David

"Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati"
Skier
Posts
605
Location
Holland, MI
Last year I purchased the Giro Vivid Infrared lens with a 58% VLT specificity for flat light but it didn't help. What lens have you found to work best in flat light?

I had cataract surgery in 2018 and I have developed a thin cloudy film behind the new lens that they cannot repair without damaging my already stressed retinas. In sun or bright light I can see absolutely fine but in cloudy or overcast light everything is just white with no conture at all. Last spring I was above tree line on a flat day and had serious trouble just getting down. And here in the midwest we don't get many sunny days in the winter.
 

surfsnowgirl

Instructor
Skier
Posts
4,380
Location
Londonderry, VT
I'm not sure what the best is but I know what I like. I love the Oakley Prizm line. I find the Rose a bit dark for my southern vermont ski days and prefer the hi pink. I think the prizm technology is pretty amazing. There's a whole array of colors for low light, partial light and full sun conditons.
 
Last edited:

James

Skiing the powder
Instructor
Posts
8,188
You’re going to have to try stuff.
Yellow is probably the brightest in Oakley, I prefer Persimmon (orange) or Hi Persimmon, has a flash coating to make it a little more versatile in brighter light. Prizm Rose is way too dark for you, try Hi Pink Prizm if you want Prizm. It’s often cheaper to look for the lens you want already in the goggle as Prizm lenses are around $100.
 

hbear

Out on the slopes
Skier
Posts
699
High intensity yellow or Prizm Hi Pink in the Oakley line.

Yellow being better when it’s flat and darker or night while the Hi Pink is great for flat but still bright out.
 
Thread Starter
TS
David

David

"Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati"
Skier
Posts
605
Location
Holland, MI
I was looking at the Oakley Prizm for cycling this summer and as a possibility for winter. But it seems like every manufacturer has what they say is the best lens for flat or any condition visibility. I'm shopping by lens visibility first and frame/model/fit second. Is the Prizm that much better than the competition or is it just their marketing?
 

James

Skiing the powder
Instructor
Posts
8,188
Is the Prizm that much better than the competition or is it just their marketing?
The only low light Prizm is the Hi Pink. Some people west claim the Rose is, but they have two miles less atmosphere. It’s not true low light for the East, too dark.

I find the Prizm Rose has an odd glow in a whiteout to certain parts of snow. I’d rather have the Persimmon in questionable low light but Prizm is nice. Haven’t tried the Hi Pink.

There used to be an optometrist on epic who had a shop in Park City I think. He would have specific recommendations with an eye test.
 

EricG

Lost somewhere!
Skier
Posts
780
Location
VT
I started using a Smith Chromopop Constant Rose Flash (50% VLT) last winter after my O.D. Suggested them and it seemed to work well for me. I also have the Chromopop Storm Yellow Flash (65% VLT) which I like when it’s snowing heavier. I prefer the rose when overcast before/after storm.

Everyone will prefer something different and it’s tough to know what’s ‘best’ thus many of end up with 4-5 lenses.
 

Jacob

Out on the slopes
Skier
Posts
477
Location
Luton, innit?
Is the Prizm that much better than the competition or is it just their marketing?
I'm not sure about comparisons to other brands, since I've been using Oakleys for several years, but I know that my Prizm Rose lens offers better definition than my old HI Persimmon lenses when I'm in low-visibility conditions in the Alps. The Prizm Rose is darker, but the definition is better for me than my old lens.

If I were going for a lens specifically for low-visibility conditions and nothing else, then I'd for for the HI Pink Prizm.

It's too bad shops don't have demo programs for goggles.
 

Marker

XLTL
Skier
I did a side-by-side with Oakley Prizm Hi Pink and I believe Smith Chromapop Storm Rose Flash. For me the Prizm was a scooch better, but they did not have the Storm Yellow Flash that I really wanted to try. Both googles had a darker companion lens, but again I'd give the nod to the Prizm. I still use my older Smith IOX googles depending the forecast for the day.
 

Cheizz

Craving camber
Skier
Posts
590
Location
The Netherlands
It's too bad shops don't have demo programs for goggles.
At the Sportscheck Stubaier Glatscher Testival in November, most goggle and helmet manufacturers offer demos, including Oakley.
I like my Prizm Hi Pink. I combine it with the Prizm Irridium Torch when it's sunny.

In theory, a yellow-orange lens will counter te oevrly blue tones in a white-out best, since that color is opposite blue in the continous color spectrum.

And if you go for a Category S1 lens, it lets most light through (80-100% VLT)
 

James

Skiing the powder
Instructor
Posts
8,188
but I know that my Prizm Rose lens offers better definition than my old HI Persimmon lenses when I'm in low-visibility conditions in the Alps. The Prizm Rose is darker, but the definition is better for me than my old lens.
This is why it's so individual. I really disliked the Prizm Rose in the Alps. In a whiteout, some areas had a glow which was very distracting. I switched it out for the Persimmon when I went with the guide even though it was pretty scratched.

For the op with vision problems, who knows. I dislike yellow too, others don't. It's usually the brightest.
 
Thread Starter
TS
David

David

"Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati"
Skier
Posts
605
Location
Holland, MI
I'm not sure about comparisons to other brands, since I've been using Oakleys for several years, but I know that my Prizm Rose lens offers better definition than my old HI Persimmon lenses when I'm in low-visibility conditions in the Alps. The Prizm Rose is darker, but the definition is better for me than my old lens.

If I were going for a lens specifically for low-visibility conditions and nothing else, then I'd for for the HI Pink Prizm.

It's too bad shops don't have demo programs for goggles.
I'd love to be able to demo. But I'd be happy just to find a store or a ski show where I could try on a bunch and look out the window. When I bought my Giro's I tried the Smith but their largest goggles didn't go past both eye sockets at the same time and I have a pretty normal head & face. At that time I looked for fit first and lenses second. I still like them but not the lenses for flat light.
 

James

Skiing the powder
Instructor
Posts
8,188
I'd love to be able to demo. But I'd be happy just to find a store or a ski show where I could try on a bunch and look out the window. When I bought my Giro's I tried the Smith but their largest goggles didn't go past both eye sockets at the same time and I have a pretty normal head & face. At that time I looked for fit first and lenses second. I still like them but not the lenses for flat light.
So you're looking for wide field of view?
In Oakley, the Flight Deck.
I've bought 3 pairs of Oakley Canopy goggles, mainly because of the foam wearing out, plus I had a bunch of lenses. Like hundreds of $ worth. Otherwise, I would have switched to Flight Deck. Buying a whole new one on sale with lense was almost as cheap as just the lens.

I was "forced" to buy a Scott LCG goggle before a trip because I needed a new low light lens and couldn't find one for mine on short notice. (The night before leaving) I've always thought their lens change system was good, and it comes with a nifty 2nd lens holder. Within 5 minutes of wearing it on the slope I sort of disliked it, because the field of view was too narrow. Back when I got the first Canopy I thought it was absurdley huge. Then I got used to it.

Quick change lenses may be over rated. The Canopy is very old school struggle, but you get decent at it. It's never easy, but you get it. I've had the easy LCG pop out because I didn't do it right.
 
Thread Starter
TS
David

David

"Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati"
Skier
Posts
605
Location
Holland, MI
So you're looking for wide field of view?
In Oakley, the Flight Deck.
I've bought 3 pairs of Oakley Canopy goggles, mainly because of the foam wearing out, plus I had a bunch of lenses. Like hundreds of $ worth. Otherwise, I would have switched to Flight Deck. Buying a whole new one on sale with lense was almost as cheap as just the lens.

I was "forced" to buy a Scott LCG goggle before a trip because I needed a new low light lens and couldn't find one for mine on short notice. (The night before leaving) I've always thought their lens change system was good, and it comes with a nifty 2nd lens holder. Within 5 minutes of wearing it on the slope I sort of disliked it, because the field of view was too narrow. Back when I got the first Canopy I thought it was absurdley huge. Then I got used to it.

Quick change lenses may be over rated. The Canopy is very old school struggle, but you get decent at it. It's never easy, but you get it. I've had the easy LCG pop out because I didn't do it right.
A few years ago I finally had to retire the goggles I bought in the late 80's. They were made by a small Detroit are guy called Vents. With them I had 100% of my peripheral vision at over 180°. With helmets, that I now wear, a goggle that wide won't fit. While I think 100% peripheral is safer it's not realistic anymore. I'd like as much as I can in a goggle that fits but lens/vision is the number one issue now.
1 - lens/vision
2 - fit
3 - peripheral view
 

dbostedo

Asst. Gathermeister-- Jackson Hole 2020
Moderator
Posts
4,310
Location
Northern Virginia, USA
So you're looking for wide field of view?
In Oakley, the Flight Deck.
I've bought 3 pairs of Oakley Canopy goggles, mainly because of the foam wearing out, plus I had a bunch of lenses. Like hundreds of $ worth. Otherwise, I would have switched to Flight Deck. Buying a whole new one on sale with lense was almost as cheap as just the lens.

I was "forced" to buy a Scott LCG goggle before a trip because I needed a new low light lens and couldn't find one for mine on short notice. (The night before leaving) I've always thought their lens change system was good, and it comes with a nifty 2nd lens holder. Within 5 minutes of wearing it on the slope I sort of disliked it, because the field of view was too narrow. Back when I got the first Canopy I thought it was absurdley huge. Then I got used to it.

Quick change lenses may be over rated. The Canopy is very old school struggle, but you get decent at it. It's never easy, but you get it. I've had the easy LCG pop out because I didn't do it right.
Nothing beats a magnetic system
 

James

Skiing the powder
Instructor
Posts
8,188
A few years ago I finally had to retire the goggles I bought in the late 80's. They were made by a small Detroit are guy called Vents. With them I had 100% of my peripheral vision at over 180°. With helmets, that I now wear, a goggle that wide won't fit. While I think 100% peripheral is safer it's not realistic anymore. I'd like as much as I can in a goggle that fits but lens/vision is the number one issue now.
1 - lens/vision
2 - fit
3 - peripheral view
Well Lens/vision is probably Smith at the top. But peripheral, probably Oakley. The lens isn’t going to be a significant difference I don’t think. So 2,3 is probably the deciding factor.
 

Jacob

Out on the slopes
Skier
Posts
477
Location
Luton, innit?
I'd love to be able to demo. But I'd be happy just to find a store or a ski show where I could try on a bunch and look out the window. When I bought my Giro's I tried the Smith but their largest goggles didn't go past both eye sockets at the same time and I have a pretty normal head & face. At that time I looked for fit first and lenses second. I still like them but not the lenses for flat light.
In that case, I second @James recommendation for the Flight Deck. See if you can find some HI Pink Prizm lenses to test.
 

Marker

XLTL
Skier
I checked, my Oakley are the Air Brake XL with Hi Pink and Sapphire Iridium. Although darker, I was amazed how versatile the latter were on mixed days. I still want to try those Smith Storm Yellow on a snow puking day! The IOX does feel smaller than the Air Brake.
 

Advertisement

Top