I just had prescription lenses made for a Scubapro Clear VU 4 mask made by Prescription Dive Masks in San Diego. Took a while to get them to fill the order (economy?). I need bifocals and have a +3.75 prescription. The general (far) clarity is okay. The bifocal area is very, very narrow and will be a challenge to use for viewing the face on my Cobra dive computer. I have not done a dive with this mask yet. I have also ordered lenses from Leonard Maggiore in New York. He "invented" scuba mask prescription lenses many years ago and has a great reputation. Same mask (a duplicate) and same presciption. I will post a reply when I do comparison dives in the FL Keys in April using both masks.
Corrective Masks and the rest?
- Thread starter Scuds
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Hi tmccabe,
If your distance "sphere" Rx is +3.75 (which makes you farsighted), and if your bifocal "add" is in addition to the +3.75, then your Rx is challenging for a dive mask. If the above is true, then a bonded-on lens with this Rx will be optically inferior vs. eyeglasses with the same Rx.
And your field-of-view will be greatly reduced vs. a non-Rx flat mask.
Why?
All eyeglasses, regardless of Rx, are concave facing our eyes, so the optical path is close to being perpendicular to angles-of-view that are off-axis (when looking through eyeglasses, we don't always stare where our nose points).
Nearsighted divers are lucky: an Rx dive mask for someone who's nearsighted is concave on the inside, just not as steeply curved vs. their eyeglasses.
But a conventionally-made Rx dive-mask lens for someone farsighted must have an inside surface that's convex, bulging toward your eyes, curved the opposite way vs. eyeglasses.
HydroOptix also makes conventional Rx masks, not just our 4.5DD / Double-Dome.
So if indeed you are +3.75 sphere, and also have a bifocal "add," then we'd strongly recommend a lens "carrier" inside a mask, holding conventional bifocal eyeglass lenses. This solution happens to be $60 cheaper vs. conventional bifocal dive-mask lenses (and probably even greater savings, since your Rx would require high-index material if traditional plano-convex).
Any downside? Yes, three surfaces inside must be prepped with anti-fog gel before each dive. But we believe this is the smartest compromise, short of wearing contact lenses.
Here are two links to PDFs with diagrams to fully explain the options:
Our flat-mask bifocal options, depending upon your RX.
AND
For farsighted divers with "Sphere" greater than +2.00, we recommend our insert "lens carrier".
If your distance "sphere" Rx is +3.75 (which makes you farsighted), and if your bifocal "add" is in addition to the +3.75, then your Rx is challenging for a dive mask. If the above is true, then a bonded-on lens with this Rx will be optically inferior vs. eyeglasses with the same Rx.
And your field-of-view will be greatly reduced vs. a non-Rx flat mask.
Why?
All eyeglasses, regardless of Rx, are concave facing our eyes, so the optical path is close to being perpendicular to angles-of-view that are off-axis (when looking through eyeglasses, we don't always stare where our nose points).
Nearsighted divers are lucky: an Rx dive mask for someone who's nearsighted is concave on the inside, just not as steeply curved vs. their eyeglasses.
But a conventionally-made Rx dive-mask lens for someone farsighted must have an inside surface that's convex, bulging toward your eyes, curved the opposite way vs. eyeglasses.
HydroOptix also makes conventional Rx masks, not just our 4.5DD / Double-Dome.
So if indeed you are +3.75 sphere, and also have a bifocal "add," then we'd strongly recommend a lens "carrier" inside a mask, holding conventional bifocal eyeglass lenses. This solution happens to be $60 cheaper vs. conventional bifocal dive-mask lenses (and probably even greater savings, since your Rx would require high-index material if traditional plano-convex).
Any downside? Yes, three surfaces inside must be prepped with anti-fog gel before each dive. But we believe this is the smartest compromise, short of wearing contact lenses.
Here are two links to PDFs with diagrams to fully explain the options:
Our flat-mask bifocal options, depending upon your RX.
AND
For farsighted divers with "Sphere" greater than +2.00, we recommend our insert "lens carrier".
Similar threads
