Having decided to try getting sunglasses from one of those “our lab is in Hong Kong” places, the question arises: what lens & frame size do I need?
Rummaging through the heap produces this assortment:
| Frame label |
Lens size |
Frame width |
Earpiece |
Commentary |
| 53-19 |
53×40 |
141 |
145 |
Current glasses |
| 55-16 |
55×45 |
142 |
140 |
Current sunglasses |
| 54-16 |
54×45 |
133 |
135 |
Old sunglasses |
| 56-16 |
56×45 |
137 |
133 |
Wire rims, aviators |
| 52-19 |
52×39 |
140 |
140 |
Clear, previous daily |
| 56-16 |
58×50 |
135 |
130 |
Aviators, too big |
The obvious conclusion is that any lens in the low 50s x 40-ish range will suffice. Pity that the LPS (low-price supplier) doesn’t have anything non-aviator-ish or un-dorky (even by my slack standards) in the 40-ish range, but maybe it’ll work out OK.
Some general observations.
I used to wear relatively large aviator-style lenses, as I worked on little parts that occasionally went sproing. Not enough energy to merit safety glasses, but annoying enough to want good eye coverage. These days, alas, I tend to wear a headband magnifier.
Progressive bifocals require a relatively tall (and, it seems, currently unstylish) lens. Aviators solve that problem, but really are too large for my face. No matter that I wore them for years.
Anti-reflection coating is wonderful. Pity that the LPS can’t put it on tinted lenses; I’ll see how that works out.
I wear one pair of glasses all day, every day, and take fanatic care of them; we have an ultrasonic cleaner pretty much dedicated to eyewear. By and large, my lenses last forever. The frames, as you’ve seen there, tend to fail first.
[Update: It turns out 53×35 lenses really aren’t tall enough for gray 20% transmission sunglasses: the progressive transition is a bit cramped and there’s too much daylight around the top & bottom. I think they’ll be OK for biking, as I wear hideous goggles to keep the dust out of my eyes. A pupillary distance of 62 seems OK. About $63 delivered.]