Andre wrote:I like having a blinder on my glasses instead of on the sight, so that's why I've never shot with contacts.
Shouldn't you be shooting with SOME protective frame, regardless of contacts? The blinder can be attached to the frame. If contacts provide added clarity, then it may be a worthwhile switch to make to wear contact lenses and a protective frame in front (whatever form it takes, it's better than none). Moot?
ShootingSight wrote: Negative power lenses have a negative magnification (shrinking) effect, that gets bigger the further they are from your eye, so you want strong negatives as close to your eye as possible. So in this case, contacts might be better than lenses.
Though even here, if you were going to experiment, I'd suggest trying a pure sphere contact to manage most of the correction while minimizing the effect of floating, and then get all the cylinder correction in the lens. I've never tried this approach - only just thought of it as I was typing this response, but I don't know why it would not work.
I realize I am coming to this slightly late, but I wanted to post in some validation of Art's premise. I am not a "strong" minus, but I also do not run any plus on my irons, so that exacerbates the narrowing effect.
I shoot in a -3.75 Spherical soft contact. My astigmatic effect is currently about -0.25 at 6 degrees off axis, so fairly minor yet in that eye. My regular frames are made to...no surprise...-3.50, as the result of the vertex distance (eye-to-lens) is that I need 'less minus' to correct adequately.
I did have to play around with several lenses to determine which one would stay in place the best; losing points to a moving lens in rapid-fire is not good for the nerves of those around me.
For best performance toward the end of the day, even when the lenses ARE dry, I highly recommend The B&L Purevision 2 HD. All the ad-hype aside, they stay put (for me), are a great lens in the wind, and provide excellent clarity.
-Nate