Lennon was wearing the best shape for high prescriptions.
Small, and round. Both will make the highest prescriptions very thin since the flaring out of the lens doesn't happen. Most of the mainstream optometrists don't specialize in frames like these.
Lenses are also available in 1.7+ high index in plastic lenses or even higher if you don't mind glass. Glass lenses while brittle at high index, can be additionally hardened as well.
It's helpful to find a frame manufacturer that can hide higher prescriptions in the thickness of the frame.
Companies like OGI, Anne Et Valentin have suitable frames for high prescriptions, which include adjustable nosepads to get the lenses right, and also a hybrid frame where the lenses might be wrapped in a combination of metal and plastic.
I wear soft contacts and one of my eyes has astigmatism. I've never understood how a symmetrical lens can correct an asymmetrical eyeball. Another strange thing I've seen is that after having put these things in my eyes about 2000 times at this point, I think I can tell that they vary in thickness, sometimes even in the same pack, but it doesn't seem to affect their performance. It all seems a little magical, so I guess I should find some time and go down the youtube rabbit hole that probably exists.
I have tried contact lenses, but it seems they keep rotating around slightly and don’t match the angle of my astigmatism exactly, causing my vision to become blurry. I don’t know if it was a bad fit, but my optometrist told me it is because astigmatism correcting lens come in 15 degree increments, and the angle of my astigmatism falls right in the middle of these increments. I have never heard of anyone else having this issue and would have thought that surely it would be more widespread. Has anyone else had this issue, and have they corrected it?
Hybrid lenses have worked for me. Hard contact in the center with a soft "skirt" around the edge. Ideally, it's the vision of the hard lens and the comfort of the soft.
Or just hard lenses. My first were hard and in retrospect, they were less comfortable, but I had nothing to compare them to so I was more than happy with them. That was quite some time ago, but it was my understanding that hard lenses worked better with astigmatism.
A new doctor said I was on the edge between soft and hard and suggested I trial soft. It felt like wearing nothing. I did sorta notice they would blur on and off at times, but I opted for them and wore them for several years. Then he suggested the hybrid one for one eye and that's what I've been with.
Astigmatism correction requires toric contacts- you should have a small line you have to orient upwards to align it properly, which myopia only contacts don’t have.
Hmm, I have astigmatism and have never had to worry about the alignment of my contact lenses in order to get good correction. Perhaps they are somehow engineered so that they automatically settle in the correct orientation.
It is much more likely that your astigmatism is very mild, and your optometrist decided not to correct it, and corrected only the myopia. This is common because toric contacts are more expensive, more difficult to put in, less breathable, and fall out easier.
As a longtime user of toric contacts, I have tried a dozen brands and every single one has the exact same mark. The shape will keep them from moving out of orientation, but it isn't enough to put them back into orientation if put in wrong, at least not quickly.
Care to share exactly what contacts you are using? Do you have astigmatism in one or both eyes? If it is toric and for astigmatism it will say so on the box- many people have it in only one eye, so the boxes will be different, and only one will say toric.
If you really are using toric contacts, but not aligning the mark, I am willing to bet you will be able to find the mark, align it properly, and your vision will be remarkably better.
Edit: One reason you absolutely need the mark is because the optometrist also needs to be able to tell if they are staying in orientation like they're supposed to, by visually checking the alignment mark. It needs to point straight upwards (vertical). If not, they can prescribe you one that is made pre-rotated to compensate.
No, my prescription is for astigmatism, and my contacts are contacts specifically for astigmatism. In my experience, they orient themselves (and indeed I have never had to worry about their orientation).
I have never previously thought about this in terms of rotation (as I was not even aware that the contact lenses were asymmetrical), but I do normally have to blink a few times after inserting the contact lens before I have sharp vision. But in my experience it takes a few seconds for this to happen and does not depend on inserting the lens at any particular orientation.
I have glasses too, so I would notice if the contact lenses were giving me significantly worse vision!
The brand is '1 Day Acuvue Moist for Astigmatism'.
It might be different for different people, but if I don't align mine, it takes more than a few blinks to align them. I think they will eventually but it could be a very long time (hours?)
The marks aren't the same across brands. Some have three dashes with two oriented horizontal and one up. Others have two equal dashes (My axis was 90° at the time). Others have two with unequal length.
I have astigmatism and toric lenses never worked well for me. I could feel them rotate in my eye and they would never settle perfectly. This was back in 2006, though. And they weren't bad contacts either, they were ordered from Switzerland, allegedly custom made etc. I tried for a few weeks, they never worked well. Every ten blinks or so I'd get blurry vision.
Probably just need a fitting with a different brand.
A lot of times your local distributor doesn't carry many of the astigmatic lenses because they can sit on the shelf for a while (it can 100x the available combinations) so they special order. I doubt they're specially manufactured per order for soft lenses.
That's good to know - thanks! My astigmatism one is definitely special, because it takes an extra two or three weeks to get it from Costco, but I didn't know there was an orientation mark on it. I'll take a look.
I'm blown away that apparently lots of people on here are using toric contacts but their optometrist never instructed them on how to use them ??!!?!? That is horrible.
I think they are pretty much all the same (I've tried almost every brand of them over the years), but will orient themselves... however at least for me it can take a long time, and vision is pretty bad while that is happening. I can't imagine skipping the extra few seconds required to have them perfectly aligned from the beginning.
Interesting! I have always worn symmetric contacts when I (rarely) wear contacts, because I can’t get astigmatism contacts them to sit comfortably in my eyes and not pop out. I wonder if I were to align them first if they would be comfortable enough to wear. I’ll give it a try next time I’m at the optometrist.
Even when they fit properly, they are slightly less comfortable and pop out a little easier, but they have gotten leaps and bounds better in the last few decades. If they didn't work for you a while ago, it's worth trying again.
I have astigmatism, and have worn rigid gas permeable (RGP) lenses starting over 40 years ago. I have tried various types of soft lenses a few times but could never see as well with them.
Astigmatism here too. I have soft lenses for sport use but I can't really read with them easily. Things go out of focus often and I have to wait for eyes to re-focus etc if at all possible.
But for sport use it's fine. For every day use I use glasses and it's perfect. Except of course for the inconvenience of wearing them!
Do you think RGP could be worth trying out for me ?
I've used RGPs for 45 years (now -6.5) because I've been told multiple times that they provide the clearest vision. They only times I have any issues with comfort is grass allergy season but antihistamine drops work great. They tend to be a bit more expensive up front but they also last for years.
My understanding is that even non-toric RGP lenses can correct some degree of astigmatism.
Once thing that you can do with contacts is so-called Monovision [0], where one lens is slightly under-corrected and your brain figures out which to use. I'll put on reading glasses for close detail work but otherwise go from driving to working at a computer without any focus troubles.
> My understanding is that even non-toric RGP lenses can correct some degree of astigmatism.
This is correct. Both of my eyes have astigmatism, but in differing amounts. One eye is corrected with a non-toric RGP while the other requires a toric RGP. The line is around a 1.75/2.00.
RGPs are initially not very comfortable, it's been a long time but when I first got them I would only wear then a few hours, then I slowly worked up to wearing them all day. But now I rarely notice them, unless I get a bit of dust or a loose eyelash under one of them (that can be really uncomfortable).
The nice thing is that they last pretty much forever and care is pretty easy. Just clean them daily and soak them overnight in disinfectant/conditioning fluid.
I used them for years before I got LASIK. They were fantastic – great vision and very comfortable to wear all day.
I wouldn't wear them for sport though because they're quite expensive and they come out easily (they're very small). There's some slim chance they could damage your eye because the material is hard.
Honestly, your setup sounds pretty much ideal. If you're not into the idea of LASIK or PRK or even ICL then I would stick with what you have – glasses plus lenses for sport. Saves you the trouble of switching contacts and reduces your chance of infection or eye troubles wearing and switching lenses all the time.
Not OP, but I'm a lifelong glasses wearer with a strong prescription who has started considering LASIK in recent years; have you had it done, and would you recommend it?
I've only heard from others but the people I've talked to all had some issues post-op which they seemed to rationalize and claimed that it was a net improvement, but I've ruled it out as something I'll ever have done.
It would be really nice to have 20:20 vision without contacts or glasses but some of the stuff I've heard (extreme dry eye feeling, distortions, glare/dazzling at night) just don't sound worth it.
It changed my relationship with the world. Dependency is the name of the game – it all depends how dependent you are on glasses.
If you lost your glasses, would you be able to walk around? I was -6.5 and 3.5 astigmatism and I was stuck if I lost my glasses. Had to carry contact lens boxes and solution with me. Post-LASIK I'm something like +0.5.
I get halos if I look directly at overhead street lights at night, that's about it. It's underwhelming as a side-effect. I don't stare at street lights at night very often!
Yeah ideally it sounds nice. But I've never lost my glasses. I don't carry contact lens supplies with me, worst case with my RGP contacts I can clean them with hand soap or dish detergent and tap water in a pinch.
How do you do with oncoming headlights while driving at night?
So I did ICL (and I recommend it over LASIK), ICL gives thin distinct halos at night around bright lights. I saw them for 2 first weeks only, then I stopped seeing them - brain filtered them out. Now I only see halos in very unusual lighting situations, or if I specifically look for them for fun (and it takes some effort).
I had it done 2 years ago and started taking it for granted about 4 days after the operation. I have perfect sight with no complaints and almost never think about it.
Got mine done 8 years ago with around -3 lenses, but also with some notable astigmatism (forgot the number). Couldn’t have been happier.
Yes, sometimes I get dry eyes, but it is such a minor thing that I don’t even notice it, and it can be alleviated entirely by just using eyedrops twice a day. If I could go back in time and reconsider my decision, I would still go with it 10 times out of 10, not even a question.
I had LASIK in 2012 (wanted to, but couldn't afford it ten years previously). It was amazing. Dry eyes persisted for about a year, which is longer than most people say. Halos? Yeah, a bit, I guess, but not enough to be bothersome. I got a full decade of 20:20 vision. About a year ago (I'm in my 40s) I started to need distance-vision glasses for driving and sports, but a mild prescription and I don't bother with them around the house. I'm still grateful I did it.
I had Lasik in 2007. I had a medium prescription (-3.5 diopters.) Definitely glad I had it, although I do have the tradeoffs of dry eyes (manageable with eyedrops) and some visual artifacts at night (I can drive fine, though wondering if it will eventually be problematic.) The upside of never wearing or thinking about glasses is tremendous, though.
I had it done last year and it's been phenomenal. Just had my annual eye exam and my vision is 20/20, near vision is great and eye health is great. Highly recommend it.
Expect some discomfort afterwards for a day or two. Then expect painfully dry eyes in the morning for a month or three and a bit of light sensitivity. After that it's all roses
In comparison the glasses I have even with the most advanced glass is extremely thick and only a small area doesn't cause color shifting.