# Using 2 lenses at once?



## itchyfinger (Jun 14, 2007)

mmm....interesting to see what it would do to sight picture.....two concave/convex lenses should not cancel each other out but it might cause more problems than solutions because you would be looking through two different defracted light specturms.....I wonder what that damn Yankee would have to say about it.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

I don't think it will cancel anything. It may not get to 10X but it will be more then a 6X that's for sure.


----------



## dbracer (May 20, 2005)

*2 lenses*

I'm a trad archer, but I'm also an eye doc. Lenses physics is part of my life. 

I'm not sure I understand the nature of the question, but if 2 simple lenses are placed adjacent, in low powers (and 4 diopter & 6 diopter are low pwrs) then they would be additive. To some extent it depends on whether we are talking "powers" or "diopters". 

The problems that will arise are:
1. there are 4 surfaces for dirt and reflection.
2. 10 power reduces the field, compresses the image and increase any little motion you may have during aiming, which why I won't hunt with anything higher than 8x binoculars - there's to much motion above that unless you are using a mounted spotting system.
3. The optics in bow sights is "sloppy." The focal distance between the front and back lenses is an "approximation," since every archer's draw length is different, and if you get either the front sight or the back sight to far of the telescopic power arrangement the focal distances will be fouled up and the image will be terribly blurry. 

dbracer.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Thanks for the info....I think you are over analyzing the question a little...atleast for my purposes :wink:

The two lenses that I have are both from the same manufacture...one is a 4X the other is a 6X (I would state them by diopter but DY doesn't list them that way)

But the reason for my question is that I want to go with more magnification...and I don't feel like buying another lens right this second..nothing more nothing less. But I also want to try a 8x or 10x before I plunk down the $$. This is simply for experimentation purposes....I won't go to the range for a few days otherwise I would just slap them in there and try it 

But on your negative points....

#1. there are 4 surfaces for dirt and reflection The dirt isn't a biggie...you have to clean the glass when it is one anyway from time to time. How much MORE reflection would the second lens cause? It will only be used indoors and I can't really see why there would be that much more reflection.

#2. 10 power reduces the field, compresses the image and increase any little motion you may have during aiming, which why I won't hunt with anything higher than 8x binoculars - there's to much motion above that unless you are using a mounted spotting system. I am aware of that reduced field of view that is one thing I am going for :wink: I am also VERY aware of the movement issue I have been shooting a scope for archery for about 10 years But the motion isn't as bad when there is no aiming reticle:wink:

#3. The optics in bow sights is "sloppy." The focal distance between the front and back lenses is an "approximation," since every archer's draw length is different, and if you get either the front sight or the back sight to far of the telescopic power arrangement the focal distances will be fouled up and the image will be terribly blurry. Layman's terms please I don't understand how adding adding another 1/16" of glass will change anything other then adding more magnification....:noidea:

Basiclly what I am trying to figure out is what "power" will I come up with? Will my scope not be as clear? Would it work better with one lens in the front...and one in the back of the housing (like a rifle scope or binoculor).... The "negative" affects you brought up are all problems that occur with one lens anyway.....so it isn't something that I would worry about.


----------



## thenson (Mar 23, 2004)

Good question, got my mind to rolling too, I have an extra lens.... great, another project for this evening....

thanks BH


----------



## GATOR-EYE (Jun 30, 2006)

Sounds like a job for duct tape!!


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

try it and see what happens...let us know how it went


----------



## target1 (Jan 16, 2007)

if you clean them with PI, I think it will work great.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

GATOR-EYE said:


> Sounds like a job for duct tape!!


Nope...my ring will hold them together fine no duct tape needed:wink:


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

target1 said:


> try it and see what happens...let us know how it went


I will this weekend....just thought that out of the trillion people on here someone would have thought to try it atleast once.:embara:

but I don't need to clean it with PI....

My DY lens get coated with PIV2 prior to being sent to me...I just have to nock the dust off from time to time:wink:


----------



## dbracer (May 20, 2005)

Brown Hornet said:


> Thanks for the info....I think you are over analyzing the question a little...atleast for my purposes :wink:
> 
> The two lenses that I have are both from the same manufacture...one is a 4X the other is a 6X (I would state them by diopter but DY doesn't list them that way)
> 
> But the reason for my question is that I want to go with more magnification...and I don't feel like buying another lens right this second..nothing more nothing less. But I also want to try a 8x or 10x before I plunk down the $$. This is simply for experimentation purposes....I won't go to the range for a few days otherwise I would just slap them in there and try it  .


Hornet,

You're probably correct. I'm over analyzing, again.

I shoot with those that use telescopic sights all the time, but I've never shot one, myself. I shoot bent stick - no sights. 

What you want to try sounds reasonable. Do you use a power peep? If not then a lot of what I said doesn't apply. 

Telescopic bow sights as far as I can tell are "afocal" especially if the peep is of little importance. These systems are founded on the human brain being able to accept some blur. 

Hell, mine is so blurry most of the time a little more from optics would hurt much. 

Now you got me curious. I'm going to have to study those darn things. I was so happy in my ignorance. Then there is some guy like you that comes along and ruins it. 

Dang, Hornet, I don't really have time for this. I deal with sick eyes and optics all day long. Now I'm going to have to fool with it during my rec time, otherwise it'll drive me nuts. 

Geeesss! Catch you later. 

Respectfully,
dbracer


----------



## tabarch (Sep 20, 2006)

Here is somthing you have not thought of Hornet is you will have a harder time finding the correct target when you get above 6X, if you don't hold your bow on the target you are shooting at before you draw you may actually wind up shooting the wrong target. One of the guys I shoot with tried an 8X scope indoors one year and he shoot the wrong target on several shoots during the season and I tried it ONE time and I have yet to find the correct target . I almost always draw the bow leval and I never sky the bow but I still could not find the correct target.
Terry


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

dbracer said:


> Hornet,
> 
> You're probably correct. I'm over analyzing, again.
> 
> ...


LOL...gotta keep you on your toes 

I do use a clarifier peep....but nothing to strong at the moment. However most people do once you get over a 4X so again it isn't something that is out of the ordinary for us Freestylers :wink:


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

tabarch said:


> Here is somthing you have not thought of Hornet is you will have a harder time finding the correct target when you get above 6X, if you don't hold your bow on the target you are shooting at before you draw you may actually wind up shooting the wrong target. One of the guys I shoot with tried an 8X scope indoors one year and he shoot the wrong target on several shoots during the season and I tried it ONE time and I have yet to find the correct target . I almost always draw the bow leval and I never sky the bow but I still could not find the correct target.
> Terry


I have thought about it...I just didn't bring it up because it isn't a concern of mine  For one I draw on MY target....not at the floor or the ceiling like some do...so I have never had the problem of shooting the wrong target.  Besides there are plenty of people that shoot a 8X indoors so...it will wither be something I get used to or don't. But it won't hurt to try it

Heck I have had pin shooters shoot my target


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

Brown Hornet said:


> I don't think it will cancel anything. It may not get to 10X but it will be more then a 6X that's for sure.


Hello
I have tried all theses combinations and even spaced them in a Old two ring Extreme sight.And useing a negative peep to try and clear up this much powere just didn't pan out.

A diopter = 12 1/2 But that can very also.But thats a ball park figure.

Now your 4 power is 50 -diopter's
Now your 6 power is 75-diopter's

Now adding them together you now have 125-diopters

Now a 10 power = 125 diopter's

You see your aiming lense has a postive value And your peep lense has a negative value.

So to find the value of a postive lense and a negative peep lense
When used in line with each other at the proper focal lenth for the lense.You subtract your negative power from your postive power.And that gives you your power value for that lense used at that focal lenth.

I have a chart given me back in the 60's from A lense maker in Cal.It list the draw lenth and color of negative peep lense, that work together, with ones postive scope lense. 
i make my own scope lense by hand.Have made them as small as a dime.


----------



## dbracer (May 20, 2005)

Unk Bond said:


> Hello
> I have tried all theses combinations and even spaced them in a Old two ring Extreme sight.And useing a negative peep to try and clear up this much powere just didn't pan out.
> 
> A diopter = 12 1/2 But that can very also.But thats a ball park figure.
> ...



Okay 007, 

If ya don't mind mi intrudin' here, but this is drivin', me nuts. Prolly be in the loony bin come tomorrow. 

So you say you have a +50.00 D. front lens. That means it has a focal length of 0.8 inches, and to give you 4x the peep lens has to be a -12.50 D., virtual focal distance bein' about 3.2 inches. Do I have it right? 

So the total telescopic focal length is 4 inches, 10 bloody cm's? Is that right?

Don't get me wrong 007. I'm not making fun. I'm just tryin' to understand this. If what I've said its right then things are going to be pretty bleedin' blurry out there at a draw length of 28"+!

'Course there is the peep itself which is basically a "pinhole" which would wipe the blur off a foggy London morning. I guess it's possible. Sure seems strange though. Could you mean 0.50 D. instead of 50.00 D?

Again, I no nothing of these telly sights. I shoot a sightless stick. You are cutting lenses for them, so I'm sure ya know what you're doing, but can you help me understand this any?

Respectfully,
dbracer


----------



## ArcheryNut2006 (Dec 5, 2006)

I was courious about this a year or two ago so I put a 3X and a 4X lens in a super d housing. One lens in the front and one in the back. I have a 6x lens that I have shot alot and also an 8x lens that I have shot, but not alot. In my opinion, with the clarifier that I used, which was a #3 red 1/16" (same as I used with the 6x) the 3x and 4x together looked about the same as the 6x. This may not be the same for everyone, but this is what I came up with. Also, both of the lens that I used were flat lens.


----------



## IGluIt4U (Sep 22, 2004)

Well, I'd have tried it by now, but it seems Yankee ain't hooked me up with enough lenses to test the theory.. :set1_thinking: :chortle:

I'll have to have a word with him next time I see him... :wink:


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

Let me try again.Since you are the doc  you would know more the focal lenth value of a lense than i. [ Iam saying.Useing a postive scope lense with a plus value.And useing a peep with a negative value and the peep lense made of glass .

Well as you know. haveing a postive lense and a negative lense to find the correction value and useing two different type values. Then you subtract the negative value from the postive value.

Now front scope lense that archers use .Has a plus power value of 3x-4X-6x-8x-10X not sure about a 10X being available.

Now one type of rear peep they use.Has glass inserts.If my memory serves me .They are a [ yellow with a minus 25 value ] a [Green with a 50 minus value] And a [ Red with a 75 minus value.]

So as you can see here the focal lenth now comes in to play.And ataining a draw lenth that works with two different type of lense values. useing also a postive and negative value.

-----------------
Some archers use a 6X being a 75 postive lense with a green minus 50 peep lense.Now a archers draw lenth now comes in to play.If his draw lenth is to long or to short.And in turn this changes the focal lenth value of the two lense.Then as you know  There is a distorsion of one viewing of a target.One can move his scope in and out here also, to help with ones draw lenth to work in the range of the lense focal lenth.

When i ordered my first lense from Cal. Back in the 60's The first thing i was asked .What is your draw lenth.And at that time i was shooting a recurve.I said 27 1/2 inches .He said you fall between the yellow and green negative lense.To be safe he sent me a green negative lense peep.

Now days lense makers let you find the correct lense by trial and errow.

There is a chart here on AT for a draw lenth to conenside with a lenses values .I feel its close.
As you know there could be different lense value made in postive and negative.But the cost inconvenance, becomes a factor.So they chose less negative lense to work with.Postive lense values

Now i will look for that old chart i have. And will try to post it tomoro.


----------



## tabarch (Sep 20, 2006)

Brown Hornet said:


> I have thought about it...I just didn't bring it up because it isn't a concern of mine  For one I draw on MY target....not at the floor or the ceiling like some do...so I have never had the problem of shooting the wrong target.  Besides there are plenty of people that shoot a 8X indoors so...it will wither be something I get used to or don't. But it won't hurt to try it
> 
> Heck I have had pin shooters shoot my target


I know what you mean, a few years ago after shooting one end we walked down to the target to score we found that in my target there was actually 8x's had been shoot into my 5 spot.


----------



## dbracer (May 20, 2005)

Unk Bond said:


> Let me try again.Since you are the doc  you would know more the focal lenth value of a lense than i. [ Iam saying.Useing a postive scope lense with a plus value.And useing a peep with a negative value and the peep lense made of glass .
> 
> Well as you know. haveing a postive lense and a negative lense to find the correction value and useing two different type values. Then you subtract the negative value from the postive value.
> 
> ...


Okay 007,

I think I'm getting it now. The 25, 50, 75 means 0.25 D., 0.50 D. and 0.75 D.
They are the dioptric designations of the peep. 

And you are correct, I added the to focal lengths like an astronomical telly (everything upside-down) instead of subtracting like I should have for a Galilean telly (everything upright). So, my total length should have been less than 10 centimeters. 

But, since you made the light clear on the designation now I can see how we get all that focal length. The lenses are very low power. If you combine a +1.00 objective (front lens) and a -0.50 ocular (peep) you have a 2x telly. It's just simple arithmetic. If you use a -0.25 ocular you got a 4x. 

See you can't do ophthalmics and be too smart. If you were they'd send you to law school where the real money is. 

Anyway, thanks 007. You've showed me the light, and they are now untying the arms to my straight jacket and givin' me my dismissal papers as my transcriptionist finishes our correspondence. 

I hate sleeping in those darn white jackets with my arms all tied down, especially when they allow me a conjugal visit. It can be so inconvenient, ya know.

Catch ya in cyberspace.

Respectfully,
dbracer


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Ok...update....

I tried it yesterday when I got home...I didn't shoot it as I don't have room in the house. BUT the two lenses together....equal AT LEAST a 9X...and I would say it is close to a 10X...to much :fear: Nothing but gold (at least at 10yds)....I couldn't tell you if I was on the right, left, or top spot....:embara:

But I may pick up an 8x anyway just to play around...heck it's only $$:wink:


----------



## archerycharlie (Nov 4, 2002)

*Merry Christmas*

Butt if i shoot bad with one lens,will 2 lens make me shoot twice as bad?:wink: AC


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

archerycharlie said:


> Butt if i shoot bad with one lens,will 2 lens make me shoot twice as bad?:wink: AC


If you use the combo I put together....YES:wink:


----------



## rudeman (Jan 25, 2006)

> Originally Posted by archerycharlie
> Butt if i shoot bad with one lens,will 2 lens make me shoot twice as bad? AC


And what if you don't shoot a lens at all and you try 2? Yikes.

Then again, maybe I should switch off of being a pin guy and go to scopes. Everyone keeps telling me there are three X's on the Vegas target but I don't believe 'em. It's just one big yellow blob, right?


----------



## dbracer (May 20, 2005)

*2 glasses*

Ya give a stickbow shooter like me a couple of glasses and I'll make a spectacle of myself. 

Respectfully,
dbracer


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

dbracer said:


> Okay 007,
> 
> I think I'm getting it now. The 25, 50, 75 means 0.25 D., 0.50 D. and 0.75 D.
> They are the dioptric designations of the peep.
> ...



-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hello All
***Quote = But, since you made the light clear on the designation now I can see how we get all that focal length. The lenses are very low power. If you combine a +1.00 objective (front lens) and a -0.50 ocular (peep) you have a 2x telly. It's just simple arithmetic. If you use a -0.25 ocular you got a 4x. 

Answer = Back in your straight jacket, you go  for more addition and subtraction. here.

Quote = If you combine a +1.00 objective (front lens) and a -0.50 ocular (peep) you have a 2x telly. 

Now a +100 ninus .050

+100 Front lense value
-50 peep lense value
-------------
=a +50 = now ask your self, what value power this equals based on useing the 12 1/2 Diaopter scale [A hint here  a .075 D is a 6 power


Now here is what makes this balanceing act so very hard.

First off. Your eye has a postive value.Now looking through a negative power lense peep. And on to viewing a scope with a lense with a postive value,set to a distance of ones draw lenth.

If thats not enough to tilt or up set the equasion.Other factors can also come in to play.Such as the shape of the front lense. And properties the lense is made from.

For example.] What values one atains, by useing a Plastic scope lense with a glass negative peep lense

Now here is another factor .That hast to be entered in to the equasion.The shape of our eyes, and what value is atained by there shape. [Example ] My right eye has a 21.50 + value since i had a lense put in for cataract removal.Where as my wifes right eye has a 17.50 postive lense.

So this is why one's combination of lenses he uses.Won't work or be clear for the next archer that trys the same set up.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

This is a good time for me to rant about the dumb archery industry use of 2X, 3X, 4X or whatever X for scope lens designation.

The only thing that matters is the diopter. I do not want to even hear about a lens being a certain power because it is not relevant in any way. With different people using the lens at different distances from their eye, the amount of magnification varies.

If you tell me that you have a .5 diopter scope lens, I know what that is. Otherwise, I know that you do not know what you have.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

FS560 said:


> This is a good time for me to rant about the dumb archery industry use of 2X, 3X, 4X or whatever X for scope lens designation.
> 
> The only thing that matters is the diopter. I do not want to even hear about a lens being a certain power because it is not relevant in any way. With different people using the lens at different distances from their eye, the amount of magnification varies.
> 
> If you tell me that you have a .5 diopter scope lens, I know what that is. Otherwise, I know that you do not know what you have.


I know that....you know that...but until someone bugs the heck out of the lens makers you aren't going to see a change. The shooter can only go off of what is listed...and I think if I say I have a 6X lens by now you know about what I have.:wink:

Although I was very disapointed when I talked to Sure Loc last year and they told me that I needed lens XXX to get the power that I wanted. Then after talking to Steve a month later he told me about the calculator and I found out that it was not close to what I wanted....I wondered why it seemed weak


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

Unk Bond said:


> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Hello All
> ***Quote = But, since you made the light clear on the designation now I can see how we get all that focal length. The lenses are very low power. If you combine a +1.00 objective (front lens) and a -0.50 ocular (peep) you have a 2x telly. It's just simple arithmetic. If you use a -0.25 ocular you got a 4x.
> 
> ...


-----------------------

PS :wink: I for got to add reading glasses 

Now a curve postive eye value, viewing through a postive curve reading glass or plastic lense .And then on to viewing through a negative glass lense peep.And then on to viewing a plastic or glass being flat or curve scope lense.

 so guys you are now trying to incorperate values thought glass and plastic being different shapes and being postive or negative in there own type values :wink:

Now guys i might go on to say. Looking through that MFG peep and scope mounted on a long rod .To show you how clear there lense is .Just ask yourself this.Am i at my own natural draw lenth while viewing this lense.Or am i viewing a focal lenth or draw lenth pre establised for you and, will fit in there show box to travel to the shows with.. :wink:


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

Brown Hornet said:


> I know that....you know that...but until someone bugs the heck out of the lens makers you aren't going to see a change. The shooter can only go off of what is listed...and I think if I say I have a 6X lens by now you know about what I have.:wink:
> 
> Although I was very disapointed when I talked to Sure Loc last year and they told me that I needed lens XXX to get the power that I wanted. Then after talking to Steve a month later he told me about the calculator and I found out that it was not close to what I wanted....I wondered why it seemed weak


The problem is that a 6X lens is not the same diopter with all scope manufacturers. I realize that it is purported to be a .75 with perhaps most. However, unless I familiarize myself with all of them and ask the brand you have, I really do not know what you have without asking you the diopter.

Even though I have now ranted about it, I really do not feel better.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

FS560 said:


> The problem is that a 6X lens is not the same diopter with all scope manufacturers. I realize that it is purported to be a .75 with perhaps most. However, unless I familiarize myself with all of them and ask the brand you have, I really do not know what you have without asking you the diopter.
> 
> Even though I have now ranted about it, I really do not feel better.


But that is the thing....most don't care or know....you know what to look for. Majority of the higher end lenses run pretty close in power (diopter)....there are a couple that I think are strong....

but either way you still could have answered the question....using your method of course I would have understood and converted it for the masses


----------



## dbracer (May 20, 2005)

I agree the diopters are the most significant designation, because you guys are correct, the _power_ is an estimation, at best. 

I've written to the manufacturers to get the science. I can't stand guessing at this stuff. 

When I get it all straight I will post the exact formulas so you know what you're getting. It won't be very complex. 

Also I had it wrong earlier, because I seldom work with telescopic systems.
First, the formula for power is the peep diopters / sight diopters. But I'm not sure that bow scopes are that accurate. I think they use acceptable blur. 

The focal length for an individual lens in inches is 40 / D. eg. 40 / 0.50 = 80 inches.

Hornet, you've been a lot of fun, especially for bringing this question up anyway. Now, no offense, I'll have to disagree with you here a little bit. If a guy does not need correction, has had correct surgery, or is wearing the appropriate correction (these are all one in the same person) the eye has little to do with it. Because all the eye cares is that when it is looking in the distance the light rays are coming to it parallel and not converged or diverged. 

If a guy is trying to use a scope without the compensation for his known refractive error -- he's crazy anyway so don't worry about him. 

Respectfully,
dbracer


----------



## Bob_Looney (Nov 17, 2003)

I didn't read all the mumbo jumbo but I did put 2 lenses in my Apex a cpl weeks ago. 

wasn't worth the trouble. Just buy a 6x if that's what you want. I put 6's together. You can't hold that steady enough, I don't care who you are.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

dbracer said:


> Hornet, you've been a lot of fun, especially for bringing this question up anyway. Now, no offense, I'll have to disagree with you here a little bit. If a guy does not need correction, has had correct surgery, or is wearing the appropriate correction (these are all one in the same person) the eye has little to do with it. Because all the eye cares is that when it is looking in the distance the light rays are coming to it parallel and not converged or diverged.
> 
> If a guy is trying to use a scope without the compensation for his known refractive error -- he's crazy anyway so don't worry about him.
> 
> ...


Nothing wrong with not agreeing...besides you know more about eyes and glass then I do 

BUT...you lost me....:embara: What are you talking about :noidea: I don't understand what I said that you are disagreeing with.


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Bob_Looney said:


> I didn't read all the mumbo jumbo but I did put 2 lenses in my Apex a cpl weeks ago.
> 
> wasn't worth the trouble. Just buy a 6x if that's what you want. I put 6's together. You can't hold that steady enough, I don't care who you are.


well I have a 6X (whatever diopter that is ) and I wanted to try a little more...that was the only reason for the question. I may call DY after X Mas and just get an 8X to try...the 6X and the 4X are WAY to much.


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

dbracer said:


> I agree the diopters are the most significant designation, because you guys are correct, the _power_ is an estimation, at best.
> 
> I've written to the manufacturers to get the science. I can't stand guessing at this stuff.
> 
> ...


-----------------------------------------------------
Quote =If a guy is trying to use a scope without the compensation for his known refractive error -- he's crazy anyway so don't worry about him. 

Ans = i will now remove your straight jacket :wink: We need it for them you decribed.

It has been fun .
--------------------------------
Before i go. i would appreciate it. If you could tell this old fellow why. When i move my glasses towards the end of my nose.Why my byfocals see letters plainer.And darker.and clearer.And these are new glasses.


----------



## dbracer (May 20, 2005)

FS560 said:


> This is a good time for me to rant about the dumb archery industry use of 2X, 3X, 4X or whatever X for scope lens designation.
> 
> The only thing that matters is the diopter. I do not want to even hear about a lens being a certain power because it is not relevant in any way. With different people using the lens at different distances from their eye, the amount of magnification varies.
> 
> If you tell me that you have a .5 diopter scope lens, I know what that is. Otherwise, I know that you do not know what you have.


Hey 560,

This is really off the subject, but can you tell us what your by-line means,
i.e. _Illegitimus non Carborundum._ Sounds interesting, and I just love genus and species names. 

Several of the guys I went to college with graduated _magnum cum loaded_ -- little heavy on the ethanol, if you no what I mean. Not exactly genus and species, but you get the picture. 

The guy that graduated last in my class was called _gnotso intellegentus_. What's really spooky is that he is also known as _"doctor."_ God help us. 

Respectfully,
dbracer


----------



## dbracer (May 20, 2005)

Unk Bond said:


> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Hello All
> ***Quote = But, since you made the light clear on the designation now I can see how we get all that focal length. The lenses are very low power. If you combine a +1.00 objective (front lens) and a -0.50 ocular (peep) you have a 2x telly. It's just simple arithmetic. If you use a -0.25 ocular you got a 4x.
> 
> ...


Now 007,

So are you saying that both you and your wife have had cataract surgery or lens replacement? 

It's pretty interesting that you actually know your implant's power. Most people could give a hang. 

If you haven't noticed, I like my work. It's hi-tech which is probably why I shoot low-tech. 

Enough of me. Tell me of your implant situation. 

Respectfully,
dbracer


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

Hello all
A doctor Derick in Columbus Ohio.is my Glacoma doctor.And may i say he is oustanding in his field.It has now been 4 years .And my pressure in both eyes have remained the same, as he set them at at time of opperation.Now i tried every kind of liquid med, to try and hold the pressure down.But the med efected my eyes and pressure wouldn't come down.My honest oppinion here is. One should just have the opperation in the first place.When one finds out they have Glaucoma.But my feeling also is. its a money maker for med company's [

He let my wife see the opperation on a tv screen.Now she said when he cut the lower part of my eye,under the eye lid.She could see a mucus spay. By releaseing the pressure from my eye. It spued all around where i was laying.After he put stiches in his cut.He checked my pressure.And not being satisfied with the pressure.He took a lazer and removed one of the stiches.And set the eye pressure to his likeing.

Now my right aiming eye took a beating.while waiting on a professor in WV to deside i needed a opperation.The professor shot both eyes with a lazer 50 times for one and 52 times for the other.After a year he said i would be blind in 6 months .Unless i had a opperation .So he sent me to doctor Derick in Columbus Ohio.
Later still trying to improve my vision in my aiming eye.We desided to remove the cateract.in both eyes.I took eye drop med in both eyes for two weeks.To prepare my eyes for the opperation . After given it some thought and just before the opperation.I wayed things over, and desided just to have the cateract removed from my right aiming eye.Was put to sleep .Reawakened.Just in time for the opperation to start.Now he spent very little time performing this opperation.Came home, and that evening removed the bandage.And never had a pain then to now.Like i said this guy can do the talk and the walk.

Now they measure your eye on a machine,to find the curversture of your eye.Inturn the machine gives you the postive value and size of the lense to be implanted.Now they give you a card to carry with you at all times that decribes your value.Thats how i know mine.

Now my experance with eye doctors or doctors as a whole.Is they specialize in one field now days.And in my case, they let me slip through the crack.Meaning all the times i had doctors evaulateing my eyes and treating my eyes for Glacoma.Even with a proffeser that taught others about the eye.And observing them And since the retina wasn't in there field of expertice.They didin't find i had MD .Till after my caterat removal.And i told them it was better .But still hasy.So he desided to send me to a retina doctor.That again only specialized in the retina field.So he ran red die in the vain of my arm. And took pictures of my eyes.My left eye is still good but my aiming eye. Has spots.Now he gave me a sample of vitiams.And now i take 2 a day.I will admit they do help.But theres no cure.And they don't realy know.What causes it.They think oils one cooks with and so on.

My point here with this long story.Is maybe, some one else will read this and not fall in the crack of a specialist evalulateing just one part of the eye.Have a complete eye evalulation.if you halft to see more than one doctor to get the job done.Take time and study your eye .So as you will know when you have had a complete check up. [Later


----------



## dbracer (May 20, 2005)

*eyes*

Good points 007.

Concerning MD: If you have the wet form, you may want to consider the new injections. They are now injecting chemo drugs which stops wet form in its tracks.

If you have "dry form," consider yourself lucky because no one would ever trade dry form for wet form even though the latter is more treatable. 

Here check out this site: www.mayoclinic.org/news2005-rst/2676.html 

Respectfully,
dbracer


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

dbracer said:


> Good points 007.
> 
> Concerning MD: If you have the wet form, you may want to consider the new injections. They are now injecting chemo drugs which stops wet form in its tracks.
> 
> ...


--------------------------------
Hello
I was aware of the wet type MD and the shot scedual one hast to indure.

But luckley i have the dry MD
Now the link you provied was interest.But if iam correct.It pertains to the wet type MD.

Now have you seen a link.That adresses the dry Type MD [Later  By the way iam shooting as a right hand shooter and aiming, with my left eye  :wink:

--------
Sill have this little question.And that is.Moveing my eye glasses towards the end of my nose.Why dose my byfocals seem to find letters darker and clearer and bigger.Now i have new glasses.But my reading of a line of words .Seem to be ,so much sharper when moveing my glasses away from my eyes.:wink:


----------



## Brown Hornet (Aug 8, 2002)

Hey thread jackers....take your eye probelms to PM. 

You to crazy guys are the first two to EVER succesfully jack a Hornet thread


----------



## dbracer (May 20, 2005)

*Jacking*

007,

Ya know Hornets got a point. 

I've always thought these internet forums were about human relations: not subject matter. But, some of these guys actually want to stay on topic, right Hornet?

Okay Okay. Hornet's been a good sport. Ill start a thread in the Health and Wellness forum section, and I'll see if I can get some info for you on dry form ARMD (age related macular degeneration). Probably won't get anything posted for a week or more. 

And Hornet, as soon as I get this telescopic sight formula thing figured, I'll find you somewhere in this AT forum and distribute the info. 

Ya got your thread back, Hornet. Never let it be said that I will steal a man's threads. You could let a guy freeze to death doin' that!

Respectfully,
dbracer


----------



## romanduffe (Mar 24, 2006)

*Sams Archery Sales*

If you are not confused now you should be.

I have shot a four and a three many times and had no problem.

I sel lens for 1 and 3/4 inch scopes so if it don't work I still have an 8X and and my 6xs are on order.

e mail
[email protected]


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

dbracer said:


> Hey 560,
> 
> This is really off the subject, but can you tell us what your by-line means,
> i.e. _Illegitimus non Carborundum._ Sounds interesting, and I just love genus and species names.
> ...


My rat class at VPI (VA Tech) E Company adopted that as a class motto. We even had it on our ring dance invitations.

It means "dont let the sons of unwed mothers get you down". The way we word it does not print on here.


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

Brown Hornet said:


> Thanks for the info....I think you are over analyzing the question a little...atleast for my purposes :wink:
> 
> The two lenses that I have are both from the same manufacture...one is a 4X the other is a 6X (I would state them by diopter but DY doesn't list them that way)
> 
> ...



---------------------
Sorry Hornet.Guess we got carried away.

Now to make it up to you since you are thinking on the lies of cheap scale :wink:

Go to Wal Marts.Buy your self a pair +75 or a +100 Chinies reading glasses.

1. Remove one of the lense

2.Lay a reg lense on the Chinies lense.Tape in 3 places.

3.Scrach between pieces of tape.

4 remove one piece of tape and place where you scrached a mark.

5 continue till you have scrached a circle.

6 Take your scrached lense to a smooth bench grinder.

7.Just take a little off as you go around your scrach mark.

9. Now your +100 Chinies lense will make a 50 yard target look like a 40 yard target.

10 By :wink:


----------



## dbracer (May 20, 2005)

*Illegitimus non Carborundum*



FS560 said:


> My rat class at VPI (VA Tech) E Company adopted that as a class motto. We even had it on our ring dance invitations.
> 
> It means "dont let the sons of unwed mothers get you down". The way we word it does not print on here.


I get the point 560,

What you really meant was "don't let the pups get you down," but then your translation's as good as mine. 

Better get off here. Hornet's gonna put-out a contract on me for stealing his threads again. Missin' with a guy that goes by Brown Hornet is like missin' with Golden Eagle, Snow Leopard, Black Wasp, Purple Sage, White Rhino, or Yellow Jacket. No matter what you're gonna bit, stung, tromped or made into sausage. :zip:

Respectfully,
dbracer


----------

