22 replies to this topic

[MTF]

I have never played golf with sunglasses in my life but decided I wanted to give it a try in order to protect my eyes to potentially prevent eye problems later in life.  I have always wore polarized sunglasses in everyday life.  As I started my research for information on which shades to sport on the course, I found a lot of mixed information that in the end didn't give me a definitive answer to the question, polarized or not for golf.  Like usual, I had to see for myself.  Companies that sell polarized glasses all say they are great for golf.  What else would they say, they want as many people that need a pair of glasses to buy theirs.  I also read many forums where there was a mix of people who liked polarized and people who did not like polarized when it came to golf.  So I did a little testing of my own.  

I decided to go with a pair of Oakley's.  The first pair I bought was a pair of Radarlocks with a G30 polarized lens, since I have always worn polarized.  After I bought them I decided to do some investigating and found there were a lot of people out there recommending against wearing polarized lenses.  Before I ever took them to the course, I decided that I didn't like the style so I exchanged them for a pair of Fast Jackets XL.  However, I still decided to give the polarized lenses a try.  Through some of my investigating online I noticed that even though the G30 is Oakley's golf specific lens, many of the high profile players that wear Oakley, such as Ian Poulter, Rory McIlroy, and Zach Johnson like the Positive Red Iridium lenses but there is no information to determine whether any of them use polarized or not.  The Positive Red comes in polarized and non-polarized. However, none of the glasses on Oakley's site offer Positive Red in polarized.  But there is a newer lens called oo Red Iridium Polarized.  I presume that this lens took the place of the Positive Red Polarized.  So, this is the lens I went with.  Again, that night I did more research and really started deciding against polarized for golf based on all of the bad things I was reading about polarized sunglasses for golf.  So, the next day, again before trying them on the course, I decided to go back to the Oakley store and get a pair of Positive Red Iridium (non-polarized) lenses, but I also kept the polarized lenses and decided to try both to find out for myself what was the real story about polarized lenses for golf.  

There are other differences between these lenses besides being polarized or not.  Oakley's new oo series of lenses all have a rose base which enhances color.  The Positive Red (non-polarized) lenses are supposed to be a gray base which makes colors look more natural.  However, the Positive Red still enhances color a little bit, just not to the extreme that they are enhanced by the oo Red lenses.  For the purposes of this debate, I'm just focusing on the polarization.  

I went to the range yesterday with the non-polarized lenses and they were fine.  They did exactly what sunglasses are supposed to do, shield your eyes from light.  It was very natural looking to look through the lens.  It was a little awkward for me as this was about the first time I had ever hit balls with sunglasses on.  But soon I didn't even really notice that I was wearing them.  They stayed in place well and didn't flop around on my face or anything negative.  Today I went to the range with the polarized lenses.  It was about the same experience.  Because I wasn't wearing them in a side by side comparison, I didn't really notice one blocked more glare than the other one or was really any different in any way.  The one thing I did notice, but only because I was trying to notice anything strange or out of the ordinary was that when looking at the grass that was near me, it looked a little strange with the polarized lenses.  It was so subtle that I would have never noticed it if I weren't doing this test and looking for something to notice.  I don't even know how to describe what I saw.  I could see the break in the green and I could see undulations in the grass on the driving range so it wasn't really a flattening effect where you could see angles or undulation.  But someone could perceive it as giving the ground a little bit of a 2D effect.  But what I was seeing didn't make me feel like I couldn't read a green because of the polarized lenses.  And again, someone who wasn't scrutinizing these lenses would never even notice this effect.  Looking at anything over 50 feet away did not have this effect.  And when I tested reading the green, I looked at the green with the glasses on and off and because of the reduced glare, I could actually see subtleties of the green and the blades of grass on the green much clearer.  I did not find there to be any distortion or depth perception issues with the polarized lenses either.

Here is my final analysis.  A huge majority of touring professionals do not wear sunglasses, at least while playing tournaments for huge sums of money.  Of the pros you see with sunglasses, most of them do not have them on their eyes when they hit any shot.  Of the few that are left, most of those will hit drives and irons with the glasses on but will remove them for chipping and putting.  And only very few touring pros where glasses while chipping and putting, too.  If you are someone that cannot or does not like to hit a golf ball with glasses on and you only want to wear them between shots, then it doesn't really matter whether or not you have polarized lenses.  Get what you like.  If you like hitting tee shots and fairway shots with sunglasses but you don't like chipping and putting with glasses then I don't think it matters either because when looking out over long distances there doesn't seem to be any difference between the two types of lenses.  And if you are someone that wants to wear your glasses on every shot then I still don't think it will make a difference in reality.  But the biggest thing is if you think polarized lenses will hinder your game then they probably will.  There are actually a lot of tour players that wear polarized lenses by different companies.  Robert Allenby was in an article a few years ago and said he will only wear polarized lenses on the golf course and he wears his glasses on every shot he plays.  If you happen to be a tour pro and you are reading this and if you miss a put it will cost you between $50,000 and $500,000 then I'd say you better figure out what will help you make sure you make the most puts.  But if you are a weekend golfer and you hardly make any puts within 5 feet anyway then the sunglasses you wear aren't going to make you any better or worse.  And the new driver you just bought won't make you any better either.  Only practice will make you better.

I haven't decided yet whether I will go with polarized or not.  I'm going to keep them both and try them back and forth and decide over time which I like better.  I will keep wearing polarized lenses in every day life though.

[LOA]

MTF, on 24 November 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

I have never played golf with sunglasses in my life but decided I wanted to give it a try in order to protect my eyes to potentially prevent eye problems later in life.  I have always wore polarized sunglasses in everyday life.  As I started my research for information on which shades to sport on the course, I found a lot of mixed information that in the end didn't give me a definitive answer to the question, polarized or not for golf.  Like usual, I had to see for myself.  Companies that sell polarized glasses all say they are great for golf.  What else would they say, they want as many people that need a pair of glasses to buy theirs.  I also read many forums where there was a mix of people who liked polarized and people who did not like polarized when it came to golf.  So I did a little testing of my own.  

I decided to go with a pair of Oakley's.  The first pair I bought was a pair of Radarlocks with a G30 polarized lens, since I have always worn polarized.  After I bought them I decided to do some investigating and found there were a lot of people out there recommending against wearing polarized lenses.  Before I ever took them to the course, I decided that I didn't like the style so I exchanged them for a pair of Fast Jackets XL.  However, I still decided to give the polarized lenses a try.  Through some of my investigating online I noticed that even though the G30 is Oakley's golf specific lens, many of the high profile players that wear Oakley, such as Ian Poulter, Rory McIlroy, and Zach Johnson like the Positive Red Iridium lenses but there is no information to determine whether any of them use polarized or not.  The Positive Red comes in polarized and non-polarized. However, none of the glasses on Oakley's site offer Positive Red in polarized.  But there is a newer lens called oo Red Iridium Polarized.  I presume that this lens took the place of the Positive Red Polarized.  So, this is the lens I went with.  Again, that night I did more research and really started deciding against polarized for golf based on all of the bad things I was reading about polarized sunglasses for golf.  So, the next day, again before trying them on the course, I decided to go back to the Oakley store and get a pair of Positive Red Iridium (non-polarized) lenses, but I also kept the polarized lenses and decided to try both to find out for myself what was the real story about polarized lenses for golf.  

There are other differences between these lenses besides being polarized or not.  Oakley's new oo series of lenses all have a rose base which enhances color.  The Positive Red (non-polarized) lenses are supposed to be a gray base which makes colors look more natural.  However, the Positive Red still enhances color a little bit, just not to the extreme that they are enhanced by the oo Red lenses.  For the purposes of this debate, I'm just focusing on the polarization.  

I went to the range yesterday with the non-polarized lenses and they were fine.  They did exactly what sunglasses are supposed to do, shield your eyes from light.  It was very natural looking to look through the lens.  It was a little awkward for me as this was about the first time I had ever hit balls with sunglasses on.  But soon I didn't even really notice that I was wearing them.  They stayed in place well and didn't flop around on my face or anything negative.  Today I went to the range with the polarized lenses.  It was about the same experience.  Because I wasn't wearing them in a side by side comparison, I didn't really notice one blocked more glare than the other one or was really any different in any way.  The one thing I did notice, but only because I was trying to notice anything strange or out of the ordinary was that when looking at the grass that was near me, it looked a little strange with the polarized lenses.  It was so subtle that I would have never noticed it if I weren't doing this test and looking for something to notice.  I don't even know how to describe what I saw.  I could see the break in the green and I could see undulations in the grass on the driving range so it wasn't really a flattening effect where you could see angles or undulation.  But someone could perceive it as giving the ground a little bit of a 2D effect.  But what I was seeing didn't make me feel like I couldn't read a green because of the polarized lenses.  And again, someone who wasn't scrutinizing these lenses would never even notice this effect.  Looking at anything over 50 feet away did not have this effect.  And when I tested reading the green, I looked at the green with the glasses on and off and because of the reduced glare, I could actually see subtleties of the green and the blades of grass on the green much clearer.  I did not find there to be any distortion or depth perception issues with the polarized lenses either.

Here is my final analysis.  A huge majority of touring professionals do not wear sunglasses, at least while playing tournaments for huge sums of money.  Of the pros you see with sunglasses, most of them do not have them on their eyes when they hit any shot.  Of the few that are left, most of those will hit drives and irons with the glasses on but will remove them for chipping and putting.  And only very few touring pros where glasses while chipping and putting, too.  If you are someone that cannot or does not like to hit a golf ball with glasses on and you only want to wear them between shots, then it doesn't really matter whether or not you have polarized lenses.  Get what you like.  If you like hitting tee shots and fairway shots with sunglasses but you don't like chipping and putting with glasses then I don't think it matters either because when looking out over long distances there doesn't seem to be any difference between the two types of lenses.  And if you are someone that wants to wear your glasses on every shot then I still don't think it will make a difference in reality.  But the biggest thing is if you think polarized lenses will hinder your game then they probably will.  There are actually a lot of tour players that wear polarized lenses by different companies.  Robert Allenby was in an article a few years ago and said he will only wear polarized lenses on the golf course and he wears his glasses on every shot he plays.  If you happen to be a tour pro and you are reading this and if you miss a put it will cost you between $50,000 and $500,000 then I'd say you better figure out what will help you make sure you make the most puts.  But if you are a weekend golfer and you hardly make any puts within 5 feet anyway then the sunglasses you wear aren't going to make you any better or worse.  And the new driver you just bought won't make you any better either.  Only practice will make you better.

I haven't decided yet whether I will go with polarized or not.  I'm going to keep them both and try them back and forth and decide over time which I like better.  I will keep wearing polarized lenses in every day life though.

I found that sunglass both polarized and non create a distorted topography .    Green reading is affected as well as lie on the fairway.   Judging depth of the surface is an issue.    

So I wear glasses on the course for help with the sun but take them off when its time to hit my shot or putt.

[freddyottawa]

I will not play without my sunglasses, simple as that for me. My Bolle's are polarized and i've had no issues being able to read greens. I can read them just as bad without sunglasses

I've played in regular glasses before and the glare just ended up giving me a headache. The investment in a pair of polarized prescription sunglasses has been one of the best I have made for my golf game.

[pdaero]

I wear polarized sunglasses on the course, and they haven't been an issue. I do want to get a pair of Fast Jacket XLs with the G40 Transitions lenses, though!

[magicmatt]

LOA, on 24 November 2012 - 08:20 PM, said:

I found that sunglass both polarized and non create a distorted topography . Green reading is affected as well as lie on the fairway.   Judging depth of the surface is an issue.

So I wear glasses on the course for help with the sun but take them off when its time to hit my shot or putt.

is it seriously necessary to quote the original post when its 1500 words long and right above yours?


answer: NO, IT IS NOT.

[buckeye88us]

magicmatt, on 24 November 2012 - 09:12 PM, said:

LOA, on 24 November 2012 - 08:20 PM, said:

I found that sunglass both polarized and non create a distorted topography .    Green reading is affected as well as lie on the fairway.   Judging depth of the surface is an issue.    

So I wear glasses on the course for help with the sun but take them off when its time to hit my shot or putt.

is it seriously necessary to quote the original post when its 1500 words long and right above yours?


answer: NO, IT IS NOT.

LOL!!!

[SurfinTurf]

MTF, on 24 November 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

I have never played golf with sunglasses in my life but decided I wanted to give it a try in order to protect my eyes to potentially prevent eye problems later in life.  I have always wore polarized sunglasses in everyday life.  As I started my research for information on which shades to sport on the course, I found a lot of mixed information that in the end didn't give me a definitive answer to the question, polarized or not for golf.  Like usual, I had to see for myself.  Companies that sell polarized glasses all say they are great for golf.  What else would they say, they want as many people that need a pair of glasses to buy theirs.  I also read many forums where there was a mix of people who liked polarized and people who did not like polarized when it came to golf.  So I did a little testing of my own.  

I decided to go with a pair of Oakley's.  The first pair I bought was a pair of Radarlocks with a G30 polarized lens, since I have always worn polarized.  After I bought them I decided to do some investigating and found there were a lot of people out there recommending against wearing polarized lenses.  Before I ever took them to the course, I decided that I didn't like the style so I exchanged them for a pair of Fast Jackets XL.  However, I still decided to give the polarized lenses a try.  Through some of my investigating online I noticed that even though the G30 is Oakley's golf specific lens, many of the high profile players that wear Oakley, such as Ian Poulter, Rory McIlroy, and Zach Johnson like the Positive Red Iridium lenses but there is no information to determine whether any of them use polarized or not.  The Positive Red comes in polarized and non-polarized. However, none of the glasses on Oakley's site offer Positive Red in polarized.  But there is a newer lens called oo Red Iridium Polarized.  I presume that this lens took the place of the Positive Red Polarized.  So, this is the lens I went with.  Again, that night I did more research and really started deciding against polarized for golf based on all of the bad things I was reading about polarized sunglasses for golf.  So, the next day, again before trying them on the course, I decided to go back to the Oakley store and get a pair of Positive Red Iridium (non-polarized) lenses, but I also kept the polarized lenses and decided to try both to find out for myself what was the real story about polarized lenses for golf.  

There are other differences between these lenses besides being polarized or not.  Oakley's new oo series of lenses all have a rose base which enhances color.  The Positive Red (non-polarized) lenses are supposed to be a gray base which makes colors look more natural.  However, the Positive Red still enhances color a little bit, just not to the extreme that they are enhanced by the oo Red lenses.  For the purposes of this debate, I'm just focusing on the polarization.  

I went to the range yesterday with the non-polarized lenses and they were fine.  They did exactly what sunglasses are supposed to do, shield your eyes from light.  It was very natural looking to look through the lens.  It was a little awkward for me as this was about the first time I had ever hit balls with sunglasses on.  But soon I didn't even really notice that I was wearing them.  They stayed in place well and didn't flop around on my face or anything negative.  Today I went to the range with the polarized lenses.  It was about the same experience.  Because I wasn't wearing them in a side by side comparison, I didn't really notice one blocked more glare than the other one or was really any different in any way.  The one thing I did notice, but only because I was trying to notice anything strange or out of the ordinary was that when looking at the grass that was near me, it looked a little strange with the polarized lenses.  It was so subtle that I would have never noticed it if I weren't doing this test and looking for something to notice.  I don't even know how to describe what I saw.  I could see the break in the green and I could see undulations in the grass on the driving range so it wasn't really a flattening effect where you could see angles or undulation.  But someone could perceive it as giving the ground a little bit of a 2D effect.  But what I was seeing didn't make me feel like I couldn't read a green because of the polarized lenses.  And again, someone who wasn't scrutinizing these lenses would never even notice this effect.  Looking at anything over 50 feet away did not have this effect.  And when I tested reading the green, I looked at the green with the glasses on and off and because of the reduced glare, I could actually see subtleties of the green and the blades of grass on the green much clearer.  I did not find there to be any distortion or depth perception issues with the polarized lenses either.

Here is my final analysis.  A huge majority of touring professionals do not wear sunglasses, at least while playing tournaments for huge sums of money.  Of the pros you see with sunglasses, most of them do not have them on their eyes when they hit any shot.  Of the few that are left, most of those will hit drives and irons with the glasses on but will remove them for chipping and putting.  And only very few touring pros where glasses while chipping and putting, too.  If you are someone that cannot or does not like to hit a golf ball with glasses on and you only want to wear them between shots, then it doesn't really matter whether or not you have polarized lenses.  Get what you like.  If you like hitting tee shots and fairway shots with sunglasses but you don't like chipping and putting with glasses then I don't think it matters either because when looking out over long distances there doesn't seem to be any difference between the two types of lenses.  And if you are someone that wants to wear your glasses on every shot then I still don't think it will make a difference in reality.  But the biggest thing is if you think polarized lenses will hinder your game then they probably will.  There are actually a lot of tour players that wear polarized lenses by different companies.  Robert Allenby was in an article a few years ago and said he will only wear polarized lenses on the golf course and he wears his glasses on every shot he plays.  If you happen to be a tour pro and you are reading this and if you miss a put it will cost you between $50,000 and $500,000 then I'd say you better figure out what will help you make sure you make the most puts.  But if you are a weekend golfer and you hardly make any puts within 5 feet anyway then the sunglasses you wear aren't going to make you any better or worse.  And the new driver you just bought won't make you any better either.  Only practice will make you better.

I haven't decided yet whether I will go with polarized or not.  I'm going to keep them both and try them back and forth and decide over time which I like better.  I will keep wearing polarized lenses in every day life though.

buckeye88us, on 24 November 2012 - 09:18 PM, said:

magicmatt, on 24 November 2012 - 09:12 PM, said:

LOA, on 24 November 2012 - 08:20 PM, said:

I found that sunglass both polarized and non create a distorted topography . Green reading is affected as well as lie on the fairway.   Judging depth of the surface is an issue.

So I wear glasses on the course for help with the sun but take them off when its time to hit my shot or putt.

is it seriously necessary to quote the original post when its 1500 words long and right above yours?


answer: NO, IT IS NOT.

LOL!!!

+1

[Golfjunki71]

MTF, on 24 November 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

I have never played golf with sunglasses in my life but decided I wanted to give it a try in order to protect my eyes to potentially prevent eye problems later in life.  I have always wore polarized sunglasses in everyday life.  As I started my research for information on which shades to sport on the course, I found a lot of mixed information that in the end didn't give me a definitive answer to the question, polarized or not for golf.  Like usual, I had to see for myself.  Companies that sell polarized glasses all say they are great for golf.  What else would they say, they want as many people that need a pair of glasses to buy theirs.  I also read many forums where there was a mix of people who liked polarized and people who did not like polarized when it came to golf.  So I did a little testing of my own.  

I decided to go with a pair of Oakley's.  The first pair I bought was a pair of Radarlocks with a G30 polarized lens, since I have always worn polarized.  After I bought them I decided to do some investigating and found there were a lot of people out there recommending against wearing polarized lenses.  Before I ever took them to the course, I decided that I didn't like the style so I exchanged them for a pair of Fast Jackets XL.  However, I still decided to give the polarized lenses a try.  Through some of my investigating online I noticed that even though the G30 is Oakley's golf specific lens, many of the high profile players that wear Oakley, such as Ian Poulter, Rory McIlroy, and Zach Johnson like the Positive Red Iridium lenses but there is no information to determine whether any of them use polarized or not.  The Positive Red comes in polarized and non-polarized. However, none of the glasses on Oakley's site offer Positive Red in polarized.  But there is a newer lens called oo Red Iridium Polarized.  I presume that this lens took the place of the Positive Red Polarized.  So, this is the lens I went with.  Again, that night I did more research and really started deciding against polarized for golf based on all of the bad things I was reading about polarized sunglasses for golf.  So, the next day, again before trying them on the course, I decided to go back to the Oakley store and get a pair of Positive Red Iridium (non-polarized) lenses, but I also kept the polarized lenses and decided to try both to find out for myself what was the real story about polarized lenses for golf.  

There are other differences between these lenses besides being polarized or not.  Oakley's new oo series of lenses all have a rose base which enhances color.  The Positive Red (non-polarized) lenses are supposed to be a gray base which makes colors look more natural.  However, the Positive Red still enhances color a little bit, just not to the extreme that they are enhanced by the oo Red lenses.  For the purposes of this debate, I'm just focusing on the polarization.  

I went to the range yesterday with the non-polarized lenses and they were fine.  They did exactly what sunglasses are supposed to do, shield your eyes from light.  It was very natural looking to look through the lens.  It was a little awkward for me as this was about the first time I had ever hit balls with sunglasses on.  But soon I didn't even really notice that I was wearing them.  They stayed in place well and didn't flop around on my face or anything negative.  Today I went to the range with the polarized lenses.  It was about the same experience.  Because I wasn't wearing them in a side by side comparison, I didn't really notice one blocked more glare than the other one or was really any different in any way.  The one thing I did notice, but only because I was trying to notice anything strange or out of the ordinary was that when looking at the grass that was near me, it looked a little strange with the polarized lenses.  It was so subtle that I would have never noticed it if I weren't doing this test and looking for something to notice.  I don't even know how to describe what I saw.  I could see the break in the green and I could see undulations in the grass on the driving range so it wasn't really a flattening effect where you could see angles or undulation.  But someone could perceive it as giving the ground a little bit of a 2D effect.  But what I was seeing didn't make me feel like I couldn't read a green because of the polarized lenses.  And again, someone who wasn't scrutinizing these lenses would never even notice this effect.  Looking at anything over 50 feet away did not have this effect.  And when I tested reading the green, I looked at the green with the glasses on and off and because of the reduced glare, I could actually see subtleties of the green and the blades of grass on the green much clearer.  I did not find there to be any distortion or depth perception issues with the polarized lenses either.

Here is my final analysis.  A huge majority of touring professionals do not wear sunglasses, at least while playing tournaments for huge sums of money.  Of the pros you see with sunglasses, most of them do not have them on their eyes when they hit any shot.  Of the few that are left, most of those will hit drives and irons with the glasses on but will remove them for chipping and putting.  And only very few touring pros where glasses while chipping and putting, too.  If you are someone that cannot or does not like to hit a golf ball with glasses on and you only want to wear them between shots, then it doesn't really matter whether or not you have polarized lenses.  Get what you like.  If you like hitting tee shots and fairway shots with sunglasses but you don't like chipping and putting with glasses then I don't think it matters either because when looking out over long distances there doesn't seem to be any difference between the two types of lenses.  And if you are someone that wants to wear your glasses on every shot then I still don't think it will make a difference in reality.  But the biggest thing is if you think polarized lenses will hinder your game then they probably will.  There are actually a lot of tour players that wear polarized lenses by different companies.  Robert Allenby was in an article a few years ago and said he will only wear polarized lenses on the golf course and he wears his glasses on every shot he plays.  If you happen to be a tour pro and you are reading this and if you miss a put it will cost you between $50,000 and $500,000 then I'd say you better figure out what will help you make sure you make the most puts.  But if you are a weekend golfer and you hardly make any puts within 5 feet anyway then the sunglasses you wear aren't going to make you any better or worse.  And the new driver you just bought won't make you any better either.  Only practice will make you better.

I haven't decided yet whether I will go with polarized or not.  I'm going to keep them both and try them back and forth and decide over time which I like better.  I will keep wearing polarized lenses in every day life though.

[hoosiervolunteer]

I wear Oakley polarized red iridium.  Wore them playing today.  They really help with tracking the flight of the ball and filtering out the glare.

I put them up on my hat when I'm putting though.  It's just habit and superstition though.  I could easily learn to read and putt with them on.

[Laws of Woo]

I've heard both good and bad regarding Polarized lenses and golfing, but I have both and really haven't noticed too much of a difference. I wear SunDog Mela Lens glasses (1 pair polarized, 1 not) and wear them most times while golfing. I haven't tried other glasses while golfing, but I haven't had much if any visability issues regarding my glasses.

[bobcat]

I get the "rainbow effect" when I wear my polarized Maui Jims....I will wear them to drive, but NEVER to the golf course.  They really bring out the colors, but I don't like seeing "rainbows" that aren't really there.  

Edited by bobcat, 27 November 2012 - 09:13 AM.

[Padre John]

I have tried grey, yellow, rose and blue colored lenses in my sunglasses and the yellow are the best for reading the greens.  I prefer non-poloarizd but that is personal peference.

[Bingo1976]

I wear Oakley's with the G30 lenses. Seem to work, and I would wear them all the time if I wasn't constantly sweating into them. Depending on the day, they can help with green reading, though I tend to have a look with them both on and off (plus I have a caddy, so get 3 opinions*).

If you play in constant summer like I do, having something to take the edge of the sun and general glare is a must, as well as the health benefits of shielding your eyes.



*Not that any of them are correct

[TNSooner]

I go back and forth with wearing sunglasses sometimes and then sometimes I don't.  Have a pair of Costa del Mar (Brine - Blue 580G lens) polarized with the glass lenses and there is absolutely no distortion at all.  I can understand why all the fishing professionals and guys who spend all their time on the water wear these.

I can wear these all day on the golf course and have no problem with reading greens.  I don't wear them all the time, but I don't have any trouble going back and forth...

[ironmikes]

I have always worn polarized sunglasses for golfing. never had a problem wearing greens with them. I wear them anytime I am golfing. if it is overcast or low light I wear a lighter color lens. have always used a brown color lens. never ever had a problem reading break on the greens. I do not wear regular glasses and have good eyesight, want to keep it that way.

[dbleag]

In an effort to find the perfect sunglasses, I have tried every brand made for golf and some that are not made for golf - Oakley, Bollei, Maui Jim, Ray Ban, Sundog, Peak Vision and about 5 more highly marketed brands.

The BEST ones that work for ME are the cheapo HD Vision glasses for $9.99 at CVS or Walgreens. They really help me see everything better on the golf course, from tee shots to little variations on the greens.  Plus,they have UV protection.

No need for me to ever spend a penny more than this on sunglasses. I am also surprised at the number of people who ask about them from just seeing them on me.

[dpete]

Every lense causes distortion (high school physics, a wave changing medium changes direction).  Our brains are really good at adjusting for that distortion, given some time to adjust and learn.  I don't think there's a right or wrong answer to a question like this, just find what works for you (especially giving you ultra-violet protection).  You'll get use to it.  Problems are most likely when changing between glasses.  Those initial few minutes are the likely to be when the problems occur.  I wear glasses all the time and am quite sensitive to their differences.  For me the solution is to put on the playing glasses when I leave for the course.  By the time I get there, I've adjusted.

Progressives and bi-focals are a different story,  those I can't deal with on the course.

[JDorfler]

I usually wear glasses, but when I play I wear contacts.  I have a pair of Oakley non-polarized sunglasses I wear on the course.  I'm pretty sure it's subconscious, but I play a lot better with them on.

[Konklifer]

I wear Kaenon Jetty polarized on the course for all shots.  No problems.

[daveltb]

I'm sold on the Oakleys with G30 lens. I feel I read greens better with them.

[sheppy335]

I have no issues with Polarized sunglasses on the course. They are better for my eyes.

[vman]

I've been wearing Oakley prescription G30's for the last 10yrs of playing and the vision is just unbelievable due to the heightened contrast.

[jwalz131]

LOA, on 24 November 2012 - 08:20 PM, said:

MTF, on 24 November 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

I have never played golf with sunglasses in my life but decided I wanted to give it a try in order to protect my eyes to potentially prevent eye problems later in life.  I have always wore polarized sunglasses in everyday life.  As I started my research for information on which shades to sport on the course, I found a lot of mixed information that in the end didn't give me a definitive answer to the question, polarized or not for golf.  Like usual, I had to see for myself.  Companies that sell polarized glasses all say they are great for golf.  What else would they say, they want as many people that need a pair of glasses to buy theirs.  I also read many forums where there was a mix of people who liked polarized and people who did not like polarized when it came to golf.  So I did a little testing of my own.  

I decided to go with a pair of Oakley's.  The first pair I bought was a pair of Radarlocks with a G30 polarized lens, since I have always worn polarized.  After I bought them I decided to do some investigating and found there were a lot of people out there recommending against wearing polarized lenses.  Before I ever took them to the course, I decided that I didn't like the style so I exchanged them for a pair of Fast Jackets XL.  However, I still decided to give the polarized lenses a try.  Through some of my investigating online I noticed that even though the G30 is Oakley's golf specific lens, many of the high profile players that wear Oakley, such as Ian Poulter, Rory McIlroy, and Zach Johnson like the Positive Red Iridium lenses but there is no information to determine whether any of them use polarized or not.  The Positive Red comes in polarized and non-polarized. However, none of the glasses on Oakley's site offer Positive Red in polarized.  But there is a newer lens called oo Red Iridium Polarized.  I presume that this lens took the place of the Positive Red Polarized.  So, this is the lens I went with.  Again, that night I did more research and really started deciding against polarized for golf based on all of the bad things I was reading about polarized sunglasses for golf.  So, the next day, again before trying them on the course, I decided to go back to the Oakley store and get a pair of Positive Red Iridium (non-polarized) lenses, but I also kept the polarized lenses and decided to try both to find out for myself what was the real story about polarized lenses for golf.  

There are other differences between these lenses besides being polarized or not.  Oakley's new oo series of lenses all have a rose base which enhances color.  The Positive Red (non-polarized) lenses are supposed to be a gray base which makes colors look more natural.  However, the Positive Red still enhances color a little bit, just not to the extreme that they are enhanced by the oo Red lenses.  For the purposes of this debate, I'm just focusing on the polarization.  

I went to the range yesterday with the non-polarized lenses and they were fine.  They did exactly what sunglasses are supposed to do, shield your eyes from light.  It was very natural looking to look through the lens.  It was a little awkward for me as this was about the first time I had ever hit balls with sunglasses on.  But soon I didn't even really notice that I was wearing them.  They stayed in place well and didn't flop around on my face or anything negative.  Today I went to the range with the polarized lenses.  It was about the same experience.  Because I wasn't wearing them in a side by side comparison, I didn't really notice one blocked more glare than the other one or was really any different in any way.  The one thing I did notice, but only because I was trying to notice anything strange or out of the ordinary was that when looking at the grass that was near me, it looked a little strange with the polarized lenses.  It was so subtle that I would have never noticed it if I weren't doing this test and looking for something to notice.  I don't even know how to describe what I saw.  I could see the break in the green and I could see undulations in the grass on the driving range so it wasn't really a flattening effect where you could see angles or undulation.  But someone could perceive it as giving the ground a little bit of a 2D effect.  But what I was seeing didn't make me feel like I couldn't read a green because of the polarized lenses.  And again, someone who wasn't scrutinizing these lenses would never even notice this effect.  Looking at anything over 50 feet away did not have this effect.  And when I tested reading the green, I looked at the green with the glasses on and off and because of the reduced glare, I could actually see subtleties of the green and the blades of grass on the green much clearer.  I did not find there to be any distortion or depth perception issues with the polarized lenses either.

Here is my final analysis.  A huge majority of touring professionals do not wear sunglasses, at least while playing tournaments for huge sums of money.  Of the pros you see with sunglasses, most of them do not have them on their eyes when they hit any shot.  Of the few that are left, most of those will hit drives and irons with the glasses on but will remove them for chipping and putting.  And only very few touring pros where glasses while chipping and putting, too.  If you are someone that cannot or does not like to hit a golf ball with glasses on and you only want to wear them between shots, then it doesn't really matter whether or not you have polarized lenses.  Get what you like.  If you like hitting tee shots and fairway shots with sunglasses but you don't like chipping and putting with glasses then I don't think it matters either because when looking out over long distances there doesn't seem to be any difference between the two types of lenses.  And if you are someone that wants to wear your glasses on every shot then I still don't think it will make a difference in reality.  But the biggest thing is if you think polarized lenses will hinder your game then they probably will.  There are actually a lot of tour players that wear polarized lenses by different companies.  Robert Allenby was in an article a few years ago and said he will only wear polarized lenses on the golf course and he wears his glasses on every shot he plays.  If you happen to be a tour pro and you are reading this and if you miss a put it will cost you between $50,000 and $500,000 then I'd say you better figure out what will help you make sure you make the most puts.  But if you are a weekend golfer and you hardly make any puts within 5 feet anyway then the sunglasses you wear aren't going to make you any better or worse.  And the new driver you just bought won't make you any better either.  Only practice will make you better.

I haven't decided yet whether I will go with polarized or not.  I'm going to keep them both and try them back and forth and decide over time which I like better.  I will keep wearing polarized lenses in every day life though.

I found that sunglass both polarized and non create a distorted topography . Green reading is affected as well as lie on the fairway.   Judging depth of the surface is an issue.

So I wear glasses on the course for help with the sun but take them off when its time to hit my shot or putt.

What I do as well. Although i've never really had a problem with hitting a shot with them on, I do take them off to putt.