vision was 20/20. I went in the next day and my vision was still a bit hazy but I could pick off the 20/15 line on the eye chart easily. Three weeks after the surgery I was easily 20/15 in both eyes and could pick off 5 of the letters on the 20/10 line using both eyes. Now, five months after surgery I am 20/15 + in both eyes.

Two days after getting the surgery I shot a match. It was amazing how clearly and consistently I could see my sights. My ability to call my shots was greatly improved. I wasnt't slow or inaccurate before I got LASIK, but I can say for certain that I am able to shoot faster and more accurately since getting LASIK.

I know LASIK isn't an option for everyone but if you are a good candidate seriously consider getting it done. Its like seeing in high definition all the time.

[XRe]

So far, so good - first day post-op, 20/20 in right, 20/25 in left, with the left still being a tad fuzzy. Even so, I'm seeing better than I did with contacts by a good margin. Doc expects left eye to be 20/20 by next week, and believes its possible we'll see more improvement than that in both... we'll see So far, this beats contacts hands down, I'm happy to say...

[Filishooter]

Excellent! Good to here the procedure was a success!