Loupe reviews anywhere

[harmonica]

I'm a general surgery resident, looking to invest in some 2.5x loupes. I'm leaning towards either Surgitel or Designs for Vision brand loupes, but that's just because the reps come to our hospital so I know I can get easy service on them if I have problems.

Does anybody have experience with the DesignsforVision 2.5x loupes?

How about the Surgitel Micro 2.5x, Ultralight FLM 2.5x, or the Ultralight TTL 2.5x?

Any recommendations between those? Anybody know if there are any sites or forums that do loupe reviews that I can read up on?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[skiz knot]

I'm a general surgery resident, looking to invest in some 2.5x loupes. I'm leaning towards either Surgitel or Designs for Vision brand loupes, but that's just because the reps come to our hospital so I know I can get easy service on them if I have problems.

Does anybody have experience with the DesignsforVision 2.5x loupes?

How about the Surgitel Micro 2.5x, Ultralight FLM 2.5x, or the Ultralight TTL 2.5x?

Any recommendations between those? Anybody know if there are any sites or forums that do loupe reviews that I can read up on?

I have designs for vision 2.5x loupes (it is what my program pays for, so I never investigated other brands). They are nice. Various frame styles available with at no additional cost.

 

[ESU_MD]

I like the designs for visions- if you want 2.5x, I think they have pretty good focal depth, durability, etc..

Plus the traditional frames are very.... durable. I personally like how they look and appreciate that the fact that when you wear the traditional frames, you are as old school as you can get.

The 3.5x are too heavy though, and the focal depth is not very good. It will kill your neck as a resident.

There are tons of loupes out there. go to the ACS meeting in october and you will see tons. I saw some residents wearing these loupes that looked literally like binoculars clipped on their glasses!!

I also saw these metro-looking wraparound oakley frames. (would get kicked out of my OR)


to each their own!

 

[maxheadroom]

I have Designs for Vision 2.5x as my standard loupes. I use the old black frames -- they're sturdy and not too heavy. I'd stay away from the Oakley and Nike frames. I know several people who've had problems with durability that the company won't cover.

I also have Carl Zeiss 4x loupes for peripheral nerve work and dissecting out smaller perforators. They're heavier and have a narrower field, but the optics are fantastic.

 

[JackADeli]

I have seen the products of most of the companies. I have used designs for vision and Surgitel . I'm not sure you will find a good "review". It really comes down to what frame fits you best and gives you the best magnification to field of vision..... which is where each company argues. Each of the surgical telescope companies I have seen all claim there is no "standard" classification of magnification.... but "if there was one ours is the best". Basically, they each claim to speak a unique language without a means of translating between each other.

As for your question: I used DFV 3.5 expanded field. They worked well. The "woody Allen" frames are sturdy but heavy. The mag cylinders continue to have fine cracks. They have been sent back a few times and they have not been able to figure out the problem (I think they over pressure them at the factory when fabricating and glueing... thus cracks straight out the box). Either way, they work well... just alot of money for cracked equipment. I use surgitel supposedly equivalent to 3.5 expanded field DFV... but rep again claims lack of standard/etc... They work well, light frames, double nose pads for comfort.

My only suggestion is that you avoid the tempting nike/oakley/etc... designer frames and choose something sufficiently sturdy but not too heavy or too flashy.... It always amazes me at what residents make their decision on.... Nike vs Oakley frame? NASA looking metal box vs old wood? Remember, your not wearing these out to the beach and it really shouldn't be a fashion show. just my opinion.


JAD

 

[TomC727]

I have the nike 2.5x frames and I love them. I didn't like the old school black frames, felt too big for my face. Love the nike ones. Haven't seen the oakley ones but I wear normal oakleys when not wearing loupes. If the rep comes to the hospital, he will have multiple frames you can try.

 

[Pir8DeacDoc]

I have the old school 2.5 DFV. They work for me because I've got a big melon and I got a kick out of having my name on the sides 🙂. Also, I wanted something pretty durable because we use Loupes for quite a few of our cases.

 

[deleted89854]

I ended up with the Oakley frames just because I liked that they were lightweight and the fit on my nose felt better than with the bigger frames. Although I will most likely get some crap from the attendings for trying to look fancy. You have to decide for yourself what lenses, frames, etc work best for you. Just call one of the reps for any company and they will happily bring over a bunch of frames and lenses to try out. Whatever you do, dont try to use someone else's loupes for a case. I did a bunch of AV fistulas with borrowed loupes and almost puked by the third case.

 

[surg]

Most brands of loupes are fine. I have Surgical Acuity Loupes (the 2.5x equivalent) and love them. They provide a nice wide field of view without the added weight of the extended field DFV. They are realistically probably more like 2.4X but I don't notice it. Best thing to do though is to try as many loupes as you can in a short period of time (the same day if you can swing it) before ordering.

Also, just as a tip, get the longest focal length you can possibly tolerate, it will really help when you have to keep your head out of the wound and still have to sew.

 

[dfagod]

I have the oakleys and I like them a lot. I spent forever trying on every pair of loupes offered by surgitel, and many other residents loupes. The oakleys were by far the most comfortable.
It's unfortunate that some people are going to think I bought them because they are oakleys, but truth is the complete opposite. I know the old school people are going to give me a hard time, but for me the oakleys were my favorite. The only bad thing was the price.
If the old school attendings ever tried on the newer loupes, they probably wouldn't make fun of them so much. The traditional designs for vision loupes felt like I had a 5 lb dumbell sitting on the bridge of my nose compared to the oakleys

 

[Dunce]

What are your thoughts on the expanded field 3.5 by DFV vs the 2.5 which seems to be the standard -- specifically for use in ENT?

 

[JackADeli]

What are your thoughts on the expanded field 3.5 by DFV vs the 2.5 which seems to be the standard -- specifically for use in ENT?

Though, I now use the surgitels , my experience is....
While larger (35 EF DFV), the 3.5 EF DFV will have significant noticable increased magnification wth about the same width of visual field as the standard 2.5. The E's are more expensive, though. I prefer the EF DFV 3.5 and never owned a pair of 2.5 for just those reasons (i.e. field width & magnification). I think in ENT with facial nerve work and soe finethyroid/etc... you may appreciate the expanded field andincreased magnification. It is as always a matter of personal preference.

JAD

 

[maxheadroom]

All of my ENT friends use DFV 2.5s. You really need to have a compelling reason to need anything higher than that -- otherwise you're accepting neck aches from the heavier loupes and less peripheral vision.

 

[JackADeli]

All of my ENT friends use DFV 2.5s. You really need to have a compelling reason to need anything higher than that -- otherwise you're accepting neck aches from the heavier loupes and less peripheral vision.

As stated, it comes down to personal preference. I did all my thyroid/parathyroid work with 3.5x EF DFV. I found it worthwhile. The magnification was significant without any real loss of field width compared to standard 2.5x. teach each their own.... but those reasons were compelling enough for me... and others.

JAD

 

[Pir8DeacDoc]

All of my ENT friends use DFV 2.5s. You really need to have a compelling reason to need anything higher than that -- otherwise you're accepting neck aches from the heavier loupes and less peripheral vision.

Completely agree.. All of our staff and residents rock the 2.5s