


January 12, 2011
HaberVision Offers Polarized Glasses With the Readers On Top
by Kirk Deeter
Those of you who need a little eyesight assist on the river might want to check this out (and supposedly, 90 percent of you under-40s will need reading lenses eventually)...
HaberVision is an eyewear company that sells its products via its website. They say that by eliminating the middle man (the retail store), they can sell directly to you at wholesale prices. For example the "Nice" model features polished glass, polarized lenses (the kind anglers often pay $150 or more for), and HaberVision sells them for $87.50.
I was particularly interested in these shown in the picture... if you look closely, you'll notice they have "readers"... but not in the bottom of the lenses, rather, on the top! I haven't fished in these yet, but I am intrigued. I do wear a progressive lens with close-range focus at the very bottom of my glasses now, and the problem with that is, when I guide, most of the time I'm looking down. Not just when I'm tying on flies, but also when I'm spotting fish... heck, even walking on a rocky riverbed (looking for snakes). And frankly, the reader lenses on the bottom can be inconvenient, especially when I'm walking along and my feet look fuzzy.
Also, when I tie things on, I inevitably tilt my head back to look down my nose through the reader lenses. With these, it seems like the forward-down view is not bothered by the reader lenses...and when it's time to tie on a fly, I slide them down my nose a bit, and I can see at close range without craning my neck.
No matter how you slice it, losing your close-in acuity stinks...but it's a fact of life. I'm not big on flip-downs or wrap-arounds, and custom prescription polarized shades can set you back at least a few hundred bucks. These "Up" bi-focals cost under $80. I'll let you know how they work out...what's your guess?
Comments (12)
Why would the readers be on top? You'd really have to bend your neck down to tie on a fly. I just can't accept a limited field of view that bifocals create. I see things in my peripheral view that can make for a good fish catching day, and not if my peripheral view is restricted. I prefer to have a pair of readers for when I need them.
I'm interested in hearing the results of how the clarity and polarization is on those specs.
Sounds like a great idea and some planning went into it before-hand. Its too bad I won't be needing to try these out :)
Sounds like a great idea and some planning went into it before-hand. Its too bad I won't be needing to try these out :)
that's pretty pricey for a regular person, don't you think?
I absolutely love my Habers, and although I'm still young, I find that the Kenai model with bifocals are by far my favorite pair.
jamesti..What, in your mind, is a "regular" person? If someone fishes all the time, especially fly fishes, I sure don't see that as something a "regular" person wouldn't own. This thread sure has a lot of posters that want product on the cheap for outdoor activity that I would think they do all the time. I see regular young guys driving down the road in the 3/4 ton new pickup pulling a $25,000, or more boat, and they are bait fisherman. Can the bait guy afford better equipment than a fly guy?
I am with Nick on this one. I am far to young for readers but "accidentally" purchased a pair of bi-focal fishing glasses a couple years ago. You cannot see the ground to walk with the close up lenses located on the bottom. Again, this is a problem I do not have to worry about for many years.
Buckhunter..You are right for sure. What you have to do is train yourself to move your head, not your eyes. I need them, but can't stand bi-focals because they restrict my field of view. I had some $300 prescription glasses made up with expensive frames, and had the bi-focal bottom portion cut way down so it wasn't so high. It was cut so low, I can't even use the bifocal portion. Now I have a $150 pair with no bifocal, just for distance, and dyed purple to highlight objects. I carry a dollar pair of cheaters in my vest for up close stuff.
And does anyone see any use for readers on top? That must be a joke.
The Haber Vision glasses in this article are great looking; but if you are on a limited budget here is a link to a pair of fishing bifocal/polarized sunglasses for $30. (discount for new buyers) from my favorite online retailer. They have good deals on tippit and leader material too!
Try ww.sierratradingpost.com and search for item #1056F or Hatteras-Sport-Bi-Focal-Sunglasses-Polarized.
I now see the advantage of the bifocals on top. Wish these threads had some informative posters that could fill in the blanks once in awhile. They are up top so you can see where you are walking, and that becomes a big problem with the bifocals on the bottom. When you want to tie a fly, or a new tippet on, you can move the glasses down on your nose, and use the bifocal portion. I see them described in the Orvis catalog I received. Supposedly the Orvis guy, Perkins, designed the glasses.
Post a Comment
The Haber Vision glasses in this article are great looking; but if you are on a limited budget here is a link to a pair of fishing bifocal/polarized sunglasses for $30. (discount for new buyers) from my favorite online retailer. They have good deals on tippit and leader material too!
Try ww.sierratradingpost.com and search for item #1056F or Hatteras-Sport-Bi-Focal-Sunglasses-Polarized.
Why would the readers be on top? You'd really have to bend your neck down to tie on a fly. I just can't accept a limited field of view that bifocals create. I see things in my peripheral view that can make for a good fish catching day, and not if my peripheral view is restricted. I prefer to have a pair of readers for when I need them.
I'm interested in hearing the results of how the clarity and polarization is on those specs.
Sounds like a great idea and some planning went into it before-hand. Its too bad I won't be needing to try these out :)
Sounds like a great idea and some planning went into it before-hand. Its too bad I won't be needing to try these out :)
that's pretty pricey for a regular person, don't you think?
I absolutely love my Habers, and although I'm still young, I find that the Kenai model with bifocals are by far my favorite pair.
jamesti..What, in your mind, is a "regular" person? If someone fishes all the time, especially fly fishes, I sure don't see that as something a "regular" person wouldn't own. This thread sure has a lot of posters that want product on the cheap for outdoor activity that I would think they do all the time. I see regular young guys driving down the road in the 3/4 ton new pickup pulling a $25,000, or more boat, and they are bait fisherman. Can the bait guy afford better equipment than a fly guy?
I am with Nick on this one. I am far to young for readers but "accidentally" purchased a pair of bi-focal fishing glasses a couple years ago. You cannot see the ground to walk with the close up lenses located on the bottom. Again, this is a problem I do not have to worry about for many years.
Buckhunter..You are right for sure. What you have to do is train yourself to move your head, not your eyes. I need them, but can't stand bi-focals because they restrict my field of view. I had some $300 prescription glasses made up with expensive frames, and had the bi-focal bottom portion cut way down so it wasn't so high. It was cut so low, I can't even use the bifocal portion. Now I have a $150 pair with no bifocal, just for distance, and dyed purple to highlight objects. I carry a dollar pair of cheaters in my vest for up close stuff.
And does anyone see any use for readers on top? That must be a joke.
I now see the advantage of the bifocals on top. Wish these threads had some informative posters that could fill in the blanks once in awhile. They are up top so you can see where you are walking, and that becomes a big problem with the bifocals on the bottom. When you want to tie a fly, or a new tippet on, you can move the glasses down on your nose, and use the bifocal portion. I see them described in the Orvis catalog I received. Supposedly the Orvis guy, Perkins, designed the glasses.
Post a Comment