Poster: A snowHead
|
I struggle with goggles. I've had some cheap Cebe (single lens) and mid-price Bolle (double lens) googles, but never really got on with either. The cheaper ones were just rubbish, the Bolle ones were OK but were a pink-ish lens (I didn't know colour made a difference!) and I felt whenever I used them they made me ever so slightly dizzy - perhaps they weren't giving me the definition I was looking for.
So I'm set on buying myself a pair that I will be more happy with - good quality, and hopefully flexible enough to accommodate the most likely skiing conditions.
I wouldn't choose to wear goggles if I had the choice - I prefer sunglasses with my helmet, so I suppose I'm looking for goggles that are good in low light conditions, and certainly during snowfall.
I've read that the Smith IO are a good recommendation, but they do seem excessively pricey!! I've spotted some for £80 with two lenses (Ingitor Mirror and Red Sensor Mirror) but no idea whether this would fit the bill. And to be honest I'd be happier with a price closer to the £50 as I only get to ski one week a year.
Any help gratefully received!!!
Thanks
Matt
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I was about to get some Oakley XLs, so also like any recommendations.
I wear sunglasses (bloc) when suitable but my goggles have seen better days.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Oops, sorry about putting this int he wrong forum!! Brain fade...
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
IOs the best I've used.
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Agree with under a new name, IOs are the best I've had. Spare lenses means you can change them depending on conditions, where as for £50 you wouldn't have that option. £80 is a great price for great goggles, though I'm not sure about the helmet and sunglasses look (I always go goggles with a helmet)
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
I agree with foxtrotzulu, goggles are such a personal thing as it's all down to the fit. What works for one person may not work for someone else. I think you need to work out which brand/model work for you and then look at what low light lens they do. That said the IO's are fantastic.
I've also got a pair of the birdz thrashers - and you can also get them in them in a yellow lens which is perfect for low light
http://www.i-sunglasses.com/Birdz-Thrasher-Convertible-Padded-Sunglasses-Black-Yellow
They're crazily good value for money for £19 - gives you the option for wearing your sunglasses in good conditions and then swapping to these for low light. Plus they're small enough to carry in your pocket.
|
|
|
|
|
|
With goggles you definitely get what you pay for, i currently use smith io/x and oakley airbrakes neither are cheap but they don't fog and swapping the lenses is pretty straight forward. Surely if you only get 1 week a year on the hill it's better to have kit that makes it as enjoyable as it can be, having cheap goggles that fog up or even leave you feeling dizzy seems a bit daft.
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Dragon DX coal with amber lens £25 or with a sunny Ionised lens and yellow lens £35 at eyewearoutlet.co.uk.
My amber pair wont die I didnt sell them when asked in resort.... lucky as my Oakley inner lens coating was messed up and these were fine with probably a further 30 days in powder .
|
|
|
|
|
|
francium. wrote: |
With goggles you definitely get what you pay for |
Yeah, this is definitely true - as much as the Birdz are a steal at £20, they are never going to complete with a higher spec pair of goggles. When bad conditions kicks in, I still go to my Spy Optic googles with blue contact lens which I love.
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Last season I was persuaded by an assistant in Snow and Rock to go for light sensitive goggles - and was very pleased with them. However, I have a horrible feeling I've lost them.
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Well you don't need to pay full retail, and certainly not full UK retail. You can usually pick up "last year's" goggles in the USA from REI for less than half price; I expect the same goes for Europe. It may be harder here in the UK, where pound-for-dollar exchange rates are common.
I didn't realize you could get goggles without double glazing. There are broadly a couple of ways the lens may be shaped: that may affect the feeling you report. Try on a few for fit and also how you like what you see. If you're a sunglasses wearer, then you may prefer goggles with a wide field of view.
If you're grown up then the "gaper" concept is irrelevant, but you probably want to check that you can get replacement lenses as you'll likely keep the goggles for a while.
In deepest winter I wear goggles all the time (it can be bright, but too cold for exposed skin), so I like the goggles which come with two lenses: one for bright and one for dark conditions. I was given some nice Anon M1s which do that very well. I'm sure others work well too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
I have Oakley A frames. Interchangeable lens takes less than a minute to swap. Highly recommended.
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
I bought some Smith Sentry goggles towards the end of last season from snow and rock which came with 2 lenses; bright light and dark conditions. The lenses are pretty easy to swap over as i found out in Tignes during April when it suddenly started to snow whilst over 2500m on the mountain. I managed to price match them so instead of £85 i got them for £55 which seems a bargain to me as they seem a quality piece of kit.
I tried on at least 10 pairs of goggles whilst wearing my helmet to ensure that the fit was good. Some fitted well on my face but didn't fell comfortable when the strap had to go round my helmet and/or they didn't fit snug with my helmet etc. Definitely try on as many pairs as you can whilst wearing your helmet (if you own one).
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
larkim, for me Smith are hard to beat. I had two pairs of their Anthem (small frame/womens) which I loved until I got my I/Os which are amazing. My 9 year old has Smith Stance which are great for him. The goggles need to fit with your helmet.
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Wife uses Smith Anthems too and can't be separated from them - she bought new low-light lenses last season and they are phenomenal.... I use Oakley Canopy these days as I need OTG goggles - I used to really suffer with fogging issues but ever since I switched to Oakleys the problem went away. Got them with the Hi Yellow for low light and picked up a bright sun lens in the sales.
larkim, intrigued by this part of your OP "whenever I used them they made me ever so slightly dizzy" - wondering were the Bolle goggles much larger and more curved than your Cebe ones - When you wear sunglasses, do you wear flattish ones or curved ones like wrap arounds / Oakley-style ?
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Another vote for the IO range from Smith. I used to have Oakley A Frames, but prefer the IO and IOS I now use.
However, recommendations count for nothing if the goggles don't fit your face comfortably or don't work well with any helmet you might use. Buying goggles without trying them on can be an expensive mistake.
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
I'm a big fan of the I/O goggles as well, but they fit me brilliantly - when my first pair became too badly damaged I only considered a direct replacement, nothing else would do! A friend has the smaller I/OS and also loves them, but again, based on fit.
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
under a new name wrote: |
IOs the best I've used. |
+1
Better than Oakley and Shred goggles IME at least.
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
I see the new Smith I/O RECON GPS Ski/Snowboard Goggles are going to be a really cool RRP £799.99 needless top say I will not be stocking them ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
livetoski, you mean you DON'T want to know your hang-time off the kickers? Pfft... how can you enjoy your snowsport without the METRICS dude?
|
|
|
|
|
|
larkim, Just make sure you take really good care of them and they'll last you for years.
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Quote: |
Handy Turnip,
Yeah, this is definitely true - as much as the Birdz are a steal at £20, they are never going to complete with a higher spec pair of goggles. When bad conditions kicks in, I still go to my Spy Optic googles with blue contact lens which I love |
.
I linked to the Birdz as just an example of padded goggles. I have no idea what the quality of the optics is like. However, I'm not sure I'd agree with your principle. In bad conditions you definitely want goggles. No doubt about that. But in better conditions I'd argue that a rigid lens of the sort you find in sunglasses and presumably Birdz are almost certain to be optically superior to the much thinner, flexible, lenses found in goggles. That's certainly my experience. For whatever reason sunglasses also seem to be more scratch resistant.
Do you get what you pay for with goggles? I'm not convinced. I'm not saying Smiths aren't good, but I've had several much cheaper pairs (probably £50 or less before discounting) and they have been brilliant and I'd struggle to think how they could be better. Buy what you like and what fits, but you don't need to spend £100 to buy good goggles if you don't want to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have 2 pairs of Smith gogs which I've had for 10/11 years. Anti-fog, flat light lenses and they work pretty well. £50 a pair then and am loath to change them. Good investment IMO. I didn't ski with a helmet until fairly recently and the goggles work/fit fine either way.
If you can stretch to the IOs, and they fit OK, I'd go for them, to be honest.
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
foxtrotzulu wrote: |
Quote: |
Handy Turnip,
Yeah, this is definitely true - as much as the Birdz are a steal at £20, they are never going to complete with a higher spec pair of goggles. When bad conditions kicks in, I still go to my Spy Optic googles with blue contact lens which I love |
.
I linked to the Birdz as just an example of padded goggles. I have no idea what the quality of the optics is like. However, I'm not sure I'd agree with your principle. In bad conditions you definitely want goggles. No doubt about that. But in better conditions I'd argue that a rigid lens of the sort you find in sunglasses and presumably Birdz are almost certain to be optically superior to the much thinner, flexible, lenses found in goggles. That's certainly my experience. For whatever reason sunglasses also seem to be more scratch resistant.
Do you get what you pay for with goggles? I'm not convinced. I'm not saying Smiths aren't good, but I've had several much cheaper pairs (probably £50 or less before discounting) and they have been brilliant and I'd struggle to think how they could be better. Buy what you like and what fits, but you don't need to spend £100 to buy good goggles if you don't want to. |
Sounds like you were agreeing with my principle! I said when bad conditions kick in I always wear my goggles!!
The birdz are good value for money if you've only got £20 to spend, my brother (skier for 30 years) still loves his - I've a pair but rarely use them as I've got better kit now.
With regards to price vs. quality - it all depends on which price point you're at. Personally I think that a pair of goggles at £50 are a hell of a lot better than most £20 pairs, but I don't believe that there's a huge amount of difference between, say, a £80 pair and a £150 pair. Plus there's that old marketing trick of increasing the price to infer higher quality.
But as I mentioned earlier, with fit being so key, a £150 of goggles that don't fit isn't as much use as a £50 pair that do!
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Handy Turnip, yes, I think we were agreeing with each other. I meant that average sunglasses will be optically superior to even the best goggles, but no use in crap weather.
I also agree that you get what you pay for up to about £50 and above that you start to pay disproportionately for brand and gimmicks.
|
|
|
|
|
|