Optical problem

[Tony Moore]

The following will probably seem blindingly obvious to most of you, but it caused me some problems .
I had noticed recently that I was often unable to get a decent manual focus with some shots over recent months despite always using a monopod. I put it down to 'shakes' in old age, but it was getting critical, so I had a little practise. The penny quickly dropped! I now wear varifocal glasses and the bit of lens that looks into the viewfinder is the distance vision section, making my view blurry. As soon as I focused without specs on, the problem, of course, vanished. Specs on a string from now on. D'oh!

Tony M.

[Jack Harrison]

Anecdotally, many people don’t get on with varifocals. I have never tried them and when the need arose, I went for standard bi-focals. I adapted to them very easily.

But another age problem is (at present) unavoidable. I have had artificial lenses fitted to replace the worn out natural cataract-affected ones. They are brilliant but suffer from the disadvantage that you have nil accommodation (focussing ability) – in effect like a fixed-focus cheap camera. I say “at present” as research is underway to develop flexible artificial lenses. Apparently, the controlling muscles are not too badly affected by age so by the time the next generation is needing some help, with successful reasearch, things might be a lot better.

Jack

[Tony Moore]

Hello, Jack,

Are you able to tip your head back enough to get the 'near' part of your spectacle lens to the viewfinder? I certainly can't. Otherwise, I find varifocals brilliant and wear them all the time. All part of bloody old age, I'm afraid, although the alternative is not to be considered .

Tony M.

[Jack Harrison]

Are you able to tip your head back enough to get the 'near' part of your spectacle lens to the viewfinder?

I use either the viewfinder which is "set" (diopter adjustment) to infinity or the screen which is articulated (I wouldn't ever consider a fixed screen camera) so can easily hold it at the right height to look at the screen through the D-segment (near part) of the bi-focals. I don't actually find it annoyingly out of focus when held above head (again the articulated screen is essential) even though I am looking through the distance part of my specs.

As for tipping my head (and I think Tony with you medical connections will easily understand this) I have Ankylosing spondylitis so my neck is less than fully “articulated”. I manage.

Age: I am now well into my 81st year. I rattle with pills first thing in the morning but things mostly under control. But there don’t seem to be any pills for hearing problems. As I now realise, deafness isn’t simply a matter of things going quieter. Sounds, especially voices, are horribly distorted. Hearing aids you ask? The technology seems still to be in the Stone Age. I'm sure a Victorian ear trumpet would be just as good as digital hearing aaids.

Jack

[Tony Moore]

This is rapidly becoming an 'Old Farts' medical forum... I, too, am in my ninth decade (sob!), and could not agree more about hearing aids. If it's quiet, I don't need them, and if it's noisy, I hear the noise superbly magnified, but can't hear the poor b***** who's trying to talk to me - gggr! Ability to walk a few miles without problem is the thing that I'm most grateful for - hope it hangs on for a year or two yet .

Tony M.

[Jack Harrison]

Two pictures today 2nd March Canon SX50 bridge.

The Oystercatcher was taken at eye level through the viewfinder. 1200 mm equivalent focal length.
The pier was shot with camera resting on tummy and screen angled so I could look down. 50 mm equivalent.
By the standards of the Moray Firth, this was a cloudy day

Jack