I love having polarized cycling glasses, but is it worth it with swim goggles? I need new goggles and have decided on the Zoggs predator flex. They are $25, get great reviews and I like how they feel. The polarized version is $20 more. In the tri world that’s pretty minor, but is it a noticeable difference? Finally, I could really upgrade for $20 more and get the reactor model. Is that a good option? Anyone tried them?
I’ve got a pair of gold speedo polarized goggles. Honestly, I’d love to say they cut down on glare in the water and being polarized, they technically must, but I’ve never been able to tell the difference. The other thing to consider is that polarization is angle dependent and often when sighting, your head isn’t going to be at an angle where the polarization is working.
I have the Predator Flex polarized and love them for OWS. Not quite as comfortable as my Kaimans (but close, and Aquasphere doesn’t offer polarized lenses); the polarized lenses really help with sighting buoys when swimming into the sun.
You can get them for $26 on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Zoggs-Predator-Flex-Polarized-Goggles/dp/B00J327HZW
I’ve got a pair of gold speedo polarized goggles. Honestly, I’d love to say they cut down on glare in the water and being polarized, they technically must, but I’ve never been able to tell the difference. The other thing to consider is that polarization is angle dependent and often when sighting, your head isn’t going to be at an angle where the polarization is working.I think you will find that polarization angles or rather channels the light, so that the light will travel in one direction, this is why it stops glare. It is only when you angle 2 polarized surfaces that you can alter the effect, and even then you can not stop them polarizing, but you can oppose them which allows you to stop an light from getting through. Otherwise if you would need a different pair of glasses depending on which way you looked.
You would need a different pair if you walked around with your head cocked sideways. Try it next time you have polarized sunglasses on. Similarly, if you’re into photography just rotate your filter: the sky gets washed out again and glare reappears. Luckily, most people don’t walk around with their heads cocked to the side. However , we do swim that way. Maybe I’m wrong here as I’m only basing this on personal experience and have no theoretical understanding of polarization.
Polarization is like looking through a small tube, because the light is made to travel in one direction. So if you point the tube directly at the sun you will see down the tube, with no shading. If you point it slightly away from the sun you will still partly see the sun, but some light will be cut out, shading the view. It is this directional aspect that reduces glare, which is the greatest benefit of polarization around water, because uneven water is so high glare. So yes the shading differs, but not the polarization.
I have zoggs predators and tyr special ops for polarized. I have kaiman that are not.
The tyr spec ops 2 are way mor comfortable with a softer gasket. I feel like both the zoggs and Tyr are with it over my kaimans but if I had to pick not one it’d be the spec ops.
… but I too could be wrong
No.
I love having polarized cycling glasses, but is it worth it with swim goggles? I need new goggles and have decided on the Zoggs predator flex. They are $25, get great reviews and I like how they feel. The polarized version is $20 more. In the tri world that’s pretty minor, but is it a noticeable difference? Finally, I could really upgrade for $20 more and get the reactor model. Is that a good option? Anyone tried them?
No, stick with a $5 pair of Swedes with a $5 dollar bungee strap. Swedes are what almost all elite swimmers wear so, if you’re wearing a pair of $50-$100 goggles, you are immediately suspect of not being a real swimmer, even before you take a stroke:)
I am going to go against the trend and say yes
I love mine and would not swim with anything else.
That being said I live in the tropics where its hot and very sunny most of the year…
But swedes are so uncomfy 
I use Zogg Predetor, they are great. I have polarized, clear and blue. I almost exclusively use the blue one but during very bright days the polarized offer some protection.
But swedes are so uncomfy I use Zogg Predator, they are great. I have polarized, clear and blue. I almost exclusively use the blue one but during very bright days the polarized offer some protection.
It took me awhile to get the Swedes adjusted just right to be comfy but they are fine now. I think “comfy-ness” may depend a lot on a person’s facial config.
You would need a different pair if you walked around with your head cocked sideways. Try it next time you have polarized sunglasses on. Similarly, if you’re into photography just rotate your filter: the sky gets washed out again and glare reappears. Luckily, most people don’t walk around with their heads cocked to the side. However , we do swim that way. Maybe I’m wrong here as I’m only basing this on personal experience and have no theoretical understanding of polarization.
I wrote a nicely detailed Physicist’s post but then my WiFi crapped out and I lost it. However, basically you’re right: With our head cocked sideways polarizers can’t do their job as effectively, unless you were to angle the polarizer and sell a right-side-sighter’s and a left-side-sighter’s goggle.
Do we know that these Googles are not that way anyway? (as you would presume Google manufactures would think about Head position, would they not?)
Or
Do we know that these Google work in the and are manufactured in the Horizontal postion?
Its a good question though, I wonder if someone Emailed Zoggs and asked, what sort of reply they would get?
There’s some bad pseudo-technical information on this thread, which some posters above have already addressed.
Sunlight reflected off of horizontal surfaces (like water) is horizontally polarized. So, a vertically polarized pair of goggles will effectively reduce the glare as the reflected horizontally polarized light is attenuated by the vertical polarization of the goggles if they are held in a fixed, level orientation to the water.
So, polarized goggles will help reduce glare when sighting in a forwards direction with a level head, but are no more effective than regular tinted lenses when breathing due to the angle of the wearer’s head with respect to the water surface.
There’s some bad pseudo-technical information on this thread, which some posters above have already addressed.
Sunlight reflected off of horizontal surfaces (like water) is horizontally polarized. So, a vertically polarized pair of goggles will effectively reduce the glare as the reflected horizontally polarized light is attenuated by the vertical polarization of the goggles if they are held in a fixed, level orientation to the water.
So, polarized goggles will help reduce glare when sighting in a forwards direction with a level head, but are no more effective than regular tinted lenses when breathing due to the angle of the wearer’s head with respect to the water surface.
You’d be right if the swimmers eyes were always perpendicular to the surface of the water when sighting. As it is, yes, the head is tilted reducing the effectiveness, but the head isn’t tilted 90 degrees so they do still work. Polarized goggles demonstrably do cut glare. Are they as effective as they would be if you were swimming breaststroke? No, but they still cut glare.
There’s some bad pseudo-technical information on this thread, which some posters above have already addressed.
Sunlight reflected off of horizontal surfaces (like water) is horizontally polarized. So, a vertically polarized pair of goggles will effectively reduce the glare as the reflected horizontally polarized light is attenuated by the vertical polarization of the goggles if they are held in a fixed, level orientation to the water.
So, polarized goggles will help reduce glare when sighting in a forwards direction with a level head, but are no more effective than regular tinted lenses when breathing due to the angle of the wearer’s head with respect to the water surface.
You’d be right if the swimmers eyes were always perpendicular to the surface of the water when sighting. As it is, yes, the head is tilted reducing the effectiveness, but the head isn’t tilted 90 degrees so they do still work. Polarized goggles demonstrably do cut glare. Are they as effective as they would be if you were swimming breaststroke? No, but they still cut glare.
My post #16 was a bit over simplified.
While maximal attenuation occurs at 90 degrees like you mentioned, it’s not really relevant when comparing the glare reduction performance of polarized lens against regular tinted lenses.
Assuming that you are looking directly at the source of the glare, at lens rotation angles up to 45 degrees from horizontal (which includes just about any conceivable sighting orientation), vertically polarized lenses are more effective than tinted lenses at reducing horizontally polarized reflected glare; at rotation angles greater than 45 degrees (e.g., when breathing), polarized lenses are less effective than tinted lenses.
There’s some bad pseudo-technical information on this thread, which some posters above have already addressed.
Sunlight reflected off of horizontal surfaces (like water) is horizontally polarized. So, a vertically polarized pair of goggles will effectively reduce the glare as the reflected horizontally polarized light is attenuated by the vertical polarization of the goggles if they are held in a fixed, level orientation to the water.
So, polarized goggles will help reduce glare when sighting in a forwards direction with a level head, but are no more effective than regular tinted lenses when breathing due to the angle of the wearer’s head with respect to the water surface.
You’d be right if the swimmers eyes were always perpendicular to the surface of the water when sighting. As it is, yes, the head is tilted reducing the effectiveness, but the head isn’t tilted 90 degrees so they do still work. Polarized goggles demonstrably do cut glare. Are they as effective as they would be if you were swimming breaststroke? No, but they still cut glare.
My post #16 was a bit over simplified.
While maximal attenuation occurs at 90 degrees like you mentioned, it’s not really relevant when comparing the glare reduction performance of polarized lens against regular tinted lenses.
Assuming that you are looking directly at the source of the glare, at lens rotation angles up to 45 degrees from horizontal (which includes just about any conceivable sighting orientation), vertically polarized lenses are more effective than tinted lenses at reducing horizontally polarized reflected glare; at rotation angles greater than 45 degrees (e.g., when breathing), polarized lenses are less effective than tinted lenses.
This being my point. Sighting is when you need the glare reduced and we’re both saying that polarizing lenses on goggles will cut glare when you need/want it cut.
When breathing your head is also not just at a different rotation angle relative to the water, it’s also looking a different direction so if there’s glare where you’re sighting then you probably won’t experience it while breathing. The effectiveness at very large angles is a red herring.
Back to the original question of whether polarized swim goggles are worth it… it depends on whether glare annoys you when sighting (because that’s what they do… cut glare when sighting). I like them, but don’t find them necessary. Are they worth it? If I can get them for less than $25 then I do. That’s what they’re worth to me (also the Tyr Special Ops fit me well).
There’s some bad pseudo-technical information on this thread, which some posters above have already addressed.
Sunlight reflected off of horizontal surfaces (like water) is horizontally polarized. So, a vertically polarized pair of goggles will effectively reduce the glare as the reflected horizontally polarized light is attenuated by the vertical polarization of the goggles if they are held in a fixed, level orientation to the water.
So, polarized goggles will help reduce glare when sighting in a forwards direction with a level head, but are no more effective than regular tinted lenses when breathing due to the angle of the wearer’s head with respect to the water surface.
You’d be right if the swimmers eyes were always perpendicular to the surface of the water when sighting. As it is, yes, the head is tilted reducing the effectiveness, but the head isn’t tilted 90 degrees so they do still work. Polarized goggles demonstrably do cut glare. Are they as effective as they would be if you were swimming breaststroke? No, but they still cut glare.
My post #16 was a bit over simplified.
While maximal attenuation occurs at 90 degrees like you mentioned, it’s not really relevant when comparing the glare reduction performance of polarized lens against regular tinted lenses.
Assuming that you are looking directly at the source of the glare, at lens rotation angles up to 45 degrees from horizontal (which includes just about any conceivable sighting orientation), vertically polarized lenses are more effective than tinted lenses at reducing horizontally polarized reflected glare; at rotation angles greater than 45 degrees (e.g., when breathing), polarized lenses are less effective than tinted lenses.
This being my point. Sighting is when you need the glare reduced and we’re both saying that polarizing lenses on goggles will cut glare when you need/want it cut.
When breathing your head is also not just at a different rotation angle relative to the water, it’s also looking a different direction so if there’s glare where you’re sighting then you probably won’t experience it while breathing. The effectiveness at very large angles is a red herring.
Back to the original question of whether polarized swim goggles are worth it… it depends on whether glare annoys you when sighting (because that’s what they do… cut glare when sighting). I like them, but don’t find them necessary. Are they worth it? If I can get them for less than $25 then I do. That’s what they’re worth to me (also the Tyr Special Ops fit me well).
Yah, I think we mostly agree here. I’d only add that glare while breathing shouldn’t be so easily be dismissed. I’ve breathed on my weak side before just to avoid glare in the other direction.