progressives vs. bifocals and trifocals

I'm due for another eye exam. Haven't done it yet, but soon will. For the last two eye exams I've had, it was recommended to me to get progressive lenses. I said no both times because I didn't feel I needed them. But now I'm at the point where I might.

A question then popped into my mind:

"Wait a second.. how come bifocals were never recommended to me?"

After having that thought, I did some research on this, and found out why they were recommended in the first place.

I could, if I wanted to, get myself some cheap peepers, which they even make for bifocals. I'm glad those exist because the price is certainly nice, but I don't think they'd work very well for my vision situation. Prescription eyeglasses is the better option...

...but not progressives, because I'm certain I'd hate them.

Here are the three huge issues with progressives:

First, the zones.

Progressives are called what they are because the magnification literally progresses as you go down the lens. All well and good, but there are the spots in the lens where the progressions start and end, i.e. from zone to zone. This is where distortions can happen and things can get out-of-focus.

Think of the lens magnifications divided into regular/medium/high (i.e. distance, reading a computer screen, reading a book). The transitions from regular-to-medium and medium-to-high zones are where the distortions can happen, as well as the periphery.

The only way to mitigate the distortion crap is to spend huge (as in anywhere from $600 up to 4 figures for just for the lenses, never mind frames) to get computer-algorithmically crafted lenses that better fine tune the zones.

But even after getting all that done and spending a mint to get it, it's no guarantee you'll get distortion-free progressive lenses.

Second, peripheral vision may become completely useless.

With progressives, there's always the risk that the outer edges of the lens may be completely worthless for seeing anything. Smaller lenses probably don't have this issue, but for larger ones (which I do prefer), uh, yeah, problem.

It is typical that on progressives, the outer edges have less optical power, which can lead to seeing distortion, which leads straight to can't-see-shit peripherally.

Third, a set progressive lenses is a jack of all trades and a master of none.

Wearing progressives is like wearing a set of eyeglasses that has 20 different levels or more of magnification spread out over the lens.

Great, right? Not really. The problem is that progressives do not make any one particular distance truly view in focus. Single magnification is always sharper.

Compared to bifocals and trifocals...

Bifocals give you two magnification levels, and trifocals three. Easy enough to understand. There is a pronounced line on the lens where the magnification begins and ends. Also, peripheral vision is not wrecked since it's really easy to see where the bi/tri part ends, and there isn't anything wacky going on with the magnification level at the edges.

Adaptation

Some adapt to how progressives work, while others give it the good ol' college try, never quite fully adapt, and junk them for bifocals or trifocals instead.

More importantly, what nobody says after wearing progressives for the first time is, "I can see perfectly." That doesn't happen. You have to learn how to see again. Why? You have to get used to those zone-to-zone distortions, because they will be there.

What really ticks me off...

...has nothing to do with progressives themselves, but rather that eye doctors all say the same thing. "Yeah, you need progressives. Everyone loves 'em. Really."

Absolutely no mention of bifocals even though they were always an option. The progressives are "recommended" purely as a cash grab because they're always more expensive. That is why the eye doctor always "recommends" those and bifocals are never given a mention.

What I've decided...

...is that since my prescription isn't that strong, I'll get the exam, and then buy two sets. One single vision set, and the other bifocals just to see if I can get along with them.

If the bifocals irk me, then I may entertain the idea of progressives. But I'm certainly not spending a grand for that computer-algorithmically fine tuned lens crap, as I'm pretty sure it wouldn't make that much of a difference.

With progressives, it's the distortions and peripheral vision I'd be most concerned with. I could probably get used to the distortions, but if I couldn't see anything peripherally at the outer edges of the lens, that's a no-sale.

🙂 Be a good person and leave a tip

Published 2026 Feb 5