 Poster: A snowHead
|
Bought some basic Bolle yellow lens goggle after reading some good reviews, tried first time today in a cloudy and snowy day but runs turned all white, no definition of the terrain unless really close, had to ski really carefully. I guess my black lens would’ve helped more.
Did I get a bad goggle or sometimes even the best lens don’t help?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@Gustavobs,
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head there- sometimes nothing helps. I’ve skied with clear lenses in my sunnies today, keeps the wind out of your eyes 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
If there is no contrast, then nothing can help....there is no magic bullet.
- Some people prefer Rose/Pink/Vermillion or Persimmon...it is very personal.
- Oakley Prizm is the best I've come across.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Goggles keep the weather and the UV out of your eyes - nothing more.
All these trick lenses are just a huge marketing con to separate the gullible from their €
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
@red 27, If that is what you have found, it’s more likely to be your vision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| red 27 wrote: |
Goggles keep the weather and the UV out of your eyes - nothing more.
All these trick lenses are just a huge marketing con to separate the gullible from their € |
not true in my experience , the oakley prism lens does actually enhance small details in the snow enabling me to ski with more confidence in very poor flat light conditions , this is in comparison to most of the regular low light lens from other makes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes it's a case of trying a lot ( and spending a lot) before you find one which:
a) suits your eyes/brain;
b) suits the conditions.
Some people find it easy to have one set of lenses that cover many conditions, others (that'd be me) carry lots of sets of goggles or lenses.
I don't get on with basic yellow or orange at all, eventually gave in and bought some ludicrously expensive goggles, but now think they are worth it.
I find Oakley RPs good in Austria cloud but they were lousy in general low light in Finland or Scotland (or Pennines) where I have a Smith lens ( sorry, don't know exactly the model or colour) which is a light-blue-mirrored, lightish yellow lens with a mild orange tone ( it does wonders for improving sunsets!). That works really well for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Every yellow lens that I've ever used, from cheap to costly, has been a significant aid to creating contrast (as opposed to visibility; nothing can help with that) when out on overcast days, when compared to my usual fair-weather lenses. As has been said, though, perhaps some conditions are unsalvageable.... though even then I'd rather have my yellows in than not. Take both lenses out next time, and compare the difference. Quite possibly it depends on each person's own vision as well, though. I also love my orangey-rose lens for when the sun goes behind the mountains for the last couple of runs of the day in the wintertime.
Last edited by After all it is free  on Sun 7-01-18 20:53; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
Prizm rose I found to be very good over Xmas when there was lots of snow about. You still need some sunlight as otherwise they can't work miracles but I found a lot more definition and that was going from Hi-Pink lenses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disclaimer: when I said yellow for overcast, I guess I meant really overcast, e.g. fog, snowing, etc... there is typically no UV protection whatsoever in a yellow lens (category 1). My orangey-rose lens is a 2, I think. I would love to say that my all-weather lens was a 4, but it seems you have to pay big bucks for 4 in general. Both my sports sunnies and my normal goggle lens are 3.
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads on Sun 7-01-18 20:57; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Yellow, Orange and Red lenses alter the amount of blue light seen by the human eye, when you have flat light but otherwise reasonable visibility such as you might get under thick cloud (rather than being in the cloud itself) then these lenses will have the effect of increasing contrast, when visibility itself is poor such as skiing in thick cloud or a blizzard then the only thing the coggles do is keep stuff out of your eyes but will have minimal enhancement of your vision
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Skiing in very flat light, falling snow conditions over 3 days at Christmas (quite a few trees and bushes for contrast) I tried 3 different smith low light lenses, the plain old yellow in my old smith squads was nearly as good as the fancy new yellow sensor mirror in my new i/o's and both were much better than the blue sensor mirror.
The contrast and definition was best with the yellow sensor mirror, but only just over the plain yellow.
However all this depends on your own eyes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Srsly... The idea that switching between yellow/rose/pink/amber/orange/vermillion lenses will make any difference on a flat light day is absurd.
As for 'Persimmon'... Words fail me! I had to google it... How many words can they think up for the same thing to trick the punters into biting?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Pyremaniac wrote: |
| Disclaimer: when I said yellow for overcast, I guess I meant really overcast, e.g. fog, snowing, etc... there is typically no UV protection whatsoever in a yellow lens (category 1). My orangey-rose lens is a 2, I think. I would love to say that my all-weather lens was a 4, but it seems you have to pay big bucks for 4 in general. Both my sports sunnies and my normal goggle lens are 3. |
I used to work in plastics R&D, the chemicals used to block UV are often just as cheap as the polymer itself, there is absolutely no reason why yellow lenses should not block UV indeed many UV additives also block part of the visible violet spectrum resulting in a yellow tint.
It is possible that lenses for flat light may pass more UV to aid visibility but this is not something I have heard about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Just to clarify, visibility was ok, contrast was bad. Whoever has the oackley prizm is super happy just a shame so expensive!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Interesting... yet I think all of my goggles have come with warnings about how the yellow lens is very low category. I can almost remember the exact wording, when it comes to my old Smiths. And my current set of lenses have the UV categories printed on them, and they are 1, 2 and 3. Maybe the companies are just shaving off the pennies? Sounds a bit outrageous given the price of some of these lenses these day!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
My £17.99 Decathlon goggles with yellow lenses give some improvement in definition of terrain but flat light is just that, I skied for hours last week with no idea where the terrain was going other than watching the skiers in front.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
The best glass for a flat light day is filled with beer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Just had a quick google, the categories refer to visible light transmission VLT, not UV, all categories block UV but if you just put a tint in the lens, you could have a category 4 lens that allowed high levels of UV through, conversely, the samples that I produced for testing were totally clear to visible light but blocked UV, having said this, category 1lenses are quoted as passing 80-100% of visible light but in practice no lens will pass more than 92% due to teflection from outer and inner faces of the lens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| The best glass for a flat light day is filled with beer. |
Now there's someone that knows what they're taliking about!.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| tangowaggon wrote: |
| Just had a quick google, the categories refer to visible light transmission VLT, not UV, all categories block UV but if you just put a tint in the lens, you could have a category 4 lens that allowed high levels of UV through, conversely, the samples that I produced for testing were totally clear to visible light but blocked UV, having said this, category 1lenses are quoted as passing 80-100% of visible light but in practice no lens will pass more than 92% due to teflection from outer and inner faces of the lens. |
That is very interesting... I have been led to believe (is it just me?) that the categories represented UV. Does that mean we have to investigate harder to understand whether a given lens is safe or not?
I also have some old Carrera lenses which let almost all light through and are highly UV-blocking. If they weren't so ugly, I'd use them more often!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
I wouldnt worry, all PC (polycarbonate) lenses will have high levels of UV block as PC itself has poor resistance to UV, without the UV block in there the lens itself will fall apart.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| tangowaggon wrote: |
| but in practice no lens will pass more than 92% due to reflection from outer and inner faces of the lens. |
That's only true for the base substrate. A pair of good quality goggles should have an AR coating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| tangowaggon wrote: |
| I wouldnt worry, all PC (polycarbonate) lenses will have high levels of UV block as PC itself has poor resistance to UV, without the UV block in there the lens itself will fall apart. |
This says to me that my suspicion that sunglasses, goggles etc are 99% sold on marketing cow pat is true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Matrski wrote: |
| tangowaggon wrote: |
| I wouldnt worry, all PC (polycarbonate) lenses will have high levels of UV block as PC itself has poor resistance to UV, without the UV block in there the lens itself will fall apart. |
This says to me that my suspicion that sunglasses, goggles etc are 99% sold on marketing cow pat is true. |
Yes, a £200 pair of goggles will give no better UV protection than a £20 pair, the extra £180 might pay for improved clarity, comfort, anti fog and other features but I would guess that 95% of the extra money is for the name.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
the extra £180 might pay for improved clarity,
|
@tangowaggon, I'd rather use it to pay for improved Claret in the bar 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
As others have said, you can only add contrast to something which already has contrast. If an image only has white in it to begin with, you can't make the black bits darker - because there aren't any!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Only thing that will improve skiing on a flat light day is a message inside the goggles saying "Bend ze knees". That and what @pam w said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Ham wrote: |
| Only thing that will improve skiing on a flat light day is a message inside the goggles saying "Bend ze knees". That and what @pam w said. |
Bend ze elbow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Ive just been skiing in Finland which is dark all the time ATM. My yellow lense was useless.
Before I went I bought some clear lense Oakley for snowmobiling while u was out there and they were perfect for flat light, no light (tree skiing in dark etc)
Cost £28 and are the best purchase I've made!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
@Gustavobs, this is the solution. I bought a pair about 11 years ago when they got beyond use I was lured by Oakley airbrakes with the interchangeable lenses which were no good and used the by then knackered Alpinas (that thankfully I had brought as back up) for the rest of that holiday. Oakley then launched the Prism lenses which I tried in the A frame goggle as that was the only model they were originally made for. Still no good so bought new Alpinas in resort two years ago. Happy as Larry in all lights and conditions and no faffing around with changes. There are various models. These are the particular ones I have but whatever frame you get the Quattroflex lens is the one you want.
https://www.alpina-sports.com/snow-gear/goggles/challenge-20-qv-white/
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Best answer, find a friendly ski shop in resort that will let you test the goggles for yourself by going out the shop on a flat light day and seeing if any lens makes a difference for you, everyones eyes are different so what works well for one person may not be any good for another, as has been mentioned elsewhere you need some contrast to be able to improve for any lens to have an effect. I once skied straight into a 6 ft deep snowbank where a side run had not yet been piested simply because it was white on white in a heavy snowstorm, days like that are best used for propping up the bar or similar social activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
As a punter who only gets a couple of weeks on the slopes a year I don't want to be restricted to barracks or bar by a bit of flat light or falling snow. That said eyewear isn't going to save you. You need to find the terrain to ski, ski by feel and ideally be skiing in the trees. That said yellow lenses open things up for me a little (light, contrast) and in when it's snowing goggles keep the flakes out my eyes. I haven't tried loads of different lenses - I'm not made of money or time rich.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| red 27 wrote: |
Srsly... The idea that switching between yellow/rose/pink/amber/orange/vermillion lenses will make any difference on a flat light day is absurd.
As for 'Persimmon'... Words fail me! I had to google it... How many words can they think up for the same thing to trick the punters into biting? |
Simply not true - different colour lenses will alter the contrast.... but of course there needs to be some contrast first...
Last edited by You'll need to Register first of course. on Mon 8-01-18 12:47; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| pam w wrote: |
| The best glass for a flat light day is filled with beer. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I find yellow lenses make my eyes go funny, they are just too bright for my eyes, no matter how flat the light is. I've just got some Oakley Prizm Rose goggles and can't wait to try them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Just got these rather cool Bolle safety specs from Screwfix, 100% UV block, zero block of peripheral vision and quite close fitting so they should stop most of the wind £8.99
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| HoneyBunny wrote: |
| I find yellow lenses make my eyes go funny, they are just too bright for my eyes, |
But really... is it the glasses? Most of us just call it a hangover
x 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
