Have any of you had laser vision correction?

[Anne Williams]

I was curious how many of you have had laser vision correction done, esp. if you are over 45?

[John Kasaian]

Anne,

I pre- dated the laser thing by a couple of years---the Doc used a diamond scalpel on me and I was in my early thirties then(back when health insurance would pick up most of the tab!) What exactly do you want to know?

[lee nadel]

hi my wife is a painter always wore thick glasses she had the laser surgery 2 years ago and all she needs is the normal reading glasses as we all do in our late 50's but night vision is slightly affected especially when driving . if you had to wear glasses all your life it's definitely a miracle ! you can e-mail and speak with her if you like .

[kreig]

NO WAY!!!! I got only two eyes, i wear glasses, always have, i see 20/15 in one eye and 20/20 in the other with correction, and without glasses i can see just shy of 3 inches away. I am 55.

My friend (aged 51) just got his eyes "done" and he is having a lot of problems especially one eye, now blurry with no hope for a correction in that eye, he is NOT pleased!! The other is much better corrcted but he STILL needs glasses!! Go figure!! He cant drive at night.

Before he had his eyes "done" his only problem was the inconvenience of wearing glasses.

I know it works well for many people but can you afford to take a chance??

As i said before, No Way, i only got two eyes . . .

[austin granger]

One thing I've heard about possible side effects is a reduced ability to judge contrast. (!) Though the risks of such an outcome are undoubtedly very small, as a b+w photographer just hearing that was enough to scare me off the idea.

[Bruce Watson]

Personnally, I'd love to get rid of my glasses. But... the risk of not being able to see as well as I do now, with glasses, is still just too great.

If you've gotta do it though, you might look here:


http://www.cvs.rochester.edu/williamslab/vision_alliance.html (http://www.cvs.rochester.edu/williamslab/vision_alliance.html)

These guys are the ones who brought you the laser-wavefront proceedures. They seem to have a clue or two.

Every year I ask my eye doctor (Duke Med school - I've got a strong family history of glaucoma) about this, and every year he tells me the same thing. The doctors doing the surgery aren't yet letting their kids do it.

That, I think, ought to tell you something.

He tells me that he'll do it himself before he lets me. And he's still wearing his glasses. Sigh...

[Kaj Krinsmoe]

Technology might be perfect, but what about those who handle it?

If there is no official statistics of their performance then the circumstances are dubious.

Aldous Huxley cured his sight with yoga exercises. But this is something you have to do yourself and requires a daily effort. Its a bit the same as in religion, the right conceits will redeem you for sure, but enlightenment requires tedious practice of righteousness.

[Jon King]

I think Hogarth has it right. I've dealt with several eye doctors over the last few years, and none of them contacts, never mind laser surgery. Glasses on all. It tells me something.

[Anne Williams]

Our insurance will pay for it, so I've been debating it for a long time. Today, my trusty border collie and I went hiking with the 4x5 and now with getting to the point of needing bifocals, I found focusing to be more and more frustrating. Could I see better with my glasses and far away from the GG or take them off and be closer in? With the loupe and grain focuser I'm finding it hard to know whether to wear glasses or not.

Nothing seems right, but I also am generally risk averse about medical things that aren't a medical necessity. It seems that there are a lot of the general public who are very satisfied, but maybe the standards they need aren't as high as in photography.

[Harley Goldman]

Anne,

I had Lasik surgery done about 8 years ago. It has been really, really good. I have had a slight astigmatism slowly come back to one eye, but it is pretty minor. I have had no side affects at all. I would not hesitate to have it done again. The key is to research the doctors and be willing to pay top dollar to get a top-notch doctor. A lot do it at a discount, but who wants to go to WalMart when it comes to your eyes.

[Tom Westbrook]

Having had the joys of aging affect my eyes two years ago (presbyopia), I feel your pain. I have been moderately nearsighted since I was about 15. I got progressive bifocals and they work quite well. I focus on the ground glass at normal distances to coarse focus, and then use a loupe with my glasses on for critical focusing. I never take my glasses off to focus.

I've known a few people who have had lasik and they all seem to like it. I didn't like the odds myself: the thought of something going wrong and not having clear vision is just too great a risk. Glasses work fine for me.

If I were going to do it I'd find a reputable Dr. who has done a lot of them successfully and go have a long talk with him about my concerns. I'd guess a good Dr. would let you know the risks involved with your own eyes and help you make a decision you would be comfortable with.

[Chris Gittins]

For whatever its worth, an ex-girlfriend of mine was/is an ophthalmologist. Lasik was one of her specialties. She wore glasses and, to the best of my knowledge, so did all of her colleagues. Enough said.

[Oren Grad]

Anne -

It really depends on how risk-averse you are. I wouldn't go anywhere near it myself, despite being severely near-sighted. I consider my vision to be much too precious to take any chances on surgical procedures that are not absolutely necessary.

That said, although personal testimonials like you're getting here are a good way to get some sense of the range of experiences that are possible, do not base a decision solely on these - this is not a representative sample, even of photographers.

If you do consider it seriously, read all the literature you can describing the way the procedure works and the nature of typical complications. You should find out how many procedures have been done by the specific physicians you are looking at, and also their short- and long-term complication rates. If they won't tell you, then cross them off your list. If they have done very few procedures, also cross them off your list.

[John Kasaian]

Anne,

Like I said I'm a first generation diamond scalpel patient. With that said here are my observations:

RK dosen't halt the aging process.

RK can free you from wearing glasses for many years.

If wearing glasses is presents a problem---it did for me, since my prescription lenses were so thick they made me get plastic lenses and the plastics back them were was too soft and I was working in dirty, gritty conditions where plastic lenses were ruined within a day or two---RK is a very viable alternative, but go to the best Doc you can find. Bargain eye surgeons are like bargain parachutes;-)

I wouldn't do it for cosmetic reasons. Period.

My surgery was in 1984(Orwellian, eh?) I started using lenses again for distance around 1995, reading around 1997, and bifocals about 2000. I could undergo the proceedure again( my insurance wouldn't pay for it this time, however) but my glasses are nowhere near as heavy or as prone to damage as they were back in 1984, so I'm not.

FWIW, there are two highly qualified surgeons doing the proceedure in my little town and niether of them wears glasses.

[Ken Lee]

Lasik at Mass Eye and Ear Clinic in Boston - by one of the doctors that invented it.

Changed my life. I still remember going swimming without glasses for the first time in decades, and looking up at the clouds, sharp as a tack. Heavenly.

[Leonard Evens]

Lasik surgery corrects myopia. It does nothing to deal with presbyopia, the inability to focus closeup, that develops with age. You would still have to wear glasses to see closeup. Since when one is fiddling with a view camera, it is necessary to shift one's focus from near to far regularly, it is necessary for people with presbyopia to wear bifocals or progressive lenses.

Your developing presbyopia is not a reason for Lasik surgery.

I never had lasik surgery, but I did have my cataracts removed when they got so bad I had trouble seeing. When this is done, the eye doctor replaces the lens in the eye with a plastic lens. The plastic lens can usually be chosen so that almost all the myopia in the eye is corrected. My doctor got me from about 20/800 in both eyes to close to 20/20. So I can now see in the distance better than I have for some 60 years. But I still need glasses to see closeup. In principle, I could just use reading glasses, but taking the off and putting them on every time I want to see something closeup is too much trouble. It is much easier just to wear bifocals all the time.

If your vision is corrected to close to 20/20 for distant vision, then you ought to be able to use a loupe without glasses, since the loupe is set up so it works right when you eye is focused on infinity. But you won't be able to see anything else on the camera that close without some sort of correction as in bifocals.

[Bruce Watson]

Anne,

You could use the presbyopia to your advantage. You are going to have to get some form of reading glasses no matter what - as Leonard explains. So, get really good ones!

What I did was get my O. D. to give me a prescription for a pair of "photo" glasses. These fully correct for my astigmatism, and give me sharp focus at about 6 inches from the ground glass, resulting in about a 2x magnification. I can see the entire ground glass without moving my head, very sharp indeed, and with both eyes at the same time (which is much better than the monocular vision you get with a loupe, at least for me). The photo glasses work great for composition and for fine focusing.

You could use such photo glasses with a loupe (a 4x loupe with my glasses would give you about 6x magnification, the magnification factors add IIRC) if you wanted.

Just a thought....

[John Z.]

I actually am an ophthalmologist, and had done LASIK for many years. I never had a serious complication of any kind in all the years (9)that I did the procedure. I would recommend it, and would consider it myself if I needed any correction. A few caveats though; LASIK is great if you are a candidate, but can create problems if you are not, meaning outside the range, dry eyes, or other problems. A well qualified person has to evaluate your eyes, hopefully a well qualified surgeon that takes the time to do things well.

The second caveat is that you have to use the best technology, which means you have to pay a higher price, and not bargain shop, and also choose the best surgeon around.

The only problems I have seen have been using old technology, or surgeons pushing beyond acceptable limits, or performing surgery on someone who was not a good candidate to begin with.
I actually do not do LASIK now, having focused more on other procedures. I believe that those that specialize in LASIK are now best suited to do the procudure, usually at a dedicated laser center. I am still amazed that in the last two years I have worked with a highly competent surgeon in my area, no compications for any of my patients of any kind. LASIK is very safe when done properly.

[paulr]

"What I did was get my O. D. to give me a prescription for a pair of "photo" glasses. These fully correct for my astigmatism, and give me sharp focus at about 6 inches from the ground glass, resulting in about a 2x magnification. I can see the entire ground glass without moving my head, very sharp indeed, and with both eyes at the same time (which is much better than the monocular vision you get with a loupe, at least for me). The photo glasses work great for composition and for fine focusing.

You could use such photo glasses with a loupe (a 4x loupe with my glasses would give you about 6x magnification, the magnification factors add IIRC) if you wanted."

Jock Sturgess goes a step farther than this--he has custom TRIFOCALS for photography. The innermost lens is an 8x loupe for focussing. Other than that, they're normal bifocals. He says it's part of what makes him so fast with the 8x10.

I've never even owned an 8X loupe ...

[paulr]

one other thing ...
if you climb or ski or plan to spend any time at high altitude, be sure to bring this up with the doctor before deciding on the surgery. I know of more than one climber who has had disasterous results--the procedure weakens the eye against pressure, so at altitude the eye gradually enlarges, developing increasingly severe miopia day after day. people at very high altitudes can come close to blindness (they get better gradually when they go back down). still, it's no fun, and the only way they have to compensate is to bring several pairs of different strength glasses on a route, knowing that their vision will slowly deteriorate.

i believe this is only a worry with one or two of the procedures they do, but i'm not sure which ones.

[Jacques Augustowski]

so if I was born at the base of K2 and my operation was made at a high altitude, my eyes would colapse in its sockets once I came down to sea level? :-}}

Jacques

"one other thing ... if you climb or ski or plan to spend any time at high altitude, be sure to bring this up with the doctor before deciding on the surgery. I know of more than one climber who has had disasterous results--the procedure weakens the eye against pressure, so at altitude the eye gradually enlarges, developing increasingly severe miopia day after day. people at very high altitudes can come close to blindness (they get better gradually when they go back down)...."

[Donald Qualls]

If you're looking for distance vision correction, rather than a nonexistent solution to age-related loss of accommodation, I'd suggest considering the new Paragon lenses. These are rigid gas permeable contact lenses that are worn only during sleep -- but instead of being closely fitted to the existing shape of the cornea, they are designed to gradually reshape the cornea to match that of the lens and in the process correct vision. The initial cost is comparable with top quality LASIK surgery (though higher than the cut-rate LASIK chop-shops), and the process is non-invasive, gradual (over a course of up to two weeks for full effect that lasts up to 24 hours, as I recall), and completely reversible -- simply stop sleeping with the lenses in and your eyes will return to their previous condition in a matter of a few weeks.

The bad news is that most health plans don't yet cover Paragon lenses, and the lenses themselves, like any contact lenses, will require replacement every 2-4 years, as well as daily cleaning, disinfection, etc. -- ongoing costs appear comparable to wearing toric contact lenses (astigmatism correcting) or bifocal contacts. Of course, if you're not a good candidate for contact lenses, Paragon lenses aren't going to work for you (but if you're not a good contact lens candidate, you might not be a good LASIK candidate, either). The good news is, the results are reportedly similar to the best from LASIK, with a lower rate of much less severe complications (comparable level of problems to conventional rigid gas permeable contact lenses or extended wear soft lenses).

[Scott Bacon]

Annie, I had LASIK done about 3.5 years ago and my results are outstanding - 20/15 in my left eye (dominant) and 20/20 in my right. I started out with mild myopia and severe astigmatism. I have a very mild side effect of dry eyes, so I use an over the counter moisturizing drop a couple times a week. This problem disappears when I'm in more humid climates (Colorado is VERY DRY). I have absolutely no problems with night vision. And I certainly don't have problems with altitude (although maybe 13K - 14K ft. is not high enough) - I live at 5300 ft. I notice no difference in percieving contrast (this would have been obvious right after the surgery). I feel that I see better than I did with glasses, especially when photographing - no fogging, fingerprint smudges, rain drops or seeing around the lens when my head is tilted at odd angles. I don't have presbyopia, yet. But I fully understand that could/will be in my near future (I'm 37).

I would have the surgery done again in a heartbeat. It is one of the nicest things I've ever done for myself. But as others have said, my good experience doesn't mean that LASIK right for YOU. Carefully select a respected surgeon who specializes in the procedure, consult with them and have them evaluate your situation and lay out the risks, then decide.

[John Z.]

Actually, the statement above about problems with altitude is not correct; LASIK does not vary or fluctuate with altitude, or deep sea diving for that matter. What the person is most likely referring to is someone who had RK (radial keratotomy), which is an older procedure involving relaxing incisions on the cornea. This tends to fluctuates highly, and people that are climbers have had many problems climbing at high altitude--including Everest (Beck Wethers on the tragic climb of Everest many years ago where many people died in the storm--he survived though) . Often times people do not know the difference between RK and LASIK. LASIK has pretty much replaced RK and made it obsolete for many years now.

[John Kasaian]

Interesting observations regarding altitude. There is a local Air Guard base and back in the RK era a few pilots had RK. These guys fly F-15s and so far no problems have been noted that I'm aware of. I don't know what the current Air Force doctrine is, but I understand( well, I know from personal experience) that the FAA dosen't have a problem with RK.

[paulr]

I specifically said that I didn't know which procedure led to the problems at altitude. There's more than one type of laser surgery being done today, so as I suggested, if you're going up high (or diving down low, for that matter) make sure you mention it to the doctory.

[Larry Gebhardt]

I had Lasik done about a year ago. My vision is about 20/15 in one eye and 20/20 in the other. During the day everything is crisp and I see better than I ever have. At night I have had some problems with halos around bright lights (street lamps and car headlights). This is going away now, but it was really bad for a few months, so bad that I tried not to drive at night). I was within all the criteria for having the surgery, but my pupil size was towards the large side of the limits. This tends to be what causes the halo problem. I tend to think they need to tighten this requirment down a bit as I would be very upset if my problem was worse.