 Poster: A snowHead
|
I only get to ski about once per year so I have to make it count.  For the past few years I've been met with very cloudy or snowy conditions. I bought some cheap Bolle Pink Lens Goggles some time ago and out of all the goggles I have, this one is the best for those cloudy / flat days. However, it is still pretty rough having to feel your way down the runs instead of being able to see more.
I know this question has been asked before on this forum and I've looked at all the posts, but most of the comments seem to be from at least over a year ago. So I'm wondering if anything that has come out is considered best for these conditions. Ultimately, I've seen a lot of people recommending Oakley Flight Decks with the Hi-Pink Prizm lens. Would most agree this is indeed a top flight option for these kinds of conditions or should I maybe consider something else. Thanks for any help.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
The Prizm Hi Pink is a top flight lens.....as is Prizm Persimmon (might be a little better if sun comes out, or if you prefer this colour to pink).
Smith ChromaPop Storm lenses also have a good reputation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Chromapop storm rose also good. But depending on your personal spectrum many would say a hi yellow also a viable option. Other brands like Giro, Poc, Dragon etc have their own version of hi def lenses of course.
But nothing changes the base fact - aging eyes are aging eyes and nothing can generate directional light when it is truly dispersed. Well maybe a hi lumen headlamp ( which I'm surprised hasn't been tried)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Thanks for the responses. Yea, I was aware of the hi yellow and I do recognize these lenses can only do so much, but I'm looking for something to basically give me the optimal edge, if that makes sense.
I've tried the yellow before and my eyes don't agree with them for some reason. Even the pink cheap Bolle goggles I have do a better job so its probably just me. Smith Chromapop Storm Rose or Oakley Flight Deck Prizm Hi Pink seem like two really good options. I'll just need to decide between the two. Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
As someone who always found Goggles a bit claustrophobic....I really like the class leading field of vision of the Flight Decks.
My much older Oakleys had their ordinary Persimmon lens, which was OK - and the Prizm Rose is better for contrast (and more versatile in brighter weather). The Prizm Hi Pink are supposed to be just a little better in flat light (but not as versatile).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
The prizm persimmon lens is the latest lens from Oakley, I find it better than the pink.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Won't go far wrong with the Oakley Prizm range. I upgraded from so £50 goggles off ebay to a pair of Oakley Flight Decks with the Prizm Torch. The difference was like night and day (pun intended). I use these as my all rounder lens.
I've also purchased the Prizm Hi-Pink lens to pop in when it's flat light. Again, they are superb and really give me the confidence to ski in poor vis. The only downside is that they can be quite fiddly to change the lens over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Fridge03 wrote: |
....to a pair of Oakley Flight Decks with the Prizm Torch. The difference was like night and day (pun intended). I use these as my all rounder lens.
|
Same here. I have Prizm Rose for poor conditions (as Hi Pink wasn't an option).
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Thanks for all the replies. Ya'll are the best.
I think I know the answer to this, but I'll ask for good measure. That is, if I went with a lens that has high VLT, like the Prizm Hi-Pink, does that lens still protect you from any harmful light in all conditions? My thinking is I might just wear the Prizm Hi-Pink for all conditions. The reason being is that direct sunlight really doesn't bother me, but I wouldn't want to be using it if the high VLT somehow let in light that could possibly damage my eyes. My assumption is any lens would provide the same amount of protection against harmful UV light.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| JPW wrote: |
Thanks for all the replies. Ya'll are the best.
I think I know the answer to this, but I'll ask for good measure. That is, if I went with a lens that has high VLT, like the Prizm Hi-Pink, does that lens still protect you from any harmful light in all conditions? My thinking is I might just wear the Prizm Hi-Pink for all conditions. The reason being is that direct sunlight really doesn't bother me, but I wouldn't want to be using it if the high VLT somehow let in light that could possibly damage my eyes. My assumption is any lens would provide the same amount of protection against harmful UV light. |
Your eyes will be protected from harmful UV light.
There is at least one person on here who uses the Prizm Hi-Pink in all conditions.
I think the Rose is a better option as an allrounder, due to it being only a little worse in storm conditions and a lot better in bright Sun.....but I can see why you would be tempted by the Hi Pink.
My thinking, is that the conditions where the Hi-Pink really comes into its own, happen much less often than the brighter conditions, where the Rose is more comfortable/at least as good..
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Yes. The prism lens protect against uva and uvb.
Just to add to the conversation. Oakley now also have the Prism Snow Clear lens which has a VLT Of 65%. I have purchased the Flight tracker goggles with the Snow Clear, but have not yet tested on the mountain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| johnmac1956 wrote: |
Yes. The prism lens protect against uva and uvb.
Just to add to the conversation. Oakley now also have the Prism Snow Clear lens which has a VLT Of 65%. I have purchased the Flight tracker goggles with the Snow Clear, but have not yet tested on the mountain. |
Thanks. Haven't heard of that one. Let us know how that works out. I've tried clear lenses before (not good ones like Prizm) and haven't liked them. Just haven't been able to pick up contrast well, but that might different with a Prizm lens. I've always gone back to pink lenses. Excited to try the Prizm Hi-Pink. Any improvement over what I've had will be welcome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes to Oakley, but the Prizm lens is not for everyone... Had a Rose set but rapidly sold as - in my view - inferior to the Oakley hi-yellow (that is still available).
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
I was told that it is the plastic itself that blocks UV with Oakley lenses. I have been in bright sunshine with clear lenses when I forgot to swap them one time after an early start and didn't feel any effects afterwards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
If you really struggle in flat light, consider a cataract operation. It makes a world of difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Ones that don't steam up are the best,I find Bolle pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
I've got a pair of Giro Axis with some Zeiss 'Vivid' lenses, it's their definition enhancing technology, so chromapop or prizm - like I guerss.
So one thing to consider as @nevis1003 aludes to is not fogging up. If you have a helmet you are intending to keep it, clearly the goggles need to fit it (and you). Some brands have vents in the helmet that specifically line up with the vents in the helmet. It's worth checking out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
So : I ski in at Glencoe where we frequently get poor / zero vis.
The Scott Amplifier lenses are best I have found and not expensive (£30-40). Go for the S1 (low light) / illuminator option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Lots of good recommendations here. I have the Oakley version and like that, but others are good too.
One thing to consider though is you will never be able as well in low light, and changes in terrain will come as a surprise no matter what lenses you use. The only real answer is to ski with feel rather than rely completely on vision. Proper balance and concentrating on feeling changes in terrain through the soles of your feet is what you need to do.
After my wife did her knee in she was uncomfortable and nervous in poor visibility. We got her the best lenses. But it was only when I sent her out in atrocious conditions with a trusted instructor that she became more comfortable. I avoid giving instruction to my wife at all costs, always works better if someone else does it!
Sorry to give the boring reply but it really is more of a technique (and confidence) issue than anything else!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Thanks again for all the valuable input here. Haggis Trap, I've looked all over for a Scott goggle that has that lens and can't turn up anything. If you happy to have a link, please let me know.
zikomo, such a good point. I find myself doing that very thing (ski with feel), but admittedly, I've been met with a surprise or two and wondered whether I might have seen it coming with better goggles. I did end up buying some Oakley's with Hi-Pink Prizm so I'm excited to try them out when we go in early March. I tested them out in the house and was shocked at the reflections that impacted viewing. My Bolles don't do that, but I'm not really testing them properly until I have them in the environment they are intended. I'm optimistic that they'll be great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| JPW wrote: |
zikomo, such a good point. I find myself doing that very thing (ski with feel), but admittedly, I've been met with a surprise or two and wondered whether I might have seen it coming with better goggles. |
IMO. There ia no Magic Bullet for flat light and if there is no contrast to start with, Goggles can't manufacture some. If there is a little contrast, the best lenses make a marginal improvement that is worth having.
For me, skiing in very flat light is somewhat like skiing down an uncomfortably steep slope, in that it can induce a sense of fear and unease - which can prevent you from properly committing to the turn.
You absolutely have to ski with feel - both from the sensations through the feet and from the ski poles - but I find I also have to exaggerate my commitment at the start of the turn, as I find myself retreating from the Fall Line. If you have an injury that is affected by a sudden jolt (as I have with my back), there is a strong, if not overwhelming desire to back off the turn - which is the worst thing you can do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@JPW, following Zikomo, a change in technique tactic to do lots of short turns both naturally slows you down, without taking the fun out of it but most importantly, gives your brain a whole load more input to work with.
It really works.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Good point about the injury. My wife has a bad knee (acl) and struggled in flat light. She now forces herself to ski with even more commitment to the fall line in challenging conditions which has largely fixed the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
