I'm scheduled for surgery this friday, and had decided on Symfony IOL's until last week when my doctor called to tell me about PanOptix. He doesn't have much information on them, much less has he seen a lot of patients who've received them. As a professional photographer, and noticing enough of a color variation while wearing blue light filtering glasses to warrant not wearing them while editing photos, I'm wondering what PanOptix vision is like in regard to computer screen and in real life. Seems the general consensus is that the IOL's are a great option, but I have yet. to hear anyone really get into the details of visual acuity specific to colors and/or screens. Also, I have a bit of concern about having blue light filtered for the rest of my life. Sure, when in LED artifical form, it's supposed to be bad for us. But for circadian rhythm, it's also supposed to be a key component in natural. light exposure. I haven't found a single iota of information about potential longterm affects of blue light filtering IOL's, or just how much the PanOptix IOL's filter out(it'd be great to have a percentage number). Thanks in advance for any and all information. It's a last-second scramble of a decision to say the least - I'm supposed to call the doc first thing in the morning to order whichever IOL I decide on...
i cannot answer any of your questions. the symfony for japan market is filtered for blue light. it is called optiblue. new technis synergy is also filtered for blue light. these lenses have a yellow tint to it.
I think it is bit of a marketing gimmick. I guess if you have same IOL in both eyes then you probably won't notice it.
As a professional photographer or anyone in visual field, you should be looking at quality monofocal IOLs in my opinion. No loss of contrast and cleanest vision possible.
The fact that the surgeon wanted to install Symfony IOL in your eyes (assuming you told him your profession) is slightly worrying.
Google search shows a thread on DP review from 2017 with similar question.
You don't mention but are you having this surgery due to cataracts?
Some people do complain of yellow tint (not talking specifically of any particular lens).
Regarding the thread on DP review, I am not allowed to link here but copy pasted some of relevant posts...
My only advice is to make sure your doctor knows you are an artist and a photographer and how your cataract problems are affecting your work.
Both YardCayote and opticsEngineer are correct in their advice.
I am an optometrist, so although I do not do the surgery I see patients who have and must use Rx glasses afterwards.
The high end multi-focal implants are improving and for a person with average visual needs work OK. However, I hear more complaints from them about the sharpness is not perfect. On the converse side, frequently the patients with the standard implants are tact sharp and thrilled with their vision, even thought they may need glasses to fine tune the final result.
One comment I hear from all is that colors are so much more vibrant. And many say they wish they had done the surgery 2 years sooner.
Good luck
whvick
Don't muck about. Get corrected for long vision, even if you need a pocket full of different reading glasses afterwards. Don't go in for new or clever things, let other people do that.
Yes, I have cataracts in both eyes.
I wouldn't be rushed into this if you can help it, especially on which lens to pick. I am a photographer too so i think the yellow tint does change the colors just as it does with my eyeglasses or switching to the blue filter on my laptop and i see the marked difference between my yellow cataract eye and symfony eye. For me, the drawback with the symfony is the nighttime issues, but when they are dialed in, my vision is razor sharp, like HD, plus they also adjust for chromic aberration. I would agree that monofocals are a less risky way to go as long as you don't mind wearing glasses potentially or can deal with monovision. I think the symfony is like a Ferrari, performance can be impressive under the right conditions but they can be touchy whereas a monofocal is like a Camry, reliable and gets the job done and fewer headaches--there are pros and cons for both.
When you say "when they are dialed", do you mean the Symfony IOL? Other than nighttime issues - I'm assuming halos? - are you happy with the quality of vision with your Symfony? I've heard different opinions of the clarity of Symfony lenses, and part of me is still tempted to try them over the PanOptix.
It's an odd situation to feel somewhat rushed on this important decision. I'm 45, and up until the last year or so have had excellent vision in all ranges. My cataracts has grown at a rate where I can tell the difference in my vision in the last month, and am to the point where I don't feel comfortable driving, riding my bike, etc. The idea of delaying surgery for even another week is something that makes me feel ill, as my lifestyle has flipped a full 180 in the last few months, with the light of a beautiful fall day causing enough discomfort and disorientation to retreat back into my home with the curtains drawn.
Photography is important to me, but I'm also one of those lifestyle mountain bikers, verses somoene who rides on occasion or seasonally. 90% of my photography is in cycling, and opposed to studio style shooting, I ride with a camera bag, stop multiple times and try to set up shots as quickly as possible in order to move on to the next location or make it back to the trailhead in time. So, the idea of suddenly needing to add a pair of glasses to the mix of sunglasses, helmet, gloves, camera pack, lens changes, etc. sounds horrible. Then there's simply the idea of having to carry readers to the grocery store, or to read a GPS at stops on motorcycle trips, or a ski map, etc. etc. If I weren't lucky enough to have had a glasses-free life up to this point, I'd be willing to look at monofocal lenses. But I feel like it's worth the potential risks to go with multifocals.
Thanks for sharing that, I was able to find the DP post. I was unaware that there was that much of a difference between monofocal and multifocal IOL;s with distance VA. Do you speak from experience?
It sounds like most of the recommendations on that DP question are coming from older photographers who either shoot studio or in very controlled environments. I'm a photojournalist, specializing in the cycling industry, though I do shoot snowsports on occasion, too. I can't imagine adding glasses to shooting in the field with all the other equipment and environmental challenges I deal with on a regular basis, which is a big part of the reason I'm interested in a "premium" lens.
1-2 weeks vs rest of your life!
Google "MedHelp Dangers with Multifocal Lenses". I was reading it only last night. I think 2 surgeons posted on it too.
You can still go with trifocal but go with eyes wide open though. Lot of people rush in and then regret.
Thanks for sharing that, I was able to find the DP post. I was unaware that there was that much of a difference between monofocal and multifocal IOL;s with distance VA. Do you speak from experience?
Only on going experience with my wife's cataract. She has one eye that has been done, the next eye OP is in 4 days time!!!!! She is 2 years younger than you and VERY active person. She was living perfectly normal glass free life, then suddenly 4 months ago, she saw blurry and rest is history. All changed and her cataract became very dense in that short period. .
If everything goes according to plan then she won't be needing glasses for general everyday use. .
Since the first OP she has worked 2-3 weeks at office without needing any glasses. .
We had choice of all the latest IOLs here in Europe and $ was not an issue. 4 surgeons directly did not recommend multifocals. 5th one I don't know directly but his patient told me that he did not recommend them either, he said 25% of his patients were very unsatisfied with them. If you happen to be in the 75% then might be OK. .
There is definite loss of contrast when using multifocals, it is basic physics (I was not good at physics though lol) .
Surgeon No. 3, also highly experienced told us he would not recommend them for young people! I know one would think that it would be best for young people. With hindsight I think I understand what he meant. He just wanted best quality vision for my wife. . Surgeon No. 4, the one we went with is highly experienced with multifocals and monofocals and EDOF. We took his recommendation of mini-monovision (not same as full monovison). .
NOTE- With monofocals you can still use multifocal contact lenses or even get add on lens surgery if required. .
Wife did this-
Left eye: Has already been done and landed at -1.5 (Target picked was -1.25)
Right far eye -0.25 will be the target.
I am not against multifocals. Just sharing our thought process and why we went with Zeiss Asphina 509 monofocal.
Good luck with whatever you decide. Wish you an excellent outcome.
I have a Symfony lens in my right eye and a Symfony Toric lens in my left eye. i had cataract surgery in August and September of 2018. I am totally happy with the results and my great vision at all distances. i have not had to put on a pair of glasses since before my first surgery. I would encourage you to go with the Symfony lenses, especially since you photograph cycling events. I can't imagine having to put on and take off glasses while trying to take pictures. My son is a cyclist and I have attempted to photograph him on several occasions. Also, it seems that your doctor has more experience using the Symfony lenses. I think that is really important. I do see starbursts at night time from approaching headlights, but it has not been a problem. I had to pay extra for mg lens, but would do it again in a heartbeat. I am so thankful for my great vision.
Hi I think you could get lots of different answers :-) Many of us wants to believe we have the best thing out there, and wants everyone else to have the same. And some are very unhappy with their lenses, then it is opposite. I have a mix with edof and trifocal, similar to Symfony and Panoptix. I am a big fan of the trifocal, I would recommend trifocals over edof any day. But that said, trifocals and edofs will always be more of a compromise compared to monofocals, because trifocals and edofs splits the light into several images. So if you want the highest chance of the most clear and crisp image on your retina, a quality monofocal, combined with reading glasses, will always be the safest choice. I would not trade my lenses to monofocals, I am very happy being free of glasses, but with your profession it is certainly something to consider. All that said, if you are having cataracts now, any lens will be a huge improvement both in colors and contrast compared to what you are seeing now.
I currently have one blue tint Alcon monofocal lens and one clear B&L monofocal lens. I did not notice a difference in color when with just the Alcon lens in one eye and my other eye ( 57 years old with moderate cataracts). Now with the B&L lens I notice the color difference. Whether it's enough to impact your photography, I couldn't really say.
I've posted before, that in the week between my two eye surgeries, I compared color with PanOptix (with blue filter) to my natural lens with cataracts, and there was no perceptible difference in color other than looking at my wood pressure treated and stained deck.... the wood had a more yellowish tinge with my unoperated eye with cataracts.
I personally don't think blue filter or not is a big issue. If you search internet, I'm sure you'll find lots of info from painters and photographers and I suspect the only comment you'll find is the colors are much brighter and vibrant after cataract surgery (with or without blue filter).
I've copying my reply in an old post from an artist (not the only tri-focal approved in Canada is the PanOptix which of course has a blue filter -- so the IOL they are talking about is the PanOptix): About a visual artist in Canada, who recently got tri-focals. Search: Advances in eye care give visual artist new focus It's from a Canadian newspaper, and may require registration for free preview, or just read the cached version.
So sorry you have to deal with them at this age. I developed cataracts at 53 and felt cheated so can inly imagine your anguish given your profession.
I didn't go conservative route due to my job on spreadsheets and computer - my hobbies and love of travel. I went with Symfony lenses and judging by comments on forums my results are better than usual. See well from 11 inches to good distance. o not wear glasses on daily basis - don't even carry a pair with me although I did get +1.25 prescription readers which I use occasionally if reading a novel or in dim light situations. If making the decision today I would go for trifocals (live in Canada and they were not an option for me at the time). All to say I did want to be as glasses independent as possible - knowing it may not work out that way.
Please don't substitute my or anyone's experience for your own or consult of a surgeon you trust. We can offer support as you go through this and maybe point you in a direction or provide good line of questioning as you consult with your surgeon.
Given your age the one thing that is not as evident or easy to predict is how much your pupil could dilate beyond IOL as that leads to far more visual disturbances. All IOLs basically 6mm in diameter so there is not a selection of IOLs accommodating for that.
But I wish you the best in your journey to regain vision.
i like your description John - lol. My experience is like this.
As true as that may be the opposite can be true as well. When I was waffling back and forth between lens selection Symfony vs monofocal there was a colleague whose sister (also in her 50s) who wasn't considering anything but a monofocal after reading about those dangers and concerns. My colleague said she wasn't at all worried like I was about making a decision. Unfortunately one of my colleague's sister's surgeries did not turn out so well. First surgery we t perfectly and 2nd something went wrong and IOL had to be stitched in to place. She sees very poorly out of that eye. My colleague says she regrets not looking into it more although personally I think it can go sideways whether you do research or not.
But always best to take your time (this is not life threatening and has many impacts on life afterwards) and a younger patient has a longer time he or she has to live with this and vastly different needs than a 70 or 80 year old and that too may vary from person to person.
Technology will bring better and better lens options and whether they are for everyone or not can't say but I won't say they ate a dangerous or reckless choice. Often people only post negative results not the positive and I believe there are many happy people with premium lenses. They are where the future is headed.
Word of caution about premium lenses: more research by patient required on finding right surgeon. Surgeons have a wheelhouse of lenses they use and are comfortable with. If interested in a particular lens find a surgeon with good reputation with that lens.
Many people now opting for clear lens exchanges (I am not a fan) to correct vision. Some of these surgeons are profit driven and do not have best interest of patient in mind and often because CLE is cosmetic surgery their clientele have the funds. Deal with a surgeon mainly doing cataract surgery. Different mentally - in my opinion.
Sorry worried - many of these comments directed to OP and just my opinions on premium vs standard lenses.
My cataracts advanced so rapidly - but due to Canadian medicare system gad a 3 month wait just to have a consult with surgeon. After my consult had many additional questions after looking into the surgery on-line. So made another appointment that delayed surgery another month.
Worried Husband is so right on - what is that time vs rest of your life and regrets you may live with because you didn't take the time.
Seek out more than one doctor's opinion for your sake. It may mean a halt to what you love for a short while but so worth it. I ran marathons and had to give that up for awhile (too disorientated due to cataracts). Could read a road sign till I was almost on top of it. Had a daughter in high level soccer and from bleachers could not read jersey numbers or distinguish one player from another. I was so miserable. But making right decision for me was important - more important than things I loved to do as it is temporary compared to the future.
Reading your reply triggers a 'misery loves company' feeling, so thank you for sharing as the rapid onset and description of your impaired vision sounds all too familiar.
Part of the issue is that I actually have two doctors involved. Both went to a talk a couple of weeks ago, and both discussed Panoptix being a good option for me at the talk. One doc called and said I should look into it, as well as discuss it with the other doc who works with the surgeon(my surgeon has an excellent reputation, but is basically a glorified mechanic as he doesn't have any patient care/contact outside of surgery). The other doc is less sold on PanOptix, and thinks maybe with my outdoor profession and lifestyle, that Symfony lenses might have better contrast than PanOptix. I understand her theory of more light being distributed through 3 focal points verses 2, but it seems like studies show no difference in contrast between the two, or even sometimes state that PanOptix provide a slight advantage over Symfony.
I'm hoping to talk to at least one of the docs today, as today is the absolute last-second window to order a lens for the first surgery scheduled for this friday. I'll discuss the option of delaying surgery, but really I'm not sure what I'd do other than stay up all night reading and re-reading the same info scattered throughout the internet that only gives me the same result - a slight want of the PanOptix over Symfony.
At this point, my vision is so bad, and has been for at least a year, that I'm hoping any IOL will be a big enough improvement to put me at ease. The halos/starbursts don't exactly sound fun, but for how much of a kaleidescope nighttime vision is for me currently, it's hard to imagine it being worse or even the same with an IOL.