I’m sure that someone has posted about this subject before, and if they have, I hope you don’t mind it being brought up again. I guess I’m writing to get an idea of the differences between the Costa del mar and Smith optics sunglasses. They are both rather pricey and boast impressive results, but does anyone have experience with them or compared them side by side with each other or with other less expensive glasses? I tried looking on google without much luck. Is the improved vision they say they have worth the cost? Smith offers a non-glass lens at half the price of their glass lenses. Does glass make that much a difference? Also what are your opinions regarding lens color for fishing rivers and streams? How does lens color effect what you see? I know it’s a lot of questions. Thanks for taking your time to reply.
Is the price worth the cost? No. I’ve been using cheap polaroids for years and they work fine.
Of course using the cheapies haven’t the panache of the expensive ones. If you are wearing a high dollar brand bug free shirt with logo prominently displayed rather than using a can of Deep Wood Off as you need it, you will want the pricey jobs.
I asked some of the same questions and looked for recommendations a few months ago here and at another chat board when I thought I had lost my sunglasses. The overwhelming response was to get a pair of Smith Action Optics glasses.
Now I don’t have any kind of logo on my shirts (except a Steelers t-shirt or two and possibly some dried pizza-sauce that might be confused for an alligator) and my $50 fly rods probably wouldn’t put me in most elitist circles. I’ll be “reasonable” when it comes to most equipment and clothing (waders, fly lines, vest, etc) but 2 areas I figure I should invest in would be personal safety (good wading staff) and my eyes. I don’t have any specific data (although I guess I could find a ton of research on Google) but I feel that a good pair of glasses are better for your eyes in the long run than a cheap pair so I purchased a pair of Smith glasses. Funny thing is - I found a pair on one of the online “closeout” websites for over $100 off normal price so they became “reasonable” too.
As they were closeout I didn’t have a choice in lens color and got Brown. I’ve heard many people say Copper is excellent. My other glasses (which I found later btw) are smoke gray. Do the Smith’s work better? I think there’s an improvement and I’m very happy with them but again, I didn’t buy them so much for their glare-reducing qualities or ability to see into the water; I bought them to help protect my eyes.
I have no experience with the Costa Del Mar glasses.
gpatton …
I have had two pair of Action Optics, a pair of Haber Vision and just last year I bit the bullet and got a pair of Costa Del Mar, (Pescador’s), in copper. I got to test them out last month in Campeche, Mexico sight fishing for Baby Tarpon in the mangroves.
I find that, YES, the Costa Del Mar’s are worth the price as I could see much better through the water. But, you have to remember to try them on first. The first pair, I purchased on e-bay and they were much to small for my face and I had to sell them at a loss. The Pescador’s are for a larger face. It is also important to get the Costa’s with the 580 glass lenses. They are more expensive but I was seeing the fish before the guide did, which makes them worth it to me. I could see every reaction the fish made clearly.
See: http://www.costadelmar.com/SeeOutThere/Technology/TheCosta580Lens/
If you try them, you will never want to try another brand.
DickM.
ducksterman …
The Haber glasses are on an equal par with the Smith Action Optics which makes sense since Haber was started by the former owner of Action Optics. From what I heard, he sold Action Optics and retired. Spent a couple of years touring the world fishing and then got the itch again to form a new company producing polarized glasses.
The quality is excellent and when I got them he was just starting up and was selling them for 1/2 price.
They still don’t come close to Costa’s with the 580 lenses though in my opinion.
DickM.
… is another alternative. They are pricey, but you get what you pay for. And if you take care of them, they could last for years, which might make them less expensive on the long haul than the less expensive glasses out there. ( The glasses I was replacing was a pair of seven year old $300 Nikons - bought for $40 at Sierra Trading Post - which finally started showing enough wear that it bothered me ).
I bought a pair of the Variant model a few months ago on sale. Follow the link. Read the SR-91 information while you are there.
So far, I am quite pleased with the glasses, with one exception. The frames are a bit hard on my ears, but that problem was solved by using a style of “Chums” which cushions the frame contact with the ears and keeps the glasses on under difficult conditions.
John
P.S. I researched the Smith, Costa Del Mar, and Haber lines before I chose Kaenon. A couple points to keep in mind - glass generally will give you clearer vision but will shatter on impact, poly will give you shatterproof lenses but will more readily scratch, some glass lenses, like Kaenon, have high quality optics and are also shatter resistant. Protecting your eyes with good optics and from accidental breakage are two important considerations - more important than how comfortable the glasses are and how well you can see fish with them. You can always replace less expensive glasses, but you can’t replace eyes.
Just an observation, but seeing fish(esp. on the flats) is to a large extent a learned skill. No pair of glasses will replace that. They certainly help, and are necessary, but not the end-all, be-all.
I would not trade nor give up my Costa del Mar 580’s w/ glass lens w/ the amber tint. The difference seeing in water is more than just amazing, it is uncanny. Had these two years and getting ready for another pair.
Thanks for the tips everyone. As far as tint goes, it seems like the brownish yellow color tone is prefered. Quite a few recommend copper, others brown and another likes them amber. I haven’t tried on the different options yet, but are these color differences that different or is the company just trying to make “brown” sound better by giving it a fancy name.
Brown is pretty much brown, but is sometimes marketed as Amber as well, but Copper generally has a slight red tint to it. I have a pair of Smith Riverside which have a brown base, but a green mirror finish on them. So when viewed from the front they look Green, but when you actually look through them they are a normal brown lens.
You can get into trouble though, as some Smith lenses are sold as “Amber” and they have a deffinite yellow tint to them. If that is what you want go for it, but if you are looking more for brown lenses with Smith stick to Brown.
