• Take 30 seconds to register your free account to access deals, post topics, and view exclusive content!

    Register Today

    Join the largest Oakley Forum on the web!

Overwhelmed

Jaatus

Oakley Beginner
4
3
Hello all! I'm brand new to the forum and as the title of this thread says, I'm utterly overwhelmed. I'm trying to order some Rx sunglasses through OakleySI, and I'm having a heck of a time. I currently have a pair of of Desert Collection Desert Tan Flak 2.0 Xl's with the Prizm Tungsten Polarized lens, that I use when I wear contacts and almost exclusively when I drive. I love them so far. I have fairly light sensitive eyes, and am looking to find a lens that works well for daily wear.

I've been quite intrigued by the Prizm Ruby Polarized, but its 17% VLT compared to the Tungsten's 14% VLT has me concerned. Id really like to have a lens with some color to it, as opposed to a straight black lens. That 11% Prizm Black Polarized does look appealing though. I live in the Inland Northwest of the US, and see lots of snow every winter, so that's also something I'm trying to take into account. If anyone has any recommendations, Id be grateful for the help.

On to the second issue I'm coming across, which is Frame Rx ranges. I can't find that info ANYWHERE and its driving me nuts. In a perfect world, Id just do a second pair of the Flak 2.0 XLs, but there always seems to be confusion with my Rx and what frames are able to accommodate it.

My OD is -3.50 SPH, -.25 CYL, AXIS 154
OS is -4.00 SPH, -.25 CYL, AXIS 18

I realize my Rx isn't mild by any stretch, but its not extreme either. Couple that with my confusion of the Oakley True Digital II, which claims to expand the Rx range, and I'm lost. Again, I would be grateful for any insight into this. Thanks in advance. I'm also happy to clarify and part of my post that might cause confusion. Thanks Again!
 
Prizm deep water and prizm daily polarized are both pretty nice (and dark) lenses that have nice contrast (and are similar yet different than prizm tungsten polarized). I’d strongly recommend just going to an Oakley retailer and trying on a few different lenses before dropping cash on the Rx lenses.

As far as the frame Rx goes, I am of no help but maybe @Chris A Hardaway can give some advice.
 
Hello all! I'm brand new to the forum and as the title of this thread says, I'm utterly overwhelmed. I'm trying to order some Rx sunglasses through OakleySI, and I'm having a heck of a time. I currently have a pair of of Desert Collection Desert Tan Flak 2.0 Xl's with the Prizm Tungsten Polarized lens, that I use when I wear contacts and almost exclusively when I drive. I love them so far. I have fairly light sensitive eyes, and am looking to find a lens that works well for daily wear.

I've been quite intrigued by the Prizm Ruby Polarized, but its 17% VLT compared to the Tungsten's 14% VLT has me concerned. Id really like to have a lens with some color to it, as opposed to a straight black lens. That 11% Prizm Black Polarized does look appealing though. I live in the Inland Northwest of the US, and see lots of snow every winter, so that's also something I'm trying to take into account. If anyone has any recommendations, Id be grateful for the help.

On to the second issue I'm coming across, which is Frame Rx ranges. I can't find that info ANYWHERE and its driving me nuts. In a perfect world, Id just do a second pair of the Flak 2.0 XLs, but there always seems to be confusion with my Rx and what frames are able to accommodate it.

My OD is -3.50 SPH, -.25 CYL, AXIS 154
OS is -4.00 SPH, -.25 CYL, AXIS 18

I realize my Rx isn't mild by any stretch, but its not extreme either. Couple that with my confusion of the Oakley True Digital II, which claims to expand the Rx range, and I'm lost. Again, I would be grateful for any insight into this. Thanks in advance. I'm also happy to clarify and part of my post that might cause confusion. Thanks Again!
Don't worry about 3% more light transmission. I would recommend prizm ruby polarized. You are in the snow nearly half the year so why get a lens that's so dark? A little lighter makes them more versatile, and polarized would still cut the glare right out.
Most frames come in the Oakley true digital edge ii lenses for higher rx now. And if they don't. Just reduce your left eye rx to -4.00 sphere... no cylinder. Drop that if possible. Then any frame works w your rx. The right eye isn't the issue.

I can make you lenses for about $400 but id need a copy of your rx and pd measurement.
 
Hello all! I'm brand new to the forum and as the title of this thread says, I'm utterly overwhelmed. I'm trying to order some Rx sunglasses through OakleySI, and I'm having a heck of a time. I currently have a pair of of Desert Collection Desert Tan Flak 2.0 Xl's with the Prizm Tungsten Polarized lens, that I use when I wear contacts and almost exclusively when I drive. I love them so far. I have fairly light sensitive eyes, and am looking to find a lens that works well for daily wear.

I've been quite intrigued by the Prizm Ruby Polarized, but its 17% VLT compared to the Tungsten's 14% VLT has me concerned. Id really like to have a lens with some color to it, as opposed to a straight black lens. That 11% Prizm Black Polarized does look appealing though. I live in the Inland Northwest of the US, and see lots of snow every winter, so that's also something I'm trying to take into account. If anyone has any recommendations, Id be grateful for the help.

On to the second issue I'm coming across, which is Frame Rx ranges. I can't find that info ANYWHERE and its driving me nuts. In a perfect world, Id just do a second pair of the Flak 2.0 XLs, but there always seems to be confusion with my Rx and what frames are able to accommodate it.

My OD is -3.50 SPH, -.25 CYL, AXIS 154
OS is -4.00 SPH, -.25 CYL, AXIS 18

I realize my Rx isn't mild by any stretch, but its not extreme either. Couple that with my confusion of the Oakley True Digital II, which claims to expand the Rx range, and I'm lost. Again, I would be grateful for any insight into this. Thanks in advance. I'm also happy to clarify and part of my post that might cause confusion. Thanks Again!
Welcome
 
Don't worry about 3% more light transmission. I would recommend prizm ruby polarized. You are in the snow nearly half the year so why get a lens that's so dark? A little lighter makes them more versatile, and polarized would still cut the glare right out.
Most frames come in the Oakley true digital edge ii lenses for higher rx now. And if they don't. Just reduce your left eye rx to -4.00 sphere... no cylinder. Drop that if possible. Then any frame works w your rx. The right eye isn't the issue.

I can make you lenses for about $400 but id need a copy of your rx and pd measurement.
I appreciate the insight. I'll admit, the idea of changing the Rx is super confusing. by dropping the CYL measurement, are you suggesting that the Astigmatism is minimal enough to be ignored? and if so, by extension, would I still need to input the axis info? Or would that be moot at that point? And last question, if I were to make that change, could you correct me if it doesn't look right? Assuming I understand you correctly, I believe it should look like this:

OD -3.50 SPH, -.25 CYL, AXIS 154
OS -4.00 SPH, null CYL, AXIS 18

does that look about right?
 
Prizm deep water and prizm daily polarized are both pretty nice (and dark) lenses that have nice contrast (and are similar yet different than prizm tungsten polarized). I’d strongly recommend just going to an Oakley retailer and trying on a few different lenses before dropping cash on the Rx lenses.

As far as the frame Rx goes, I am of no help but maybe @Chris A Hardaway can give some advice.
Thanks for the insight. I hadn't even considered an oakley retailer. thats solid advice!
 
I appreciate the insight. I'll admit, the idea of changing the Rx is super confusing. by dropping the CYL measurement, are you suggesting that the Astigmatism is minimal enough to be ignored? and if so, by extension, would I still need to input the axis info? Or would that be moot at that point? And last question, if I were to make that change, could you correct me if it doesn't look right? Assuming I understand you correctly, I believe it should look like this:

OD -3.50 SPH, -.25 CYL, AXIS 154
OS -4.00 SPH, null CYL, AXIS 18

does that look about right?
Just drop the cylinder and axis on left. You are close.
OD -3.50 SPH, -.25 CYL, AXIS 154

OS -4.00 SPH, null CYL, null AXIS

Yes it's minimal. And i would order it that way if i were you. They can always call your doctors office to confirm in which case you'd need their approval. But most doctors would certainly agree to drop cyl /axis if it were an avaliable issue.
 
Just drop the cylinder and axis on left. You are close.
OD -3.50 SPH, -.25 CYL, AXIS 154

OS -4.00 SPH, null CYL, null AXIS

Yes it's minimal. And i would order it that way if i were you. They can always call your doctors office to confirm in which case you'd need their approval. But most doctors would certainly agree to drop cyl /axis if it were an avaliable issue.
outstanding, thank you. Ill keep the thread updated as I go. You all rock!
 
I had been looking to get lenses for my "OO9188" frames, but it looks tough given my strong prescription Sph:-3.50, Cyl:-1.25.

One company mentioned their lab can't do it, and they outsource to oakley to do the lenses.
They first said "True Digital Edge" and pointed to their blog on the topic. Then now they are saying it'd be "True Digital Edge II", and upon researching both, one had frosted the edge, while the newer method just lops it off I guess. I'd think that would look so weird in a frame, where the side edge is just missing.
There just is hardly any info on TDE at all.
I even emailed oakley's rx address and haven't heard back, and it's been nearly 2 weeks.
The non-oakley company mentioned "Oakley does not actually employ any opticians, they might not be able to answer your questions directly regarding their lenses. They highly depend on opticians outside of their company to answer technical questions regarding their lenses.", which I thought was extremely odd.
Like, what is the oakley "rx" email address for? And why would they depend on outside opticians to answer tech questions for oakley's OWN lens tech? I'd think if oakley created the tech for their lenses, then who would know better than themselves.

Another company said they use a couple of labs, and one of them would be able to do the lenses.
They then replied to one of my emails and included pics and I was a bit disturbed:
View attachment 1062282
These are NOT my lenses/frames(not even the model). But I was concerned with the lack of beveling detail, where it seems pretty noticeable (note specifically the clearly-visible bevel on the nosepad side of the lens in the frame). Is this just to be expected?

I was planning on going with Trivex lenses for clarity, not needing UV coating, and strength. I have no clue how TDE(I/II) would compare since I've seen no tangible data on it.
Also, being semi-rimless, I'd go with a matte edge finish I think, to limit light sensitivity for me.

I'm opting against high-index partly because of distortion, but mostly durability if I'm going to be fairly frequently swapping out lenses (indoor/outdoor).
I work for Oakley… for Flak 2.0 XL we do on average 6-7 a week… it’s do-able…

Standard Clear on Sun of Sun in both Flak 2.0 and Flak 2.0 XL are +2.0 to -3.0 with a Cyl Max of +3.0 to -3.0
SV Edge and Progressive
XL +4.0 to -5.0
Standard 2.0 +4 to -6.0

edge gives more RX range for the Flak, and going to the Flak 2.0 non XL lens fives even more range. Plus if you have access to OakleySI.com you are able to get 50% off a full RX pair as part of the Local Hero’s Program, unless the in store deal is better, sometimes it is sometimes it isn’t.

As for durability changing lenses, we have had several clients who change their lenses for varying activities even in the field, ie trail —> road —> lowlight and back again.

The cutouts (bevel) where the lens fits into the frame is visible in the clear but pretty much unnoticeable in darker and mirrored lenses.

The issue shared with me in regards to non Oakley authentic lenses and the flak has to do with the base curve and the adjustments made to compensate in your peripherals.
 
Back
Top