Dillons Lens Review

[dingo ate my baby]

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.

White noise, to me lol

 

[Chris A Hardaway]

I don't know a ton about Dillon lenses specifically to be sure but I know enough about optics to give my speculation. Oakley (HDO) or XYZ optics makes sure the "base in" prism to eliminate "image jump" is mastered in each model. (Except Shields like radar, radar EV, Batwolf and the like that is cnc cut from sheets). You'll notice the lens thicknesses vary frame to frame on the 8.75 base curved lenses. Follow this logic: a straightlink frame although 8.75 base curvature might be wrapped 20° around the face, and 9° pantoscopic tilt toward the cheeks, while sitting only 10mm from the eyes. A gauge 8 frame might only wrap 18° around the face, have 7° panto tilt, but sit further at 13mm from the eyes (vertex distance). Therefore Oakley mastered each set of lenses to balance optics and eliminate image jump in a slightly different amount of prism depending on those "XYZ" factors.

I get the impression that Dillon lenses are made in much smaller batches, almost like RX glasses are made. Maybe only aa feefew hundred blanks per batch. That's reflected in why their prices are so high, their margins are much smaller due to their lower demand and distribution, plus higher production cost.

Anyway, back to my point, old glasses (pre 2000s) and even designer glasses had no prism ground in the lenderslen "balance the eyes". I suspect Dillon does have base in Prism, but maybe a generic or consistent amount. Typically 0.13 to 0.37 diopters base-in prism is normal on "wrapped" glasses in the "current industry standards". I figure again Dillon didn't vary model to model... Just used say 0.25 base-in prism on all models.

So that would mean potentially getting Dillon's in a different (Dillon) frame would produce different results, better and worse. Or @htrap2294 you could try adjusting the pads to sit frame closer to face (spread pads) while wrapping the frame center bridge more.... Or try flattening the wrap slightly, while getting the frame to sit further off your face (pinch the pads close together)... Messing with different vertex distance, and wrap angles will change the optics... Hopefully for better!

You might notice image jump changes or reduces as you manipulate and adjust the frame... Just be careful or have a pro (optician) do it... Warn then the CR39 lenders are brittle, and laminated, making them prone to chip.

 

[M Frame Boss]

So, with all the hype about Dillons Lens, I had to jump in and get me a set. The model I decided to choose was the Dillon Drake. The reason is, price. It was the only frame I found on a third party application for a reasonable price - $80.

Disclaimer: I tend to have very sensitive eyes and I've noticed anything other than OEM Oakley lenses give me a slight headache. Now, note, this is a personal opinion and other people may feel differently.

The first thing I noticed was, the stress the metal frame induces on the lens. This is shown by this video I have taken here - I am not the only one with this issue. However, it is a minor issue as most of us use a cheese grater and nail filer to cut the lenses into a different frame.

I have also noticed, when viewing the lens in bright sunlight, that there are 3 layers to the lens. The matte polarization filter is sandwiched between the outer and inner lens. This is clear when bright sunlight hits the lens and you can see sparkles/shimmers of the polarization filter.

Video Proof:

Secondly, the crispness, the clarity, it is all very true. These lenses are extraordinarily crisp - they cut out pretty much ALL internal reflection. The hype about this was true.

Now, as I wore it more and the initial hype began to fade, I began to notice something...eye fatigue. I'm wondering to myself, what could cause this? The lens is so damn clear! I racked my brain, then I did a simple test...I focused on a far away object and put the lens on. Well, what do you know - the object jumped. This does not happen with my Oakley lenses and many Oakley videos show this to be true, as they do their laser test with an Oakley. So, I think that while Dillon Optics have amazing clarity and crispness, as well as cool factor that Oakley simply can't beat - the Oakley lenses produce a more depth accurate image.

In the end, it is your choice - what do you find more important? Crispness, clarity, cool look? Or, do you prefer an accurate image, like me? Personally, I'll keep these but I decided I can't justify the cost of cutting them as they give me minor headaches if I wear for more than one hour.

I will wear them more throughout the week and see if my opinion changes, but as of now, this is my verdict. I also plan to take my Dillons as well as my Oakley OEM lenses to my local ophthalmologist and optometrist to see their official opinions and get some concrete testing done.

@dingo ate my baby @cacatman @Litos @IAMOBS

Great Review thank you!! I have held off getting a dillion custom cut so I can read everyone's reactions. Dillions seem to be really liked by the majority who own them. Thanks @Chris A Hardaway for the technical side of this.

 

[cacatman]

I don't know a ton about Dillon lenses specifically to be sure but I know enough about optics to give my speculation. Oakley (HDO) or XYZ optics makes sure the "base in" prism to eliminate "image jump" is mastered in each model. (Except Shields like radar, radar EV, Batwolf and the like that is cnc cut from sheets). You'll notice the lens thicknesses vary frame to frame on the 8.75 base curved lenses. Follow this logic: a straightlink frame although 8.75 base curvature might be wrapped 20° around the face, and 9° pantoscopic tilt toward the cheeks, while sitting only 10mm from the eyes. A gauge 8 frame might only wrap 18° around the face, have 7° panto tilt, but sit further at 13mm from the eyes (vertex distance). Therefore Oakley mastered each set of lenses to balance optics and eliminate image jump in a slightly different amount of prism depending on those "XYZ" factors.

I get the impression that Dillon lenses are made in much smaller batches, almost like RX glasses are made. Maybe only aa feefew hundred blanks per batch. That's reflected in why their prices are so high, their margins are much smaller due to their lower demand and distribution, plus higher production cost.

Anyway, back to my point, old glasses (pre 2000s) and even designer glasses had no prism ground in the lenderslen "balance the eyes". I suspect Dillon does have base in Prism, but maybe a generic or consistent amount. Typically 0.13 to 0.37 diopters base-in prism is normal on "wrapped" glasses in the "current industry standards". I figure again Dillon didn't vary model to model... Just used say 0.25 base-in prism on all models.

So that would mean potentially getting Dillon's in a different (Dillon) frame would produce different results, better and worse. Or @htrap2294 you could try adjusting the pads to sit frame closer to face (spread pads) while wrapping the frame center bridge more.... Or try flattening the wrap slightly, while getting the frame to sit further off your face (pinch the pads close together)... Messing with different vertex distance, and wrap angles will change the optics... Hopefully for better!

You might notice image jump changes or reduces as you manipulate and adjust the frame... Just be careful or have a pro (optician) do it... Warn then the CR39 lenders are brittle, and laminated, making them prone to chip.

Wow. Just this post alone should be made a sticky.

 

[Chris A Hardaway]

Whatever!

 

[htrap2294]

Wow. Just this post alone should be made a sticky.

Ikr, it really helps me understand why some of us are seeing what we are seeing.

 

[Jon the Don]

If you want to add my guide to lense cutting please feel free to but I would appreciate all the glory.

Thanks.

 

[kronin323]

I don't know a ton about Dillon lenses specifically to be sure but I know enough about optics to give my speculation. Oakley (HDO) or XYZ optics makes sure the "base in" prism to eliminate "image jump" is mastered in each model. (Except Shields like radar, radar EV, Batwolf and the like that is cnc cut from sheets). You'll notice the lens thicknesses vary frame to frame on the 8.75 base curved lenses. Follow this logic: a straightlink frame although 8.75 base curvature might be wrapped 20° around the face, and 9° pantoscopic tilt toward the cheeks, while sitting only 10mm from the eyes. A gauge 8 frame might only wrap 18° around the face, have 7° panto tilt, but sit further at 13mm from the eyes (vertex distance). Therefore Oakley mastered each set of lenses to balance optics and eliminate image jump in a slightly different amount of prism depending on those "XYZ" factors.

I get the impression that Dillon lenses are made in much smaller batches, almost like RX glasses are made. Maybe only aa feefew hundred blanks per batch. That's reflected in why their prices are so high, their margins are much smaller due to their lower demand and distribution, plus higher production cost.

Anyway, back to my point, old glasses (pre 2000s) and even designer glasses had no prism ground in the lenderslen "balance the eyes". I suspect Dillon does have base in Prism, but maybe a generic or consistent amount. Typically 0.13 to 0.37 diopters base-in prism is normal on "wrapped" glasses in the "current industry standards". I figure again Dillon didn't vary model to model... Just used say 0.25 base-in prism on all models.

So that would mean potentially getting Dillon's in a different (Dillon) frame would produce different results, better and worse. Or @htrap2294 you could try adjusting the pads to sit frame closer to face (spread pads) while wrapping the frame center bridge more.... Or try flattening the wrap slightly, while getting the frame to sit further off your face (pinch the pads close together)... Messing with different vertex distance, and wrap angles will change the optics... Hopefully for better!

You might notice image jump changes or reduces as you manipulate and adjust the frame... Just be careful or have a pro (optician) do it... Warn then the CR39 lenders are brittle, and laminated, making them prone to chip.

You should repost that on the other Dillon thread...

 

[dingo ate my baby]

You should repost that on the other Dillon thread and give dingo a free pair of martime prizm lens for his Xmetals

fify, I 100% agree with @kronin323 statement. @Chris A Hardaway you should read this, it looks interesting

 

[Chris A Hardaway]

Dingo!