Dillons Lens Review

[iamFLIP]

Here, their website. If you go to each NIR polarized model, they are all base curve 8.

DRAKE - Matte Gun - Black NIR Lens - Black NIR Lens - Drake - Metal Frames - NIR Polarized

I meant on the part where you mount a 8 base curve lens on a orbital meant for 8.75 base curve lens, which you said it is too close it won’t make a difference.

 

[htrap2294]

I meant on the part where you mount a 8 base curve lens on a orbital meant for 8.75 base curve lens, which you said it is too close it won’t make a difference.

Oh, no link on that - I just know people use an ellipsoid curve on a C-Six instead of original base curve and it is able to work out fine. Maybe our neighborhood cutter can provide more insight on if a marginal difference in BC will make a difference.

 

[Atticus]

They seem to snap in well enough. And I think any custom cut OEM will be off as well when mounted in another frame....

 

[Trucker360]

@Louiegirl

nsw#134 ottclub #5 your mom sends her love.

 

[htrap2294]

Added a section regarding the polarization filter.

 

[kronin323]

Thanks for the objectivity.

It's interesting how the forum changes over time with turnover. Things are learned, standards are set, then people move on, new people join, the history is forgotten, then the lessons learned all over again.

It's been definitively proven that one cannot subjectively judge optical quality, i.e. judge it just by looking through them. Not just in theory, it's been proven in practice. Repeatedly. At one time the consensus here recognized the overwhelming evidence and (except for one or two who cared more about their ego than facing facts) the majority would not believe in optical quality without proof from objective tests such as the ones Oakley demonstrates. And there used to be people here who would perform some tests on aftermarket lenses.

But people moved on and there's the continuing stream of newbies talking about how much they (subjectively) love their cheap aftermarket lenses and it's not a soapbox one feels like standing on all the time - if people are happy with their lenses then fine, more power to them.

Now, I am not saying that Dillon lenses are not quality. I have never doubted that Dillon lenses have better quality than aftermarket, perhaps on par with Oakley. Dillon lenses aren't even aftermarket, really, they're just a different brand of sunglasses.

The point is that all these people (subjectively) raving about Dillon's optical quality, it's meaningless. The only meaningful rating will come from objective tests. I expect they'll come through it just fine, though. But we won't really know until we really know. Until then the rest is just noise.

 

[Atticus]

Thanks for the objectivity.

It's interesting how the forum changes over time with turnover. Things are learned, standards are set, then people move on, new people join, the history is forgotten, then the lessons learned all over again.

It's been definitively proven that one cannot subjectively judge optical quality, i.e. judge it just by looking through them. Not just in theory, it's been proven in practice. Repeatedly. At one time the consensus here recognized the overwhelming evidence and (except for one or two who cared more about their ego than facing facts) the majority would not believe in optical quality without proof from objective tests such as the ones Oakley demonstrates. And there used to be people here who would perform some tests on aftermarket lenses.

But people moved on and there's the continuing stream of newbies talking about how much they (subjectively) love their cheap aftermarket lenses and it's not a soapbox one feels like standing on all the time - if people are happy with their lenses then fine, more power to them.

Now, I am not saying that Dillon lenses are not quality. I have never doubted that Dillon lenses have better quality than aftermarket, perhaps on par with Oakley. Dillon lenses aren't even aftermarket, really, they're just a different brand of sunglasses.

The point is that all these people (subjectively) raving about Dillon's optical quality, it's meaningless. The only meaningful rating will come from objective tests. I expect they'll come through it just fine, though. But we won't really know until we really know. Until then the rest is just noise.

But man, they look so cool. No test needed for that.

 

[kronin323]

But man, they look so cool. No test needed for that.

Yes, the matte effect is a neat novelty for sure.

 

[htrap2294]

Yes, the matte effect is a neat novelty for sure.

I’ll try to get them checked out soon - life’s been busy. In full disclosure though, I do have retinal tears. Didn’t think that mattered, as it was assured by my opthamologist that it doesn’t affect my sight but some members want the disclosure.

 

[kronin323]

I’ll try to get them checked out soon - life’s been busy. In full disclosure though, I do have retinal tears. Didn’t think that mattered, as it was assured by my opthamologist that it doesn’t affect my sight but some members want the disclosure.

Yes I saw that on the other thread. That, too, was noise.