Showing 1 of 8 conversations about:
gzhang11
82
Dec 12, 2016
bookmark_border
When you you are 9000ft elevation riding down the blacks, when that blizzard billows over and the only thing standing between you and a complete whiteout is your goggles. When the shit hits the fan and your visibility deduced to watching your own thumbs twiddle, you are gonna put your life on the line for a 15$ goggle? because you're too stingy for real gears? No thanks I'll stick with my $300 Oakleys.
P.S. The photoshoped pictures aren't great btw.
Dec 12, 2016
Cyphre
2586
Dec 12, 2016
bookmark_border
You sound like a Luxottica shill. I can buy military-grade eyewear for less than $300, boasting more noteworthy specifications like an ANSI Z87+ rating. Nothing about spending $300 makes something inherently better without some specs to back it up.
Dec 12, 2016
gzhang11
82
Dec 12, 2016
bookmark_border
You obviously never skied before. Oakley Prizm lens is real and proven technology used by athletes in the Winter Olympics, and they make goggles for the US military as well.
You should probably do your research first before come yabbering like a clueless clown.
Dec 12, 2016
Cyphre
2586
Dec 12, 2016
bookmark_border
"That's cute." For a buzzword. Things that shield against reflected sunlight in some other magical way where they don't bother to simply categorize it as 'polarized' beyond the typical UVA/UVB protection are big red flags for getting taken. If you think athletes using them in the winter olympics means something, you apparently aren't aware of what a 'sponser' is. But like I say, to each their own! If you feel you got your money's worth, all the more power to you!
Unfortunately Oakley's military eyewear is a nonstarter. They hardly qualify as a blip on the tactical scene because there is zero innovation. The market in military eyewear is currently dominated by quite a number of other brands, such as Smith Optics, ESS, Bolle, etc. But please do tell me about the research you've done on the basics of eye protection!
Dec 12, 2016
gzhang11
82
Dec 12, 2016
bookmark_border
Heh, its great see someone who never been up at the top to claim a bunch on nosense. you're a real keyboard warrior aren't you? Me? Oh yea don't mind me I just came back from a week skiing the off piste at Whistler where conditions at 8000+ ft is a complete whiteout. We had terrible visibility for the past few days here. We have people using bunch of cheapo off brand goggles with a piece of tinted film because they wanna save a penny. And guess what? They can't see shit. While I can see all the nooks and crannies with decent clarity. I tossed them my goggles and guess what, they went and bought the exact pair when we got down from the top and swear they won't stingy out on survival gears ever again. But hey, don't mind me, I only talk from real life experience. Enjoy talking shit in your nice comfy chairs.
So buddy, just stop. The more you talk the more clueless you sound. Do some more research on iridium coating, Transition lens, polarisers and ray filtering technology and why they cost money before dropping your worthless opinions next time. Thanks
P.s. Oh yea. Snow blindness is a real thing.
Dec 12, 2016
DannyMilks
4533
Dec 12, 2016
bookmark_border
@gzhang11 - why so much anger?
Also, have you tested out the goggles? Because you stated"Heh, its great see someone who never been up at the top to claim a bunch on nosense. " yet you feel like you're able to give a good evaluation even you though you've never worn these.
You also wrote "you're a real keyboard warrior aren't you?" and maybe there is some introspection that could happen here.
Dec 12, 2016
detyek
61
Dec 12, 2016
bookmark_border
> So buddy, just stop. The more you talk the more clueless you sound.
Pretty ironic, considering unbelievably pretentious and unaware you sound.
Your entire argument is like someone looking at a Honda Civic and talking about their extensive experience in desert racing and how THIS JUST WILL NOT DO.
No kidding. People putting themselves in whiteout conditions where visibility could mean life or death aren't buying $15 goggles. People who are going to the mountain for the weekend and want something a little more sealed than their sunglasses are. Which is the majority of people doing winter sports. Who are the people that are going to participate in this drop.
And yes, he's right about polarization. Just about all those other things you listed are marketing gimmicks you've fallen head over heels for. No doubt I'll bring my nice Scotts the next time conditions are bad, but I'm grabbing these for when I'm going drinking and skiing with my buddies at Tahoe.
Dec 12, 2016
gzhang11
82
Dec 13, 2016
bookmark_border
Yep. I tested a whole bunch of them.
And no, I'm not angry, I'm actually laughing my head off at all the clueless and butt-hurt commenters because I came here to express my own opinion.
Dec 13, 2016
gzhang11
82
Dec 13, 2016
bookmark_border
No, I didn't fall "head over heels" for marketing. I'm not stupid, I can spot one for miles when I see them. Everything I've listed are real technology used in optics, you need to brush up your science if you think they are just "gimmicks". Every brand can call them whatever they like, I'm not here to argue that, that's called branding, but the underlying technology remains. If you think glasses and lenses are just tinted piece of plastic film, and everything is "marketing gimmicks" you are out of your minds buddy. I've worn glasses and avid photographer myself, done my research and my field experience backs that, I'm sure most glasses wearers will also tell you that a decent pair of glasses is going to be costly (and if you actually understand the technology behind it you would know why as well). Stuff like anti-glare coatings/anti-static coatings/oleophobic coatings, polarizers, transition lenses aren't just "marketing", they are essential for a good pair of optics.
P.S. I didn't say YOU shouldn't be getting them, hell, you could get whatever you like for all I care, I said >>>I<<< wouldn't get them, without directing at anyone in particular, if you think you can express your opinions, so should I, and get worked up "head over heels" about it.
Dec 13, 2016
Dlau
12
Dec 13, 2016
bookmark_border
As much as I like different perspective on all topics, your views are little extreme. If you toned it down, you could have made a valid argument and pretty solid point. Oakley as a brand under Luxottica is always going to be overpriced and quality would not be an issue but for people who want to save money and go for value, the real question we should be asking is this a good product for casual skiing on the slopes for double blues runs and other weekend trips to the snow. Most of the people looking for a pair of googles are just looking to use it once a year and if you provided some input into this it would be great as you tried and tested their products. Just my opinion, take it easy.
Dec 13, 2016
View Full Discussion