🦘Layman's Lens Clarity - Dillons vs Oakley vs Mariener (cacatman)

[Codechimp08]

you are too funny with these write-ups. Love reading them for the embedded humor and I guess I do learn a little along the way thanks for all the topics you have covered and the enjoyable writing style that you have adopted.

 

[Bonz-1]

Personally, I think that you've got the mix just right. IMHO, the tradeoff of having an absolutely stunning looking pair of lenses from the outside does outweigh the small amount of visual acuity compromise that could be subjectively demonstrated. I wouldn't change ALL my Oakley lenses for matte lenses anyhow, but it's definitely an attractive lens to use for casual daily use. One can easily see what one has to see with them.

For "specialist" applications, I'd definitely use other lenses.

I have imperfect corrected vision normally anyhow and so, I'd probably even accept a higher matte finish and slightly less clarity and still be more than happy to use them. But I was just interested in seeing exactly how different subjectively they really were. They were certainly not terrible. Normal people reading the bottom line would have 6/6 vision at 3 metres. All the lenses performed better than that.

I'd be interested in his assessment and opinion of @Bonz-1 with his polished mars pair. If my pair is a BMW, his polished pair is definitely the Ferrari!!

I haven't had a sunny day here since I received my pair from RJ so I'm thinking they are destroying Nebraska because they are so awesome!!
They do look very clean to look through from what I have seen so far!! I Did notice some glare on them from behind but that could be the hammer stems pushing them away from my face a little more or it could just be the light that day.
I do know people notice them right away and comment on how cool they look!!
I will update after the sun shines on me soon ;!

 

[htrap2294]

Could it be @cacatman that the matte gold scored higher because the added contrast helped with clarity slightly? After all, that's what prizm does as well - no?

I'd be interested to see what a Tungsten Polar lens would be like compared to a prizm counterpart.

 

[cacatman]

Could it be @cacatman that the matte gold scored higher because the added contrast helped with clarity slightly? After all, that's what prizm does as well - no?

I'd be interested to see what a Tungsten Polar lens would be like compared to a prizm counterpart.

Yeah, I didn’t think of using the original lenses, which I have here.

 

[htrap2294]

Of course, if you could withstand another 24 hours of abstinence for us to see if it is indeed the contrast which makes the Dillon Gold perform better...would be wonderful @cacatman LOL.

 

[Wesleypipesyo]

Could it be @cacatman that the matte gold scored higher because the added contrast helped with clarity slightly? After all, that's what prizm does as well - no?

I'd be interested to see what a Tungsten Polar lens would be like compared to a prizm counterpart.

Who knows, his mind was distracted by not having enough sex. I wisdom the results of this test because of that.

 

[cacatman]

Of course, if you could withstand another 24 hours of abstinence for us to see if it is indeed the contrast which makes the Dillon Gold perform better...would be wonderful @cacatman LOL.

Who knows, his mind was distracted by not having enough sex. I wisdom the results of this test because of that.

LOL.

 

[Atticus]

The mariener lens scored that high? I had the red pair and found them to be worse than the ruby, and definitely worse than Dillon. (No offense to mariener, they are an affordable matte lens)

From my experience, Dillon is up there in clarity with most if not all the OEM lenses. While I haven't tested to the same extent you just did, I do compare them on the tress out back and how well I can make out the individual leaves. I'll have to print off a chart and see what my results are...

I know the Dillon polarization distortaion can cause some funky issues when viewing a screen, but I don't really use my sunglasses while on a PC.

 

[htrap2294]

The mariener lens scored that high? I had the red pair and found them to be worse than the ruby, and definitely worse than Dillon. (No offense to mariener, they are an affordable matte lens)

From my experience, Dillon is up there in clarity with most if not all the OEM lenses. While I haven't tested to the same extent you just did, I do compare them on the tress out back and how well I can make out the individual leaves. I'll have to print off a chart and see what my results are...

I know the Dillon polarization distortaion can cause some funky issues when viewing a screen, but I don't really use my sunglasses while on a PC.

The Dillon polarization also kicks in when at the beach. Because of the fact that stress ruins polarization on these lenses...if you pay attention, the waves will look funky as ****.

By this, I mean, the light reflecting off the wave as it swells up to peak or when it crescent...just looks weird.

 

[cacatman]

The mariener lens scored that high? I had the red pair and found them to be worse than the ruby, and definitely worse than Dillon. (No offense to mariener, they are an affordable matte lens)

From my experience, Dillon is up there in clarity with most if not all the OEM lenses. While I haven't tested to the same extent you just did, I do compare them on the tress out back and how well I can make out the individual leaves. I'll have to print off a chart and see what my results are...

I know the Dillon polarization distortaion can cause some funky issues when viewing a screen, but I don't really use my sunglasses while on a PC.

I was surprised the ruby performed so badly. I'm not sure whether it was because of the tint or something else.
The prizms definitely performed better though. In terms of the mariens vs dillons, there wasn't enough of a difference based on perceived visual acuity that warrants the massive price difference. The dillons did perform slightly better. Only slightly.

Bear in mind it isn't an exact study. It was just done for fun.