P
Help Support :
S.Deaville
Well-known member
I am a young shooter at 26. My eyes are very good and dont need glasses etc. I bought a set of the Outlaw X Zeiss and
i dont care what anyone says. For me they help me see the clay better against a number of different backgrounds.
Best 600 quid i have spent in a long time.
i dont care what anyone says. For me they help me see the clay better against a number of different backgrounds.
Best 600 quid i have spent in a long time.
P
** Pending Removal **
Guest
+1
The technology in lenses now is very clever.....true story
Trap shooters embrace any new technology that make orange visible when cutting the skyline.
46N are brilliant for this. I am not of course saying look into the sun with them.
For looking at a target passing through the sun (sporting) I would always reach for Oks Fire or Randolph black astronaut ones.
The technology in lenses now is very clever.....true story
Trap shooters embrace any new technology that make orange visible when cutting the skyline.
46N are brilliant for this. I am not of course saying look into the sun with them.
For looking at a target passing through the sun (sporting) I would always reach for Oks Fire or Randolph black astronaut ones.
EdLyons
Well-known member
I find this a really interesting observation. It "sort of" makes sense, but with experience I've found it goes in the same pot as "most women are cross dominant". Sounds feasible, isn't true.
What is irrefutable is that we need an accurate prescription, optimized for distance that takes our ocular and cortical dominance into account, which is correctly centred for shooting and the level of tint is appropriate for the person.
We tend to think that "older eyes" can struggle as "they become weaker". Do they? Who is classed as an older shooter?
What can happen is the refracting media changes, ie, cataracts can begin to form and the fovea can lose sensitivity (macular degeneration occurs) although the former generally starts around 60 and the latter 70years of age, if at all.
Lots of good, balanced, focussed light is a good thing, that is what Anti Reflection coats are for and this is why Pilla lenses and prescription Oakleys carry more cost - they filter out the scrap light and deliver clarity IF the above points have been met.
I have lots of "older shooters" that need anything BUT clear lenses and the new tint matching equipment I am assessing is really valuable in this area - more to come in the coming months!
Anyway, I'd better answer the OP question...back soon. True story :spiteful:
I have been using Straub High Scorers Hy-Lo's for about 13 years or more. Cost wise quite cheap.....about £140 and that includes three sets of lenses and a metal case. As far as I know, Chris Potter Guns are still the importers, they are made in Australia to a high standard. I have tried various makes over the years, but these High Scorers are good quality at a fair price.
Jeremy Baker
Well-known member
Last edited by a moderator:
EdLyons
Well-known member
So, here is my opinion, for what i's worth!
Pilla
Good products with an excellent range of tints available although the 46N is perhaps the only product in the "new" incarnation that is truly different from the old, perfectly functional lenses.
They don't win points for aesthetics, and some of the original frames could be quite heavy.
They have addressed the weight issue with the new Outlaw X, Fugitive and 500 Series - they have also made them a lot more comfortable with the gel pad bridge - the old nose pieces were horrible.
The lens change system is good - the "poppers" allow a rapid switch without getting them grubby.
They are costly, but generally score well for me as a high end product.
It is worth noting they have a "budget" option, the Hawk, which goes out around £200 for a frame and three lenses. The Panther lenses fit this too.
Beretta and Castellani do similar looking products for a much lower price point but are not as refined.
Oakley
Robust, well made, lightweight. Unfortunately a dwindling availability of product since their takeover by Luxottica. Mframe looks to be phased out very soon and shooting-specific lenses such as G26 are gone forever it appears.
The Radar and Radarlock options do a good job although some people can find the black nose-piece and low brow-bar off putting - all depends on individual face shape and gun position. The Radarlock has a nice easy lens change system, the original Radar can be a devil.
Bottle Rocket and Flak XLJ work very well and the lens change is quite straight forward.
Think in terms of £75 for an Mframe with a standard lens (ie, non-iridium coated, non polarized) and £225 ish for a Radar array with two lenses. Also available from Ebay and discount stores. Be aware of forgeries as Fauxkleys look ok in the photo but feel very cheap when you actually get them!
Where Oakley blast the competition is in their prescription range - wonderful lenses delivered quickly and with great tint choice. Expect to pay £205 to £300 for a set of lenses (frame extra) depending on type.
Randolph Engineering
Versatile, lightweight, affordable. In the same style as Decot and Straub Hi Scorers. I tend to prefer RE and their product support is good.
Great lens choice and everything is glazeable to prescription apart form the XLW which requires an insert.
Expect to pay between £140 and £180 for a frame, £39 for basic lenses and £90 to £120 for Premium options (Polarized and the "astronaut" CMT)
Adidas
Only real option is the T-Sight, actually a golf frame but the lightest of all, no brow bar and good lenses, three for about £189.
Top Gun, Evolution, Jack Pyke products - three lenses and a frame for £40. Do a job, pass all ballistic safety tests. Lens quality and tints are not great but keep the sun out and protect your eyes well so a fine budget choice.
Wiley X
A more advanced version of the above, a good middle ground but not a favourite of mine.
Hope that helps!
Pilla
Good products with an excellent range of tints available although the 46N is perhaps the only product in the "new" incarnation that is truly different from the old, perfectly functional lenses.
They don't win points for aesthetics, and some of the original frames could be quite heavy.
They have addressed the weight issue with the new Outlaw X, Fugitive and 500 Series - they have also made them a lot more comfortable with the gel pad bridge - the old nose pieces were horrible.
The lens change system is good - the "poppers" allow a rapid switch without getting them grubby.
They are costly, but generally score well for me as a high end product.
It is worth noting they have a "budget" option, the Hawk, which goes out around £200 for a frame and three lenses. The Panther lenses fit this too.
Beretta and Castellani do similar looking products for a much lower price point but are not as refined.
Oakley
Robust, well made, lightweight. Unfortunately a dwindling availability of product since their takeover by Luxottica. Mframe looks to be phased out very soon and shooting-specific lenses such as G26 are gone forever it appears.
The Radar and Radarlock options do a good job although some people can find the black nose-piece and low brow-bar off putting - all depends on individual face shape and gun position. The Radarlock has a nice easy lens change system, the original Radar can be a devil.
Bottle Rocket and Flak XLJ work very well and the lens change is quite straight forward.
Think in terms of £75 for an Mframe with a standard lens (ie, non-iridium coated, non polarized) and £225 ish for a Radar array with two lenses. Also available from Ebay and discount stores. Be aware of forgeries as Fauxkleys look ok in the photo but feel very cheap when you actually get them!
Where Oakley blast the competition is in their prescription range - wonderful lenses delivered quickly and with great tint choice. Expect to pay £205 to £300 for a set of lenses (frame extra) depending on type.
Randolph Engineering
Versatile, lightweight, affordable. In the same style as Decot and Straub Hi Scorers. I tend to prefer RE and their product support is good.
Great lens choice and everything is glazeable to prescription apart form the XLW which requires an insert.
Expect to pay between £140 and £180 for a frame, £39 for basic lenses and £90 to £120 for Premium options (Polarized and the "astronaut" CMT)
Adidas
Only real option is the T-Sight, actually a golf frame but the lightest of all, no brow bar and good lenses, three for about £189.
Top Gun, Evolution, Jack Pyke products - three lenses and a frame for £40. Do a job, pass all ballistic safety tests. Lens quality and tints are not great but keep the sun out and protect your eyes well so a fine budget choice.
Wiley X
A more advanced version of the above, a good middle ground but not a favourite of mine.
Hope that helps!
Gene Holmes
Well-known member
Loving my Oakleys with prescription lenses from Ed Lyons
I have Oakley M frames, they wrap tightly round my face, which is fine until it is hot...then they mist up badly and I have to slide them forward on my nose to let some air flow...then they are uncomfortable to wear!?!? I feel very 'aware' that I'm wearing them some times.
Ben H loaned me a pair of Pilla (Panther?) with 46N lenses to wear while having a lesson, very comfortable, totaly forgot I was wearing them, no misting, didn't feel 'enclosed' like I do with the Oakleys some times...
Ben H loaned me a pair of Pilla (Panther?) with 46N lenses to wear while having a lesson, very comfortable, totaly forgot I was wearing them, no misting, didn't feel 'enclosed' like I do with the Oakleys some times...
Ed Lyons,
two very good posts from someone who I would consider to be knowledgeable.
If I may say so, it is very apparent that Pilla ARE a good product, but outrageously expensive and it is very obvious from numerous product changes that they are experimenting with the customers money.
Continuous product development or improvement some could call it, but if they have had to make so many alterations, do they REALLY know what they are doing?
P.S. Loved the vocabulary, such as, fovea, macular degeneration, ocular and cortical dominance .
Then you throw it all in the bin using the description 'scrap' light. :haha:
Darkside,
Ben H did not 'Loan' you a set Pilla glasses, at the prices he charges, you bought them.
two very good posts from someone who I would consider to be knowledgeable.
If I may say so, it is very apparent that Pilla ARE a good product, but outrageously expensive and it is very obvious from numerous product changes that they are experimenting with the customers money.
Continuous product development or improvement some could call it, but if they have had to make so many alterations, do they REALLY know what they are doing?
P.S. Loved the vocabulary, such as, fovea, macular degeneration, ocular and cortical dominance .
Then you throw it all in the bin using the description 'scrap' light. :haha:
Darkside,
Ben H did not 'Loan' you a set Pilla glasses, at the prices he charges, you bought them.
Last edited by a moderator:
EdLyons
Well-known member
Thank you Peter. Sorry I added the unnecessary "s" :biggrin:
Growl
Well-known member
Great review and explanation Ed, don't know where my budget Doyle top shot 500's come in, seem to be comforable and seems to be no distortion in lenses, nice easy changeover (arms detach from lenses) and two types of nose bridge. Present from the missus so wouldn't want to dump them in exchange for Pilla in case I upset my funding stream!
considering booking a check up with you in the near future but I am now better waiting until you have fully assessed your new tinting equipment???
cheers, keep on knocking them outa the sky, Growl.
considering booking a check up with you in the near future but I am now better waiting until you have fully assessed your new tinting equipment???
cheers, keep on knocking them outa the sky, Growl.
S
Supercharged
Guest
Thanks guys................................now I,m sure I don't know 
Growl
Well-known member
Ed's review above is about as good as you will get on the relative merits of glasses available, as an all round mid range solution it seems the Oakleys would be a good option - reading into the range of replies.
teepee1234
Well-known member
Jeremy Baker
Well-known member
PhilS
Well-known member
I absolutely love my RE Rangers from Ed.
The purple lenses are superb in all conditions so far.
Sent from my GT-I9305 using Tapatalk 4
The purple lenses are superb in all conditions so far.
Sent from my GT-I9305 using Tapatalk 4
ehb102
Well-known member
The reason I went to Mr Lyons was to find out what was best for me. I have a reasonably difficult prescription and If I had tried to work it out on my own I am fairly certain I would have made a £300 mistake. I reckon I'm quids in! As it happens, I ended up with Randolph Sporters. They do not flatter me. Luckily (1) they look a little less silly when worn with a baseball cap than they do a flat cap, although I look more American than I like, and (2) I don't have to look at me. These have the clip on filters so I can change colours when I like. The bills was not small, but given then prices you can pay for a non-prescription set it looks reasonable in comparison.
Last edited by a moderator:
