Custom Lens Review Thread

[Litos]

not to speak for him, but the original sales thread says no shield lenses can be made.

thanks...

still trying to get the lingo down...

now that I've put the terminology together, my Paths are considered "shields"...

I get a noob pass still, because I'm new

 

[qtrain23]

thanks...

still trying to get the lingo down...

now that I've put the terminology together, my Paths are considered "shields"...

I get a noob pass still, because I'm new

Anything with one lens is considered a shield lens.

 

[qtrain23]

Closed

 

[qtrain23]

So I have some less than stellar news,

@GH4AU took some lenses and had them tested. I don't know of the exact details of the test (who or where or how), but the results frankly sucked. I was shocked with how poorly they performed actually as I was told they were of excellent quality. Had I known, I would not have bothered with offering them to you guys here. This is part of the reason the sale thread is closed (he still is busy on top of this), and I wont be offering them any longer. I apologize for bringing all this to the community, its embarrassing and I do feel bad for selling these to my fellow O-Brothers.

@GH4AU will update with the results at some point.

 

[kronin323]

I appreciate your integrity.

 

[qtrain23]

I appreciate your integrity.

Thanks. Giff was going to make a new thread but I told him I'll open this one and post first before he does. I don't want it to seem like I'm hiding anything. I'm sure I'll take a rep hit, and people will be pissed (understandably), but like I said, had I known before hand, I wouldn't have sold anything. I was only using info that I was given. Hindsight 20/20

 

[GH4AU]

Hey guys,
I had several sets of these lenses stenograph tested over the past few weeks. They were all tested by a professional optician and the results were pretty shocking. The lenses are of very poor quality. Compared with other aftermarket options such as Linegear and others, these lenses are optically worse, by a fair margin.
The first set I had tested were Qtrain23's black iridium polar C-Six lenses.
-OEM C-Six grey polar:

-Qtrain23's aftermarket C-Six black iridium polar:

-No lens, just looking at projected image:

This didn't seem right to me, as we all were told that these lenses were of great quality. They are even touted on eBay as better than any lenses that are available on eBay. I thought maybe I just got a lemon. So I had 4 more sets tested, 3 C-Six and a Mars set just to confirm the issues weren't just with the C-Six lenses. Once again, the results were terrible.
-OEM C-Six grey polar:

-Qtrain23's aftermarket C-Six chrome polar:

-Qtrain23's aftermarket C-Six 24k:

-Qtrain23's aftermarket C-Six extreme indigo:

-Qtrain23's aftermarket Mars extreme indigo:

As you can see, these aftermarket lenses are pretty terrible. I am now going to quote what the optician sent to me as a write-up for the results.
"My first impression of these lenses holding them at arms length was not good. So I cleared my mental bias and went to analyze what I can prove.
Surface Check: Hold the lens and look at the reflection on the front surface and rear surface. Let's say the windows over my shoulder with the blinds. As I move the lens around the lines move and bend against one another. Also had a "Funhouse" mirror affect.
Optical Clarity: I align the lens in front of a projector and took pictures of the results. I have three pictures. One with no lens, one with an Oakley lens, and one with ? aftermarket lens.
Image movement: Also holding the lenses at arms length looking through it move the lens around a little and compare it to what happens with an Oakley lens.
Prism compensation: Was the first thing I noticed when I held this lens is that it had no base in prism. I put it into my lensometer to verify. There is no base in prism.
Bevel: Placement of the bevel should be toward the front surface of the lens, mostly for cosmetic issues and to be Oakley comparable. I noticed lots of chips along the bevel. I don't know it this is a result of the edging process or someone hacked at them trying to place into a frame.

These lenses are of very poor quality. It's almost as if a generic plastics manufacturer was asked to produce optical lenses. Eyeglass lenses are not. I don't mean to be an optical snob, but these shouldn't be used."

I am not providing these results to bash Qtrain23 or attempt to throw him under the bus, as we personally have a good relationship. Qtrain23 was unaware of the quality of these, and was only the middle-man trying to help his fellow Oakley Forum brethren out with another option for custom lenses. The people that have purchased these lenses just need to know what they have bought into. It just sucks that these were more expensive than the other aftermarket options that are available, and are of lesser quality. I was stoked to get my hands on these for my C-Sixes, as there is nothing else available. I wanted some color for my beauties! I'm invested heavily into these lenses, and will probably continue to wear them for short periods in my C-Sixes. For long periods, these lenses are not recommended for wear. They will be prone to cause headaches, as I have verified myself after wearing them for 8 hours straight. There you have it, a thorough unbiased test and review of these lenses.

 

[qtrain23]

Thanks @GH4AU

 

[kronin323]

Thanks. Giff was going to make a new thread but I told him I'll open this one and post first before he does. I don't want it to seem like I'm hiding anything. I'm sure I'll take a rep hit, and people will be pissed (understandably), but like I said, had I known before hand, I wouldn't have sold anything. I was only using info that I was given. Hindsight 20/20

I'd hate to be the guy who made them the next time you run into him...

 

[Hando]

I had heard from someone about the issue. Honestly, they're still really pretty, but not at the price we paid if the optical quality is this bad. You can get the prettiness from hell.. walleva lenses. I hope your supplier.. enjoys our money