Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters Bifocals and hunting

Last winter I got the news that I needed bifocals. I got the progressive lenses.

Last week, I hunted deer in them for the first time. I hadn't counted on how bad my peripheral vision would be. Usually, if I hear a deer-like sound, I'd try to look at it out of the corner of my eye before turning my head. Now, I have to turn to face things full-on before I can see a darn thing.

Has anyone else dealt with this and found a satisfactory solution? Are traditional bifocals less problematic?

I had that same scenario last year. This year I bought a backup set of glasses since I seem to break or misplace glasses. I purchased glasses that had a full frame and were larger . I used them this year for hunting with much better vision especially peripheral vision. The frame is much more rectangular then square and the overall lense surface is larger. I use progressive lenses BTW with no line.

Yes, traditional bifocals are not as bad.
I gave them up and I have a pair of reading glasses thatI carry separately and a std pair of distance vision perscriptions that I wear most of the time.Or for hunting, what you can do is have the optican set the reading portion of the bifocal a lot lower than normal so you have that if you need it by looking down further,but not have interference as bad.

About five years ago I went from never having worn glasses to progressive bi-focals. I hated having to turn my head to look at stuff. It took me two years to get comfortable shooting again, because I had to square-up my head to the bore to get my eye and glasses lined up well with the sights. Eventually it all came together, but what a PITA.

All very interesting posts.

I've worn glasses since the 4th grade, and had to get bifocals about 10 years ago. I got the lineless lenses and didn't have any trouble adapting quickly, though my optician knew I shot a lot so made the reading part as small and low as possible.

Both of my first pairs had fairly large lenses. Three years ago I switched to lenses just as wide, but not as deep, again with a smaller reading area. I like these even better, since when I'm hiking they don't steam up as easily as the larger lenses, due to better air-flow.

My optician claims I've better than average peripheral vision, even with glasses. The only problem I've noticed since switching to the lineless bifocals is that I have to tilt my head a little further downward when looking at tracks or other sign on the ground. On the other hand, I can tilt my head back slightly and see handgun sights better than before going to bifocals.

Youper,

I know what you mean. My head has never been square behind the scope.

Somehow I managed to learn how to shoot looking more down the side of my nose, chin down with my face turned in towards the stock.

Probably got this from shooting a shotgun so much as a youngster.

JM

Thanks, all. My optometrist is a shooter, so I may ask her for suggestions.

My peripheral vision isn't exactly "bad"; I do very well on the visual field test (the one where you look into a light box and click a button when you see flashes off-center) but that didn't quite translate into seeing the squirrels or possums that were making all that racket at first and last light.

Maybe I'll just get a set of traditional bifocals for hunting. It wouldn't hurt to have a spare pair, and there's no one in the woods to care how I look in them!

An option that works for some people is to have two different eye surgerys.

Have their dominate eye, usually the right, for long distance.

Have the other eye have surgery for reading and closer distances.

So both eyes focus for differrent distances.

The trick is to have you doc first write a perscription for a different contact lenses for each eye so you'll try it first with the Contact lenses.

As I said it works for some people...

Quick solution is to have your hunting/shooting glasses be for distance only.

Carry a cheep pair of readers, bought in the drug store or supermarket in your pack or jacket pocket for filling out tags.

Shaky ground and no big deal for those who don't shoot.

However eye dominance can change with age and some do not have a strong dominant eye. For a shooter it may not be that great of an option.

This is how I get my contact lenses, with one diopter less correction than called for in my right eye. I can read easily, I can focus on handgun sights, everything, and don't notice any difference in depth perception or distance. I've even got one pair of glasses set up that way for when I don't want to wear contacts. Works for me.

Been there, done that.

I've worn glasses since I was a kid. I noticed that with my progressive bifocals, the front bead on my peep sighted rifles distorted, sometimes looking like a double bead. With progressives, the optical center is good, but as one looks thru the edge of the lens, distortion occurs. I had a set of hard bifocals made with larger lenses. No problem with distortion thru the edge of the lens.

The styles in glasses these days seem to gravitate toward small lenses, which are not good for shooters. Bigger lenses may not be as "cool", but definitely work better for shooters.

IMHO,

DF

I've been using progessive lens for the past 15 years. Took some getting used to but I don't notice any impediment as far as peripheral vision is concerned. One thing I did do, and it made a big difference was to go from a 6x42 scope to a 6x36. The smaller objective aligns with my eyes much better. My shooting improved has well (at the range anyway!)the deer are just as safe!

I was just fighting with the double bead illusion yesterday. I've been battling the progressives vs. sight picture thing for 3 years now, was wondering if conventional bifocals would be any better for shooting.

I tried the differential near/distance lenses, made me feel like my head wanted to twist off.

I too have progressive lenses and have some of the same issues. With time, you get used to the situation and adapt.

Trifocals here, non-progressive. I hadn't noticed any issues with peripheral vision, and I hope this thread doesn't give me any.

I adapted to the progressives quickly but it took a couple years getting comfortable scanning for game. I have always scanned by moving my eyes so it was a while before I could break the habit and scan by moving my head. That keeps my eyes looking through the "sweet spot" where vision is the sharpest. During the transition period I started scanning more with binoculars which actually improved my game spotting a little. Over the years the sweet spot has gotten a little smaller as my eyes have less ability to focus.

I tried single vision soft contacts and reading glasses but that turned out to be a bigger hassle, like the time I field dressed a deer mostly by feel because I forgot them. Overall it was easier to take the time to adapt.

Think bifocals are bad try trifocals.Skeeter

My hunting partner had this done to his eyes and he loves it, as mentioned he did go six months with contacts to ensure he was a good candidate for it.

One thing I noticed...never let him use your binoculars after he adjusts them they are way out of whack for me

I was fortunate that my doctor is also a "shooter". I adjusted well with "normal" progressive lens. scopes could be adjusted to use the "top" part of the glass and open sights were "usable" by moving my head up and down to keep sights and target in focus. However, the sight picture just wasn't "perfect".

When I mentioned it to my doctor, he had me bring in an open sighted rifle and handgun to the office. He had me try different lens until we found one that worked best for open sights......then he made a set of progressive glasses to that prescription for shooting.

Works GREAT. I can read (although not quite as easily as with my "normal" glasses), see at a distance and see the sights to shoot. Just right for hunting since I don't do a lot of "reading" when I am hunting anyway.