ARC Worth The Extra Money?

[CyberMarine]

I'm debating whether to pay an extra $50 for the Atomic Venom ARC (anti-reflective coating) or just go with the $200 Venom itself. Do many people wear ARC masks? Do they make a noticeable difference?

Thanks.

 

[SnorkelLA]

Why would you wear sunglasses underwater? Silly question, right? However, that's essentially what you're doing when you scuba dive or snorkel with an ordinary mask because regular float glass used in typical masks cuts the transmission of the available light by about 14%. This can make you miss those fine details when you're diving - like that shark cruising the deep blue off the wall, or that lobster tucked back into a dark crevice. Atomic Aquatics brings you those fine details through use of their ARC (anti-reflective coating) technology and ultra-clear glass. The Venom ARC Mask lenses transmit 98% of the available light so you get better visibility even in murky conditions.

Seems like a gimic to me. Even if standard masks are made with the same type of glass sunglasses are made out of, you would not get "better visibility". If anything it looks like the coating makes the mask DARKER.

Besides, every mask I've ever seen uses TEMPERED GLASS, what the hell is "float glass"? I just bought me a Scubapro Orbit mask yesterday and I love it. Ultra clear, frameless mask, and it's low profile so your field of view is much wider

 

[Carlos Danger]

I felt the Venom mask itself was pretty average in terms of real-world performance for the price; plus there were some early production problems. Personally I would skip it, but if you do decide to pull the trigger I would make sure you get one from a late production run.

For my tastes the Venom is just too big and bulky, and way too expensive. As for the ARC, it works fine, but I frankly cannot justify the added expense over the performance of the more standard lens offerings. I don't really care for masks with coatings anyway. Dive gear takes a pounding and these coatings can often be the first things to suffer, not to mention that $200+ for any mask just seems silly to me.

I have owned 4 Atomic masks (Frameless and Sub-Frame). These have been above average performers overall, but some have suffered skirt and strap failures. All of them leak on me, but that's more due to the quirks of personal fit. The Frameless is Atomic's best mask IMHO, but the Sub-Frame is a very close second. My current favorite mask is the Scubapro Solo Black.

My advice would be to first focus on getting a great fit. If you can justify the other stuff after that, then go for it.

Hope this helps!

 

[CaboJim]

Seems like a gimic to me. Even if standard masks are made with the same type of glass sunglasses are made out of, you would not get "better visibility". If anything it looks like the coating makes the mask DARKER.

Besides, every mask I've ever seen uses TEMPERED GLASS, what the hell is "float glass"? I just bought me a Scubapro Orbit mask yesterday and I love it. Ultra clear, frameless mask, and it's low profile so your field of view is much wider

Here we go, bashing products that that poster has little or no knowledge of, just because its different than what he/she wears...
This one of the biggest problems with Scubaboard... experts in everything scuba, but knows nada....tiresome....

BTW, I have an ARC mask, & love it...

 

[CT Sean]

Seems like a gimic to me. Even if standard masks are made with the same type of glass sunglasses are made out of, you would not get "better visibility". If anything it looks like the coating makes the mask DARKER.

Besides, every mask I've ever seen uses TEMPERED GLASS, what the hell is "float glass"? I just bought me a Scubapro Orbit mask yesterday and I love it. Ultra clear, frameless mask, and it's low profile so your field of view is much wider

Float glass: Float glass - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia short story is it's your standard flat glass (think "window"), only difference being that is has been tempered for Scuba masks. Atomic claims the Venom uses Optical glass which is much more refined.

My main concern with the coating (any coating) is the opportunity to damage it.

 

[SnorkelLA]

Here we go, bashing products that that poster has little or no knowledge of, just because its different than what he/she wears...
This one of the biggest problems with Scubaboard... experts in everything scuba, but knows nada....tiresome....

BTW, I have an ARC mask, & love it...

I wasn't bashing it- the company tried to make this "ARC" coating seem like god. Only reason I bought the Orbit was because I'm handing my gear down to someone, and needed new mask, fins and snorkel. Paying $200 for ANY mask non-perscription is just silly. Top it off with some "see everything and get better visibility" from a coating. I had no intentions of "bashing" a product. I have owned many different pieces of gear from just about every manufacturer around, so I have no brand preference. I only tell it like it is- or in this case, like it looks.

---------- Post added ----------

Oh, and OP, there's a thread a few below yours talking about the masks seperating at the seem of the frame and the skirt from multiple users. Pass it. Rule of thumb- if something has a reputation of failing NOT due to diver error, just pass on it for your own safety, financially and physically.

 

[CaboJim]

You were bashing the product, calling it a gimic? The coating does cut glare, I haven't seen any drop off in lighting, wearing the Arc type mask I bought over a year ago. Don't really know about the atomic mask, but I paid $70 for mine, made by oceanways.... Just because it not something you would buy doesn't make it a gimic or inferior product....pathetic...

 

[chrpai]

My Hog mask for $40 seems nice enough to me...

 

[CyberMarine]

Oh, and OP, there's a thread a few below yours talking about the masks seperating at the seem of the frame and the skirt from multiple users. Pass it. Rule of thumb- if something has a reputation of failing NOT due to diver error, just pass on it for your own safety, financially and physically.

Oh I've been keeping a close eye on that thread. And that's a good point: something like this happens, you have to question the manufacturer's reputation. OTOH, a few bad apples...

 

[SnorkelLA]

You were bashing the product, calling it a gimic? The coating does cut glare, I haven't seen any drop off in lighting, wearing the Arc type mask I bought over a year ago. Don't really know about the atomic mask, but I paid $70 for mine, made by oceanways.... Just because it not something you would buy doesn't make it a gimic or inferior product....pathetic...

Like I said, I wasn't bashing it. I was telling him that it sounded like a gimic. I have no experience with this mask in particular, but when a product has a history of failing by seams coming apart, you have to question it. I have nothing against the mask itself without the coating, in fact, from what I've read the optical quality is superb. I wasn't saying the WHOLE mask is a gimick, just this ARC coating. It seems to me if they would fix the seaming issue, they'd have this down pat.

The only reason I mentioned my own mask was because I like it. There's no rule that says you can't suggest a product that YOU know to be of good quality when you're not sure about the one in question.