User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:05:07 PM EDT
[#1]
shiv.
what are telephoto lenses? you mean polarized, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:06:04 PM EDT
[#2]
Good, glad we established that you are dating an idiot. It's all good. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:06:52 PM EDT
[#3]
Actually I meant photochromatic.....and edited the post to say so...... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:10:32 PM EDT
[#4]
55 for non-iridium (grey, VR28, Clear, Persimmon) 75 for black iridium |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:12:57 PM EDT
[#5]
I am making point. Optical clarity is just as important when you use sunglasses. But apparently thats to fucking complex a concept for you to handle. Did you miss that part when other people were trying to explain that to you or do we need need to get out the etch-a-sketch for you? |
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:13:50 PM EDT
[#6]
Congratulations, you have outdone yourself!! It takes a real winner to insult someone 's girlfriend over the internet. I'm impressed at your level of sophistication and vast vocabulary! You must really have some deep seeded sunglass issues if this is making you so angry. Repeat after me, "Expensive sunglasses are good, expensive sunglasses are good". Did that help? |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:15:03 PM EDT
[#7]
All bow down to the $5 gas-station mirrored-sunglass boy from Georgia....
He's edjimicated us today. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:17:12 PM EDT
[#8]
honestly , then that is a good price for what they offer. retail versions are about twice that... i personally would buy a pair of oakleys at that price despite what i stated earlier. i still think anything over 100$ is too much for a single pair of frames and lenses. STLRN- i am assuming that these prices are available only to military and law enforcement, correct? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:17:17 PM EDT
[#9]
Any chance you and Shivan might be sharing a brain?? Who has it now, so I will know who to respond to next. And to think, I once considered AR15.com incapable of comprehensible and detailed debating. Thanks for proving me wrong! Oh, BTW, are they even letting you play with an Etch-A-Sketch yet? Seems to be a little out of your league right now... |
|||||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:19:35 PM EDT
[#10]
Well the form says Government and Military on it, but I remember talking to the UPS man a while back and him saying the could get them at a reduced price also. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:21:50 PM EDT
[#11]
Doing what I can for you, Lumpy... Actually, they are $10 gas-station mirrored-sunglasses. If you know where I can get them for $5, please let me know! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:24:48 PM EDT
[#12]
Angry? I'm not angry at all.....a bit perplexed at your idiocy. I guess it's par for the course here in general discussion. You basically called anyone who spent over $100 for sunglasses an idiot. I am using YOUR argument and insinuations to get to the root of what you said.... In the end, your girlfriend is just as big an idiot as the rest of us who bought quality eyewear. Again, it's all good.... Wait, let's look at what I paid for my M-Frames.......$85 with a buddies' employee discount....so I guess it boils down to your girlfriend being the idiot. Cool....carry on. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:28:02 PM EDT
[#13]
hrmmm... well if anyone else knows where civvies can get a pair for these kind of prices that would be awesome. i might have to actually break down and try a pair. i looked on ebay and the going price is in the 65-70$ range for the standrad SI's i'm too worried about getting a pair of Foakleys instead of the real mccoy though. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:29:04 PM EDT
[#14]
|
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:31:01 PM EDT
[#15]
Bullshit! They will give you $20 to go towards the purchace of another pair. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:31:06 PM EDT
[#16]
hey, i think that anyone who spends over 100$ is a idiot, too.
but one mand floor is another man's ceiling and i'm sure there are things that i spend good money for that other people think are stupid. my biggest point was that even oakley themselves are freely admitting (via the SI line) that their stuff is overpriced. why pay 100$ for a 50$ pair of glasses? at 50$ if anything happens to them, get another pair! you are still where you would have been in the first place buying them at full retail... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:31:27 PM EDT
[#17]
Here is my original response. Where have I called anyone an idiot for spending $100 on sunglasses? I love the way people like to make up things you've said! |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:31:41 PM EDT
[#18]
Bullshit! They will give you $20 to go towards the purchace of another pair. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:32:08 PM EDT
[#19]
yeah, i thought that didn't sound right... i thought maybe their policy had changed. |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:34:10 PM EDT
[#20]
So, are you suggesting the only way to get "quality" eyewear is by spending a lot of money on them?? Once again, you were bordering on intelligent, but you slipped back off... |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:34:55 PM EDT
[#21]
I'd advise you check into the coating process alleged to be used on the Oakley copies. They cite "UV400," which is apparently rarely done properly by lens manufacturers. Basically, these copies suck and couldn't be good for your eyes.
You may want to look for discounted, polarized Maui Jims or Raybans instead . They'll actually have UVA and UVB protection. I have tended to lose my sunglasses real fast. I found the solution was to buy Oakley Juliets. They are polarized and cost me about $275. There's no way in hell I'm losing them. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:35:51 PM EDT
[#22]
Backpeddle, backpeddle....
Totality of your comments. 
|
||||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:37:36 PM EDT
[#23]
Look, I am going to eat dinner now. Shivan, you and lumpy get together and come up with as best a response as you can. Use Lumpy's Etch-A-Sketch if you have to. You have thirty minutes, so make me proud!!
Oh rules are rules. Remember, it has to be intelligent and thought-provoking, so don't waste my time! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:39:17 PM EDT
[#24]
Actually what I am suggesting is that you UNDERSTAND what you are buying....some do, some don't...... Asking your original question puts you squarely in the second category. Cheers.....  |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:40:14 PM EDT
[#25]
Make sure to remind your girlfriend that she is an idiot.......mmkay? Good. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:41:00 PM EDT
[#26]
well, moving right along to the topic at hand... anyone know where to get CHEAP OAKLEYs?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:42:55 PM EDT
[#27]
I used an employee discount of a store employee to get my M-Frames. There are always .mil .cop guys who will hook you up. Some have posted on this site...... 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 1:47:33 PM EDT
[#28]
.mil
.cop any hookups out there? ;) PM me if you can help i might have some discounts through my employer that we can trade. -colin |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 2:19:49 PM EDT
[#29]
Not arguing with you but I just sent a pair of E-wires to Oakley less than two weeks ago that had a bent frame. Of course it was my fault but I heard how wonderful Oakley was at repairing/replacing frames. They called me after receiving them and said it would be $93.00 to replace to frames. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 2:37:11 PM EDT
[#30]
Ok, I'm back. Now, were you able to come up with that all by yourself, or did someone help you?? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 2:44:02 PM EDT
[#31]
If the name calling doesn't stop these cheap sunglasses are going to cost some accounts.
Stop behaving like little boys on the playground. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 2:45:35 PM EDT
[#32]
FWIW - it has been a while - but i broke my ProM-frame once(a GIFT/employee discount too - 2 lenses + the hardcase for 85 bucks  ) and it was out of warrantty.I called oakley up and they asked to include 17 or 19 bucks (can't remember) for postage/handling and sent me a new one with a soft case with the assurance that if it broke again - same thing. It has been 4 years though so their policy may have changed or this may be just the policy for pro-m frames which i'm sure is much cheaper to produce than the complicated metal frames. Re the original Q - best price is through someone that works through sunglass hut etc. Unfortunately, my contact has long since moved on. DD |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 2:49:08 PM EDT
[#33]
But he started it!! Just kidding !!!I always enjoy a little heated conversation on AR15.com! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 2:59:32 PM EDT
[#34]
as I was saying about 50 posts ago I got me a pair of polarized guard dogs sidecars, has anyone everheard of them, there website was pretty cool, and they were 90 bucks for the polarized and you get 3 sets of lenses all polarized.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 4:14:57 PM EDT
[#35]
I think I paid $240 for them. My health insurance paid $150 something of them since they won't cover my new Acuvue Advance contacts so I paid the difference and bought my own contacts. They would cover the Acuvue 2s but not these ones for some reason. My Rx Oakleys are like these, but with smoke Oakley installed lenses. oakley.com/catalog/colors/eyewear/opthalmic/spike/lens_2/titanium_clear |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 5:15:54 PM EDT
[#36]
I wonder if anyone has ever done a blind comparison test of distortion with high-end vs inexpensive sunglasses ?
What if a person were put in a brightly lit room looking at a standard Snellen eye chart. A pair of sunglasses is put on without letting the tester see the brand (or perhaps Foakleys are used). The person is then tested to get reading of their myopic vision. Then the test is repeated with a second pair. Would the myopic vision score be any better ? If so, great, then assuming that the more expensive pair won, that proves that they have lower perceptible distortion. If no difference, or if the lower price pair wins, then either the distortion is no better, or it is not measurably better using just your eyes. Wonder if anyone has ever done this ? Just a thought...I'd like to see the results myself.. Ed |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 5:45:32 PM EDT
[#37]
Its like HK vs Special Weapons:
To somebody that doesnt know the difference (or doesnt care), they're identical and the more expensive product is not worth the extra money, but there are some out there that are willing to pay for the (however slight) edge in quality that the original offers over the knock-off. I love my Oakley Minutes, I'm never going back to cheap glasses. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 5:47:05 PM EDT
[#38]
eye charts are simply quantitative, not qualitative. just like lasik docs that promise 20/20 vision afterwards. yeah, you can read the 20/20 line of the chart, but how sharp if it? how many of the "e" are there? are there bright halos around everything? eye charts don't mean shit. just because you can make out a letter doesn't mean shit about how "well" you are actually seeing it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 6:01:17 PM EDT
[#39]
I have a pair of M frames that bought 6 or 7 yrs ago. The best $90 [then] I spent. They have been through the wringer. I would splurge for the full amount again in a heart beat. After all, it's your eyes, you only get 2 and they need to last a lifetime.
You can get the knock offs for the cool factor. But if you are serious about protecting your peepers, get the real deal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 6:02:27 PM EDT
[#40]
Sometimes Sunglass Hut has a sale on them. Go be a mall rat for a minute and check. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 6:27:47 PM EDT
[#41]
Good advice. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 6:39:17 PM EDT
[#42]
 I have a pair of Costa Del Mar Fluids and the optical clarity and distortion free viewing is perfect! By the way, I own Armalite, Bushmaster and Colt AR's not because they cost more...but because they are better. BigDozer66 |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 7:16:08 PM EDT
[#43]
So are you trying to say that if a lens causes halos, say by spherical aberation, that it won't make it more difficult to read the letters as they get smaller ? You are absolutely incorrect on that. If a lens contains perceivable distortion, then it will indeed make the smaller letters harder to read and produce a reasonable measurement of lens quality. Wal-Mart specials will make the chart almost unreadable. I'd just like to see the difference between a 'reasonable' pair of sunglasses (whatever that is) and the $200 ultra deluxe models. I'm frankly amazed when I see someone with a $100 pair of Ray-bans and when you look at them up close, the lenses are scratched all to hell from years of wear. They'd be much better off to pitch them and pick up a new pair of any kind, but people just don't want to admit that the usable life of their sunglasses is gone. Ed |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 7:32:49 PM EDT
[#44]
any sort of lens distortion including chromatic and spherical aberration as well as improper and inconsistent light transmission, etc. "can" cause standard eye charts to be more difficult to read.
a capital "E" or any sequence of capital letters however can be distorted both horizontally, vertically, diagonally and have blue shadow trailing them and still be crisp and legible. the brain being a powerful processor can and ultimately will compensate for deficiencies in distorted lenses especially when it comes to sharply defined objects with extremely high contrast (i.e. a standard eye chart) what your eye cannot do is compensate for the loss of accuracy and spatial relation that distortion can cause when ligning up things such as gun sights and especially when transitioning from peripheral vision (outside of the lens area) to the distorted area inside of the lens. here is a great example: i have a 30mm fisheye lens for my camera that resolves more line pairs per millimeter when compared to my 150mm portrait lens (medium format camera) the fisheye image of a standard eye chart might be able to discern even one row below what the 150mm could resolve (with adequate correction for perspective- of course) even though the 30mm undoubtedly has a qualitatively better optical arrangement- no one would dare say that such a test would be representative of its level of distortion... what i'm trying to say is that you are interested in measuring one thing by measuring another unrelated component. just like if you were to weigh something when what you were really looking to find was it's density. you are solving for a solution for a wholly unrelated issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 8:09:29 PM EDT
[#45]
here is a graphic i made to show you what im talking about.
 #1 approximates cheap coating on lens that causes halos or bright spots on the image #2 approximates 15-20% barrel or pincushion distortion #3 approximates vertical compression #4 approximates horizontal compression #5 approximates a double image from poor coating, chromatic aberration, etc that causes refraction of differing spectra. #6 approximates either poor resolution, clarity or just plain ol' poor eyesight notice that distortion is unlikely to make a contrasty image such as a black letter on a white background difficult to read. as a matter of fact the only thing that does make it hard to read is the inablilty of the optic to resolve the image (be the optic your eyeglasses, your sunglasses or your eye). the point is that a standar eye chart tells you nothing about the usefulness of a pair of non-prescription glasses. even with scrips it only tells you their ability to quantitatively correct myopic, presbyopic or astigmatic conditions. you might still see three "e"s on the chart, but all three might be legible as hell. just like your "e" might be squished 30% and pulled 20% by cheap optics in your 15$ shades, but you will be able to tell that it is an "e" now quality wise, and wether or not you will have proper situaltion awareness, balance, depth perception, peripheral vision, etc. is a completely qualitative assessment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 8:18:29 PM EDT
[#46]
heres an even better example than mine
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 10:15:46 PM EDT
[#47]
Any chance for one of our E&E dealers making a group buy with near LEO prices??
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 10:55:12 PM EDT
[#48]
+1 for a group buy!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2004 11:01:34 PM EDT
[#49]
If you do this I will buy a few pair. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2004 1:41:12 PM EDT
[#50]
I stepped on my spring hinged polarized square wire 2.0 oakleys....sent em to oakley with a letter explaining how much of a moron I am along with the box and warranty and they came back with new frames and my lenses had been polished. I promptly bought a pair of polarized titanium framed square wires. I suspect few jokely manufacturers will do the same. eta: I read a few posts (after posting this) about guys who have gotten hassles from oakley... 1) I never called oakley... couldn't get a live person... couldn't even find a number 2) I did email oakley prior to sending glassess.... got a canned reply that was entirely worthless 3) I sent the sunglasses in and had my new frames in short order 4) This took place this Spring (04) |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
