Apologies if this has been discussed somewhere else, but in all my searching I couldn't find it! I'm new to posting in the forum, but have been coming here for much of my Oakley info for a little while now! And sorry for my long winded post - it's been a frustrating search on this topic!
I'm looking at the Prizm Infield Lens as a potential alternative to the Prizm Trail Torch for outdoor mountain fun (hiking, mountain biking, rock climbing etc. where visibility and ability to see the rock and ground texture especially for biking/climbing is important).
I have a pair of the Flak 2.0 frames with the Trail Torch XL lenses but as I'm of the high cheekbone/low nose bridge variety, the XL lenses hit my cheekbones and can leave a small mark when I wear them for prolonged periods of time. I found the regular Flak 2.0 lens actually works best for me (compared to the A-Fit Flak 2.0 which is a bit short vertically for me). Unfortunately, the Trail Torch is only available in the XL lens and not the regular Flak 2.0. I've come to accept that generally there are no sunglasses that will fit me without somewhat sitting on my cheekbones, though I am on the lookout for an aftermarket nosepad for the Flak 2.0 that is a bit bulkier/bigger than the A-fit ones to see if that will help a bit.
I also tried (in store only), Prizm Road, Golf & Field but don't feel that any of those quite work as Field was too dark (VLT 15%), and I think something between Golf and Road for both VLT and Colour spectrum would have been better (Golf had a good VLT but the colour seemed very purplish if I recall correctly while Road had a lower VLT and the colour seemed much more pink and I'd also read from other people that it was sometimes a bit dark for in the shaded mountain area).
I did however, find some Flak 2.0 Prizm Infield Lenses available but really can't find much info on them as they are discontinued. From what I can find, they have a VLT of 20% with a Rose base but with more of a red/torch mirror. I'm wondering if that pulls it more towards similarities with the Trail Torch? One person mentioned that despite the 20% VLT, the lens seems to brighten things up and I also found another person who liked using them for mountain biking and it worked well in both shadows and brighter conditions, which all make it sound like a good alternative. However, I can't find anything on the actual colour light spectrum or how the lens colouration and contrast is when looking through it as it seems like Oakley discontinued it fairly quick. I'm hoping to get some more feedback from actual user experience on how the Infield Lens is for a variety of activities and if they could be a good alternate to the Trail Torch lens.
Again, sorry for the super long winded post, but if anyone has any experience or can point me towards more information on the Prizm Infield Lens that would be super appreciated!
I'm looking at the Prizm Infield Lens as a potential alternative to the Prizm Trail Torch for outdoor mountain fun (hiking, mountain biking, rock climbing etc. where visibility and ability to see the rock and ground texture especially for biking/climbing is important).
I have a pair of the Flak 2.0 frames with the Trail Torch XL lenses but as I'm of the high cheekbone/low nose bridge variety, the XL lenses hit my cheekbones and can leave a small mark when I wear them for prolonged periods of time. I found the regular Flak 2.0 lens actually works best for me (compared to the A-Fit Flak 2.0 which is a bit short vertically for me). Unfortunately, the Trail Torch is only available in the XL lens and not the regular Flak 2.0. I've come to accept that generally there are no sunglasses that will fit me without somewhat sitting on my cheekbones, though I am on the lookout for an aftermarket nosepad for the Flak 2.0 that is a bit bulkier/bigger than the A-fit ones to see if that will help a bit.
I also tried (in store only), Prizm Road, Golf & Field but don't feel that any of those quite work as Field was too dark (VLT 15%), and I think something between Golf and Road for both VLT and Colour spectrum would have been better (Golf had a good VLT but the colour seemed very purplish if I recall correctly while Road had a lower VLT and the colour seemed much more pink and I'd also read from other people that it was sometimes a bit dark for in the shaded mountain area).
I did however, find some Flak 2.0 Prizm Infield Lenses available but really can't find much info on them as they are discontinued. From what I can find, they have a VLT of 20% with a Rose base but with more of a red/torch mirror. I'm wondering if that pulls it more towards similarities with the Trail Torch? One person mentioned that despite the 20% VLT, the lens seems to brighten things up and I also found another person who liked using them for mountain biking and it worked well in both shadows and brighter conditions, which all make it sound like a good alternative. However, I can't find anything on the actual colour light spectrum or how the lens colouration and contrast is when looking through it as it seems like Oakley discontinued it fairly quick. I'm hoping to get some more feedback from actual user experience on how the Infield Lens is for a variety of activities and if they could be a good alternate to the Trail Torch lens.
Again, sorry for the super long winded post, but if anyone has any experience or can point me towards more information on the Prizm Infield Lens that would be super appreciated!
