Skip to main content

I'm thinking I want to buy some Oakleys, but it has me completely lost on what everything means in the sunglasses world. Polarized or not polarized is one thing, and then there's the whole realm of what each lens color does and the light transmission ! I have just about exhausted the internet trying to learn about this, so I figured I'll turn to all of you! What lenses and types in general have you all had a good experience with for outfielders?

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Oakley has a line of what they call Prizm lenses specifically for outfield.  I got a replacement lens of these for my son and he prefers it to the polarized (which is what he had been using for years).

They have infield and outfield.  The specific lenses I ordered for his radar path frames for outfield are the 101-114-003 sku (replacement lens only for his frame)

Here's a link to the radar with prizm lenses

http://www.oakley.com/en/search?text=radar+path+prizm

Last edited by Nuke83

Thanks for the help! Yeah, I had read about the Prizms, and those look pretty nice. Based on my readings, they make the colors "pop" better, correct? The Prizms are definitely what I'm looking at most right now, but what about the frames? I saw that it's possible to customize the M2 frames with the prizms, but is the frame (M2, RadarPitch, Radar Path) all just a preference and feel? 

GoldenGraham34 posted:

Thanks for the help! Yeah, I had read about the Prizms, and those look pretty nice. Based on my readings, they make the colors "pop" better, correct? The Prizms are definitely what I'm looking at most right now, but what about the frames? I saw that it's possible to customize the M2 frames with the prizms, but is the frame (M2, RadarPitch, Radar Path) all just a preference and feel? 

Yes, pretty much anything regarding frames is style preference and comfort among the three you mention.  My son has two frames, the Radar Path and the Flak 2.0.  In his words, the Flak (which were a gift from grandparent) make him look like a certain feminine hygiene product.  He prefers the single lense look.   Neither has a visual advantage, it's a style preference in his case.

There are really only two requirements, from my experience:

1) They must be Oakleys; and

2) They need to look good draped across the bill of the cap because that's the only place you will ever see them.

Even in the majors you see this all the time. The outfielder loses the ball in the sun and right there - on the bill of his hat - is a $300 pair of sunglasses acting only as an expensive headband.

roothog66 posted:

There are really only two requirements, from my experience:

1) They must be Oakleys; and

2) They need to look good draped across the bill of the cap because that's the only place you will ever see them.

Even in the majors you see this all the time. The outfielder loses the ball in the sun and right there - on the bill of his hat - is a $300 pair of sunglasses acting only as an expensive headband.

This is EXACTLY what I've noticed.  I've never laughed so hard as I did when I would show up to a 13U game and EVERY kid on some high dollar team from some big organization had a pair of Oakleys flipped on top of his bill.....and left them there the whole weekend....regardless of the weather.  My son has never once worn a pair of sunglasses during a game.  They have Oakleys available at his school (don't get to keep them, but can use them as needed).  Never considered it.....though he does have a pair he uses to drive (never leave the car).   Considering how few guys in the MLB actually wear them, it just seems to me like it's much more of a status symbol or fashion statement than a usable piece of baseball equipment......but I guess it's up to the individual

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×