Vision Pro Viewing Focal Distance

The very first entry on the Zeiss page says:

"Use your everyday eyeglass prescription issued by a U.S. eye doctor."

"We need your eyeglass prescription to create your ZEISS Optical Inserts – Prescription (sometimes also called distance prescription)"

ie: not your reading prescription, not your computer glasses prescription, just your standard comprehensive as normally issued by your eye doctor.

Kendall, here is my opinion… take it FWIW:

Your distance correction is -2.0 and you previously stated your reading vision is just about right with no glasses. This would give you an ADD of about +2.0 for reading at ~18” distance. Apple instructs you to use the *actual* reading distance ADD — they *specifically* state NOT to provide an intermediate distance ADD.

They will assume the ADD you provide is for a distance of ~18” and then will correct the +2.00 ADD for a focal distance of ~4-6’. This will result in a much smaller ADD that they will use for the lens (possibly about +1.00). If you give them an ADD for +1.00, they will assume this is for reading distance (18”) and correct it to +0.50 (guesstimate). This under-correction will likely result in eye fatigue. I suggest you have your doctor calculate your *actual* reading distance ADD and provide it to Apple per their instructions. Apple doesn’t expect you to make the corrections to their optics.

My situation is similar to yours. My Rx has an ADD of +1.75, but I use a +1.25 ADD for my computer glasses (~3’ distance). I provided Apple with the full +1.75 (as they requested) and the optics are perfect. They obviously aren’t blindly using an ADD of +1.75 since the image would appear blurry at a 4-6’ focal distance. I can use the AVP for hours with no eye fatigue and the image is clear.

You are overthinking this.

Ok, got the new -1.25 prescription lenses and WOW! Soooo much better! This has fixed the issues for me (I almost feel like my original computer prescription of -0.75 would also have worked great. But now the vision is not as blurry as it was before using too strong of a distance prescription.

So I think the idea that the focal distance is 4.5 to 6 feet is right on the money so if you have an odd prescription like mine, get your doctor to write you one specifically for the best vision at 6 feet and it will be perfect.

This thread actually makes me feel better.

As my paid ChatGPT-4 subscription makes clear, ZEISS wants a “Full Manifest Refraction”, separate measurements for your distance and near correction needs. From this they can model your vision, and design an appropriate insert.

This design process is surely beyond anyone weighing in on this thread, and beyond any customer-facing Apple employee. You’re correcting a device several inches from your face, with an apparent optical distance of six feet. Anyone who actually understands how to do this could make more money other ways than talking with you.

Like many here, I have an amazing optometrist who has helped me tune prescriptions for each use case. I figured that if I asked him to prescribe “six feet” for me, we’d do better than having Zeiss guess from a standard prescription. The optics are in fact too complicated for this to work. Zeiss needs a model of my vision, and that’s called a “Full Manifest Refraction”.

Could one do better? I’m reminded of a friend with colon cancer. I had him ask about a procedure that could be reversed in the future, when an artificial “valve” became available. The answer was that any such development would need to work with standard practice, so the most common procedure would actually be the best bet.

Here, there’s a most common procedure, a “Full Manifest Refraction”. As others say, don’t overthink it.

No it does not work the same way as the real world so if you can focus properly on the screens you can see correctly items both near and far. So we are supposed to use our distance prescription non progressive. They do adjust down any ADD you have for progressive lenses or bifocals but they don’t say how much. So if you only use them for seeing in the distance use that prescription and it should be good.

David Strait wrote: "...Not sure how that works, but assume the internal (permanent) lens place the apparent focal point a couple feet in front of you..."

I don't know whether the following is correct, but anyway:

"Focal distance in the context of VR headsets refers to the distance at which the lenses allow your eyes to focus comfortably. In the case of the Apple Vision Pro, the actual focal distance is set around six feet. 

This means that, regardless of the virtual distance of an object in the digital space, your eyes will focus as if that object were six feet away." Source:

Apple Vision Pro Optics & Focal Distance Explained - NetworkBuildz

õ¿õ¬

That tells me that the uncorrected APV focal distance is at infinity.

Kendall,

I'm 99% sure that Apple will make the correction for you. They know the ADD is for reading distance and will reduce the ADD for the correct distance of 4-6'. They specifically say to use the ADD for reading distance and DO NOT use an ADD for an intermediate distance (like computer glasses).

You will be "out-smarting" yourself!

Ok went to the eye doctor and got written a single non progressive prescription just for the Vision Pro so will see how that works out. I also had her measure the lenses and they did exactly what I suspected and only dropped the prescription down by 0.25 as I don’t have a full reading glass ADD for my progressive lenses. So they took it from -2.0 to -1.75 which is exactly what my contacts are and those are too strong for the Vision Pro also.

Based on my experience with the Quest 3 I went for something in the middle so we are trying -1.25 which I think will be perfect. I will let you know when I get them.

I suspect for those who have a full ADD to get to reading distance on a phone (for me that would be a full 2.00 ADD), they would likely reduce it down maybe another 0.25 to 0.5 and it would likely be perfect.

What is so annoying is that when I called and spoke to ZEISS about it, they had no clue how much my lenses were actually adjusted down. Even HonsVR sends you a note with the exact prescription you have in the lenses when you get them.

That helps a lot! And explains why my distance vision is not gonna work well because with distance glasses I cannot focus properly at 4-6’. My computer glasses actually work perfectly for that distance so I might just get her to do that prescription as my VR one after she tests the inserts.

Alrescha,

Yeh... It didn't make any sense to me either!

I confirmed your point by taking out my lens inserts and put on my contacts (with a distance Rx), then repeated the AVP setup. The passthrough looked as blurry as with using the optical inserts, so it is definitely not related to the ADD. The internally generated video was slightly more blurred because my eyes couldn't focus as well without the ADD correction. I'm sure this blurriness would become worse if I wore the AVP (with contacts) for more than 5-10 minutes (due to eye fatigue). I can use the AVP for several hours without eye fatigue using my lens inserts. This was a major concern for me since your eyes are focusing on a screen that is ~1" from your eyeball... I'm very impressed how well it works. Not sure how that works, but assume the internal (permanent) lens place the apparent focal point a couple feet in front of you.

General comment... The AVP is quite expensive and it may never catch on unless they get price between $1-2000, but I don't feel the least bit "ripped off." The technology is crazy! You're getting a full-blown computer, two 4K displays, optics, multiple cameras... not to mention the billions of $ spent on development. Version 3 will be amazing if it survives that long!

I'm no optics expert, and I've only just received my Vision Pro today -

I just used my regular eye doctor's prescription when ordering it.

I am near-sighted, but due to age, I cannot see close-up. I have to use progressive or bifocal glasses..

A regular eye glass prescription will include a section called "ADD" which is how much correction you need for close-up viewing . It is measured when you get an eye exam.

(in my case +2.50).

I assumed that they must have designed a way to deal with it.

And when I put on the Vision Pro I was able to see close-up and distance.

It might be that the optics in the Vision Pro cameras might be compensating the focus for the close-up.

One thing I did find - the resolution of the pass-through cameras does not seem as good as real life - the view in Vision Pro is not as detailed in my opinion.

But again, I am not an expert - this is just my experience.

It appears to be a bifocal problem. I tried it without the “corrected” lenses and it was sharp and crisp everywhere. The actual distance to the lenses stays the same, the 3D effect is achieved by the bifocal nature of the eyes judging distance. The distance areas of a bifocal lens blurs the physically close display. It was immediately obvious fix that worked. Their optics engineers need a new perspective.