Sunglasses for Fishing

White Horses (Mike)

GreatGrady Captain
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
198
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
South Norwalk, CT
My shades are falling apart - can anyone recommend good sunglasses for fishing. I have polarized Maui Jims now - is Costa Del Mar any better?

What about color? gray vs. amber etc...

I would appreciate any thoughts... Thanks!
 

sluggoe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
151
Reaction score
1
Points
16
in my view the protection offered by all the manufacturers priced over $150 are about the same...i've owned maui jims, oakleys, ray bans, etc;

just make sure they are polarized;

that said, specific designs that eliminate side glare are better than others and have found maui jims / kaenon's to be tops;

slugg
 

Average Joe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
479
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Chesapeake, VA
I use both Maui Jim and CDM's and like them both. My only complaint with my MJ's is they scratch pretty easily. If you like the ones that are falling apart I would send them for repair first. Chances are you will get a new pair for much less than retail.

For all around use I prefer a gray lense with a reflective (mirror) finish.
 

Ky Grady

GreatGrady Captain
Staff member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Messages
3,027
Reaction score
1,351
Points
113
Location
Berea, KY/Cross, SC
Model
Seafarer
Have both, but prefer the Maui Jim's over the Costa's. I've got the Peahi style, glass lens, grey tint with slight mirror, love them. 8)
 

Parthery

GreatGrady Captain
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
2,589
Reaction score
220
Points
63
Location
Atlanta, GA
I love my CDM's...but have had some problems with their customer service. Last time I tried to take advantage of their repair program, they sent me back someone else's sunglasses. It took an act of congress to get them to replace them with a new pair of the same style, since mine were long gone to somewhere....
 

Strikezone

GreatGrady Captain
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
610
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Location
Charleston, SC
I use Costa's with blue lens and mirror finish. Like the wrap around style to keep out as much stray light as possible.
 

F18amec

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Moyock, North Carolina
I wear Oakley, M Frame, with full sweep to protect from side glare, polorized of course. They work great for me!

Rick
Capt. Hukil Lau2
 

jaydub

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Florida
I have both Maui Jim's and Costa's and although I like the Maui's for driving, I love the Costa's for fishing. I got the Costa's in gray with the built in reader bifocals so I can see when I'm tying knots. Before I got them I was constantly taking off my sunglasses and putting on my reading glasses every time I had to tie a knot or read the GPS. Now I never use my reading glasses when I'm out fishing, unless it's night.

For those of you that haven't reached that age where you need reading glasses, you WILL; it's only a matter of time. I'll bet in the early 40's you'll start noticing it.
 

White Horses (Mike)

GreatGrady Captain
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
198
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
South Norwalk, CT
OK - I will admit it... I am at THAT AGE now... So are the bifocal design a standard available item from CDM, or do you have to order a prescriotion? My Maui's are prescription now, but only for distance. Therefore I have to look under them or take them off to read the chartplotter, tie a knot, etc...
 

jaydub

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Florida
The reader bifocals aren't prescription; you can buy them off the shelf, although a store may need to order them for you if they don't have them in stock. They make 3 strengths in a few different styles. The Costa website will show them. I think it's best to try them on before you buy them to make sure they fit your face. The ones I got are 2.50 and they work great for me. Just try to get the closest strength to the reading glasses you normally use. It takes a little while to get used to using them if you haven't used bifocals before, but once you do, you won't go back.
 

Neurodic

Member
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Bel Air, MD
I've had the same pair of costas with blue mirror lenses for about 7 years. will get another pair when something happens to them.
 

fishie1

GreatGrady Captain
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
789
Reaction score
1
Points
18
Location
NSB, FL
I've used a bunch of cheap branchs + Costas, Ray Bans and MJs. For me the best has been Ocean Waves and by a wide margin when compared to all of the others. Had occasion to use their customer service and found them very cooperative and fair as well. YMMV
 

UpGrady

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2009
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
Points
8
Another vote for Ocean Waves, been wearing them for 20 years now, blue mirrored wrap arounds. Bought my wife a pair a CDM's (only because Waves did not have a small enough frame for her), 7 years ago and they do not compare to the Waves!
 

gwwannabe

GreatGrady Captain
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
255
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Piankatank River, Gloucester, VA
Saw this article today and thought of this thread. Has me concerned.

Sunglasses Carry Shady UV-Protection Claims, Study Reveals

Some manufacturers of sunglasses are as shady as the products they offer. Labeling can be ambiguous concerning the level of UV protection, and even seemingly straightforward proclamations, such as "100 percent protection," can be outright false, according a new study.


No trivial concern, the sun's invisible ultraviolet radiation can sunburn your eyes just as it burns your skin, causing immediate damage and long-term vision problems, such as cataracts and retinal and macular degeneration.


Yet the sunglass industry is loosely regulated. Should manufacturers get caught lying about their labeling, their punishment if any would be a tersely worded letter from the FDA warning them to change their ways.


Consumers have little guarantee that what the protection they think they are buying is real. The best you can do is to stick to brands from trustworthy manufacturers, such as those specializing in outdoor gear, and take the sunglasses to an eye doctor for real testing.


Blinded by the falsehood


Australia is the only country with a law defining suitable sunglass standards. Sun protection is a serious issue on this island continent, where UV intensity is at least 15-percent greater than at similar latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere. That's due to clearer skies and the Earth's closer proximity to the sun during the summer season from December to March. Skin cancer rates are among the highest in the world for this largely white population plopped into these sunny climes as recent as a few hundred years ago.


As relayed in the May 2010 issue of the journal Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, researchers from the University of New South Wales in Sydney found that over 20 percent of the sunglasses made in Europe were falsely labeled, not meeting stated levels of protection for UV, polarization or other requirements for the Australian market.


Unfortunately, similar studies testing sunglasses made or sold in the United States have tended to be small or non-scientific, such as those conducted by intrepid television news reporters. Yet most of these studies have shown that labeling is often false and that mislabeling occurs regardless of the price of the sunglasses, from cheap $15 shades to $400 designer sunglasses.


What to look (out) for


Setting aside the mislabeling issue for the moment, for complete protection, look for sunglasses offering 99- to 100-percent UV protection. This level implies 99-percent and 95-percent protection from two types of UV, respectively - the shorter-wavelength and more damaging UVB and longer-wavelength yet still menacing UVA - as determined by the American National Standards Institute, a nongovernmental body.


Terms such as "UV absorbing" or "blocks most UV light" mean nothing; these are just wiggle words to get around the loose FDA regulations. The term "UV 400" implies protection against UVB and UVA, filtering light up to the UVA threshold wavelength of 400 nanometers. But you still need something stating 99- to 100-percent protection in this full range. So-called 100-percent protection might only apply to a narrow slice of the UV spectrum.


For full protection, wrap-around shades are best. Your 100-percent protection must be averaged with zero-percent protection if unfiltered light enters in from the sides.


Polarized lenses reduce glare but offer no additional UV protection. Similarly, lens darkness means little; darkness is related only to the extent you want to look like a blind blues musician. You can buy eyeglasses with but a slight tint offering 100-percent UV protection.


"Blue-blockers" are glasses that go a step further to filter blue-wavelength visible light, just below ultraviolet radiation on the electromagnetic spectrum. This might be overkill, but the protection isn't utterly unwarranted. Scientists remain uncertain whether this near-ultraviolet light is harmful. Those of us with the greatest sun exposure - skiers and boaters (exposed to glare bouncing off of snow and water) and pilots - might want this extra level of protection.


Home testing


Should you be geeky enough to possess a UV laser, you can shine it through your sunglasses to estimate the level of protection. An eye doctor should have the equipment to test precisely how much of what wavelength is getting through.


I myself was surprised to find my $15 sunglasses, a big buy for me, offered less than 50-percent protection. Half protection is worse than no protection, however. The darkness of my lenses was causing my eyes to dilate and allow even more UV light to penetrate to the back of my eyeballs. Now I've seen the light.

Gary 89 Overnighter - 93 Gulfstream soon
 

gwwannabe

GreatGrady Captain
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
255
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Location
Piankatank River, Gloucester, VA
Saw this article today and thought of this thread. Has me concerned.

Sunglasses Carry Shady UV-Protection Claims, Study Reveals

Some manufacturers of sunglasses are as shady as the products they offer. Labeling can be ambiguous concerning the level of UV protection, and even seemingly straightforward proclamations, such as "100 percent protection," can be outright false, according a new study.


No trivial concern, the sun's invisible ultraviolet radiation can sunburn your eyes just as it burns your skin, causing immediate damage and long-term vision problems, such as cataracts and retinal and macular degeneration.


Yet the sunglass industry is loosely regulated. Should manufacturers get caught lying about their labeling, their punishment if any would be a tersely worded letter from the FDA warning them to change their ways.


Consumers have little guarantee that what the protection they think they are buying is real. The best you can do is to stick to brands from trustworthy manufacturers, such as those specializing in outdoor gear, and take the sunglasses to an eye doctor for real testing.


Blinded by the falsehood


Australia is the only country with a law defining suitable sunglass standards. Sun protection is a serious issue on this island continent, where UV intensity is at least 15-percent greater than at similar latitudes in the Northern Hemisphere. That's due to clearer skies and the Earth's closer proximity to the sun during the summer season from December to March. Skin cancer rates are among the highest in the world for this largely white population plopped into these sunny climes as recent as a few hundred years ago.


As relayed in the May 2010 issue of the journal Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, researchers from the University of New South Wales in Sydney found that over 20 percent of the sunglasses made in Europe were falsely labeled, not meeting stated levels of protection for UV, polarization or other requirements for the Australian market.


Unfortunately, similar studies testing sunglasses made or sold in the United States have tended to be small or non-scientific, such as those conducted by intrepid television news reporters. Yet most of these studies have shown that labeling is often false and that mislabeling occurs regardless of the price of the sunglasses, from cheap $15 shades to $400 designer sunglasses.


What to look (out) for


Setting aside the mislabeling issue for the moment, for complete protection, look for sunglasses offering 99- to 100-percent UV protection. This level implies 99-percent and 95-percent protection from two types of UV, respectively - the shorter-wavelength and more damaging UVB and longer-wavelength yet still menacing UVA - as determined by the American National Standards Institute, a nongovernmental body.


Terms such as "UV absorbing" or "blocks most UV light" mean nothing; these are just wiggle words to get around the loose FDA regulations. The term "UV 400" implies protection against UVB and UVA, filtering light up to the UVA threshold wavelength of 400 nanometers. But you still need something stating 99- to 100-percent protection in this full range. So-called 100-percent protection might only apply to a narrow slice of the UV spectrum.


For full protection, wrap-around shades are best. Your 100-percent protection must be averaged with zero-percent protection if unfiltered light enters in from the sides.


Polarized lenses reduce glare but offer no additional UV protection. Similarly, lens darkness means little; darkness is related only to the extent you want to look like a blind blues musician. You can buy eyeglasses with but a slight tint offering 100-percent UV protection.


"Blue-blockers" are glasses that go a step further to filter blue-wavelength visible light, just below ultraviolet radiation on the electromagnetic spectrum. This might be overkill, but the protection isn't utterly unwarranted. Scientists remain uncertain whether this near-ultraviolet light is harmful. Those of us with the greatest sun exposure - skiers and boaters (exposed to glare bouncing off of snow and water) and pilots - might want this extra level of protection.


Home testing


Should you be geeky enough to possess a UV laser, you can shine it through your sunglasses to estimate the level of protection. An eye doctor should have the equipment to test precisely how much of what wavelength is getting through.


I myself was surprised to find my $15 sunglasses, a big buy for me, offered less than 50-percent protection. Half protection is worse than no protection, however. The darkness of my lenses was causing my eyes to dilate and allow even more UV light to penetrate to the back of my eyeballs. Now I've seen the light.

Gary 89 Overnighter - 93 Gulfstream soon