Cataracts

[Martin Rickards]

I had a cataract operation 2 days ago and the difference in vision between the new lens and the old one is enormous with colours much punchier. Blues are really blue. Any colour matching is a job for one eye only from now on.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

I had mine over a year ago. That annoying blue tint to everything is still present, though in much lesser quantity. I would have thought my brain would compensate for it rather quickly but that wasn't the case.

It's nice to have the ability to accurately focus a camera again. My AF cameras are all feeling neglected - I should probably pull the batteries out of them.

 

[jeffreyg]

I am facing catarac surgery. What lenses did you have?

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

 

[Kino]

I will probably need this done fairly shortly.

Is it like the Steampunk William Gibson scenario where you can order Zeiss Icon eyes?

Should we start a thread on the retina replacement lens with the best bokeh?

 

[dutchsteammachine]

I will probably need this done fairly shortly.

Is it like the Steampunk William Gibson scenario where you can order Zeiss Icon eyes?

Should we start a thread on the retina replacement lens with the best bokeh?

Maybe if we existed in the Ghost In The Shell universe:

 

[voceumana]

I'm 69 and my doctor says that when I get my lenses replaced for cataracts, he can correct most of my vision--since I have extreme astigmatism in addition to strong myopia, it'll be nice to have vision close to normal without glasses, though I'll probably still need them, the prescription will be much lower. He says sometimes he can get 20/20, but can't guarantee it.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

I'm 69 and my doctor says that when I get my lenses replaced for cataracts, he can correct most of my vision--since I have extreme astigmatism...

Check with your insurance. Some plans won't cover astigmatism correction and you end up paying full price.

I also had extreme myopia. The new lenses are corrected at infinity - in retrospect I don't know if that was a good choice. I wear varifocal glasses for astigmatism, for reading and so I don't feel 'naked.' After a lifetime of myopia my reflex is still to take off my glasses when I want to see something close-up. Lenses that left my myopia intact would have been much easier to adapt to - and all my old glasses would still work.

 

[Martin Rickards]

Depth of field doesn't seem too bad with a 23 diopter (43.5 mm?) lens.

 

[wiltw]

Should we start a thread on the retina replacement lens with the best bokeh?

I will help start the thread drift...

1.Human eye DOF is somewhat shallow.
2. Best backround blur (which is NOT what 'bokeh' is defined as, especially not by Zeiss' definition!) is anywhere outside of a very NARROW cone of view [away from where the eye is focused at the moment]
Only the fact that the eye can instantly re-focus, away from a very narrow and very shallow zone of focus, as it moves about the FOV is what gives the IMPRESSION of wide and need zone of focus, contrary to #1 and #2

As for 'bokeh' I rather doubt that improves with cataract lens replaement, as both the original and the replacement are optically very simple, and the original is superior in its ability to refocus for near vs. far because of its inherent flexibility (which gets stiffer as we age). Until Zeiss is able to come up with a compound variable focus lens cataract replacement for our original lens, the spherical distortion correction is what it is, leaving bokeh unchanged.

 

[Pieter12]

I'm 69 and my doctor says that when I get my lenses replaced for cataracts, he can correct most of my vision--since I have extreme astigmatism in addition to strong myopia, it'll be nice to have vision close to normal without glasses, though I'll probably still need them, the prescription will be much lower. He says sometimes he can get 20/20, but can't guarantee it.

I have had cataract surgery in both eyes. While it was a great improvement, it is not a panacea. Astigmatism can be corrected by either surgical means or with the replacement lens. Also, your eyes continue to age and your eyesight may eventually change necessitating glasses. Most insurance covers the surgery and plain lenses, but will not cover corrective lenses. The additional cost of the lenses might be on you.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I had one eye done last year. I see well enough now to drive without needing glasses but that is possibly illegal as the other eye still needs 3 diopters correction. It is nice to see distance without correction and it is much clearer. The Medicare approved implant is more than good enough; no need to spend more money.

 

[MattKing]

In BC our public medical coverage covers the surgery and basic corrective lenses. Lenses designed to treat astigmatism will cost you more.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

In BC our public medical coverage covers the surgery and basic corrective lenses.

Well that is the case with all insurance - it will make you 'whole' again, but it won't make you better.

 

[Kino]

I will help start the thread drift...

1.Human eye DOF is somewhat shallow.
2. Best backround blur (which is NOT what 'bokeh' is defined as, especially not by Zeiss' definition!) is anywhere outside of a very NARROW cone of view [away from where the eye is focused at the moment]
Only the fact that the eye can instantly re-focus, away from a very narrow and very shallow zone of focus, as it moves about the FOV is what gives the IMPRESSION of wide and need zone of focus, contrary to #1 and #2

As for 'bokeh' I rather doubt that improves with cataract lens replaement, as both the original and the replacement are optically very simple, and the original is superior in its ability to refocus for near vs. far because of its inherent flexibility (which gets stiffer as we age). Until Zeiss is able to come up with a compound variable focus lens cataract replacement for our original lens, the spherical distortion correction is what it is, leaving bokeh unchanged.

Mild levity and irony has no place on the Internet, I see... I'll learn eventually.

 

[MattKing]

In BC our public medical coverage covers the surgery and basic corrective lenses. Lenses designed to treat astigmatism will cost you more.

Well that is the case with all insurance - it will make you 'whole' again, but it won't make you better.

True - but for those of us who also have extended medical (private supplementary) insurance, the "insured" options are more extensive.

 

[wiltw]

Mild levity and irony has no place on the Internet, I see... I'll learn eventually.

I was playing the part of Sheldon, to your part as Penny!

 

[gone]

William Gibson stole that whole Zeiss Icon idea from Philip Dick. This is from page 16 of The Three Stigmata Of Palmer Eldritch "it was the first time Barney had ever seen the Jensen wide-angle, luxvid eyes". Palmer Eldridge had a mouthful of shiny steel teeth to go w/ them too, so you get a pretty imposing picture.

I noticed a small amount of yellowing in my vision about 4 years ago, and the eye doc said after the exam it was the beginning of cataracts. So far, focusing a camera is still possible, but I did have to switch eyes for it. Until the cataracts get worse I'll probably just let it ride.

 

[Sirius Glass]

In BC our public medical coverage covers the surgery and basic corrective lenses. Lenses designed to treat astigmatism will cost you more.

Well that is the case with all insurance - it will make you 'whole' again, but it won't make you better.

True - but for those of us who also have extended medical (private supplementary) insurance, the "insured" options are more extensive.

Even with supplemental insurance, I would have to pay the difference. I found the the "cheapie" implant to be quite good and the residual astigmatism is corrected by eyeglasses. Without the glasses to vision is quite good.

 

[pentaxuser]

I'm 69 and my doctor says that when I get my lenses replaced for cataracts, he can correct most of my vision--since I have extreme astigmatism in addition to strong myopia, it'll be nice to have vision close to normal without glasses, though I'll probably still need them, the prescription will be much lower. He says sometimes he can get 20/20, but can't guarantee it.

Yes I have heard and seen similar comments from our own NHS eye surgeons so it really is a win-win situation

pentaxuser

 

[Wallendo]

There was an intraocular lens maker several years ago who manufactures lenses without a UV coating, and many patients were able to see ultraviolet radiation. Apparently a number of people found this unnerving and the lens were reformulated.

 

[beemermark]

Medicare covers the basic lenses and surgery at 80%. Whatever supplemental insurance you have picks up the difference. Torx lenses for astigmatism correction cost $600 per eye in NC. Multifocal lenses (so you can see both near and far) that correct for astigmatism are $2700 per eye. If I just corrected my eyes for distance I one of the rear people that would probably still need progressive eyeglasses for reading and near distance. Add in eye drops & misc and I'm looking at $6K. Get the first eye done in 9 days. For the wife and I, plus supplemental insurance, we pay about $2400 a year in premiums and $4000 in deductibles. Curious about the Democrat's Medicare for all, as they add more and more people to the eligibility list. Will they include me at some point?

 

[Pieter12]

There was an intraocular lens maker several years ago who manufactures lenses without a UV coating, and many patients were able to see ultraviolet radiation. Apparently a number of people found this unnerving and the lens were reformulated.

If this is true, that could be quite unfortunate. After a while, the implant cannot be removed easily as tissue grows around the edge.

 

[voceumana]

My doctor says the Torx lenses are $700 per eye, and which Medicare doesn't cover--don't know if my supplement kicks in anything, but I'd be happy to pay $700 per eye to get to 90% of 20/20 without glasses and fix the rest with prescription lenses. My vision without glasses is in the range of 20/400, and over half my correction is for astigmatism, so I've got in the range of 2 diopters for astigmatism. It really makes it hard to do anything without glasses and makes camera work difficult. My prescription has been changing throughout my life, so I don't expect what I get will be perfect or be the same forever--glasses will fix what needs to be corrected as I go. High index lenses don't work for me because of the astigmatism--common with high levels of astigmatism. My last pair was in the range of $450, so $1400 for the pair of Torx isn't hard for me to swallow.

 

[Sirius Glass]

There was an intraocular lens maker several years ago who manufactures lenses without a UV coating, and many patients were able to see ultraviolet radiation. Apparently a number of people found this unnerving and the lens were reformulated.

Did is also add rods and cones to the retina so that the UV light could stimulate a signal? If so, how would the brain interpret the new signals.

 

[Tom Taylor]

I had both eyes done at the beginning of 2020 - the second eye was done right before the hospitals stopped taking "electives" because of Covid. I went for "distance" and now have 20/20 in the left eye and 20/25 in the right so I don't need glasses for distance anymore. However I do need glasses for reading and before the surgery I could focus off of the ground glass without using the glasses but had to put the distance pair on when using a focusing loupe. Now its the other way around: I I need the reading glasses to focus off the GG and no glasses to use the loupe.

Thomas