Forums

Ok thank you. I guess my question is has anyone had there white label look like the one I got

Hello Spies! I recently bought 3 pairs of Tifosi sunglasses with the plan to do an unofficial review. (Disclaimer, I bought these sunglasses through a discount program through my work so I did not pay the prices I'll be listing) I for this review, I bought the Centus with the smoke blue mirrored lens ($25), the Seek FC 2.0 smoke polarized lens ($60), and the Rivet with the Enliven Golf ($50). The price is dependent on the lens with the polarized and enliven golf lens being more expensive, thought the enliven golf lens for the Seek FC 2.0 was only $5 more than the standard lens. Tifosi claims: Enliven Lens Enliven color enhancing lenses take dull colors in the environment and enhance them for sharper visual acuity. This provides... Easier reading of the greens with clearer detail. Better surveying of the contours of the course. Clearer tracking of your ball in flight with better contrast against the sky. ELEVATE YOUR GOLF GAME WITH CENTUS - THE BEST GOLF SUNGLASSES FOR ULTIMATE PERFORMANCE! Introducing Centus, your secret weapon for a flawless golf game. Crafted to perfection, Centus golf sunglasses are engineered with precision to enhance your performance on the greens. These are not just any sunglasses; they are the best golf sunglasses you'll ever own. SEEK FC 2.0 SPORT SUNGLASSES: YOUR PERFECT COMPANION FOR PEAK PERFORMANCE Are you tired of compromising on your sports sunglasses? Look no further, as your search for the ultimate, all-around pair ends here with Seek FC 2.0. Designed to elevate your athletic performance, Seek FC 2.0 boasts an array of cutting-edge features that combine style, functionality, and unmatched comfort. RIVET: ELEVATE YOUR SPORTING EXPERIENCE Whether you're cycling, running, golfing, or dominating the pickleball court, having the right gear is essential for peak performance. When it comes to eyewear, Rivet steps up to the plate, ensuring you have the coverage you need for your sport. Price: The price range for each is as follows: Centus: $25-$30 Seek FC 2.0: $35-$60 Rivet: $50-$80 Why did I selected these styles: I prefer frameless sunglasses and do not like seeing the frame while wearing them. All of these styles do not have the bottom frame. I also bought each one with a specific purpose in mind. The Centus is meant for running/cycling, the Seek FC 2.0 is meant for every day use, and the Rivet is meant for golf. Now onto the test and general results. First Impressions: 18 out of 25 I was a little disappointed to find one of the 3 boxes damaged when they arrived. Thankfully, it was the one that had a hard case. All three came in the same bag and had their individual boxes. All 3 came with microfiber bags. The Rivet came with a hardcase that seems to be on par with the cases that Oakley sunglasses come in. Each of the sunglasses had Tifosi stickers. I would have liked to have seen better packaging, especially for an order that would have been $135 at retail. Fit: 25 out of 25 All 3 fit very well. There were no issues or interference with my hat. Comfort and Quality: By Style - Centus: 5 out of 25 - Seek FC 2.0: 23 out of 25 - Rivet: 25 out of 25 This is one of the areas where the Centus proved it's lower price point. The Centus would become uncomfortable to wear after 5 to 10 minutes of wearing. The discomfort was primarily on the bridge of the nose. It's redeeming factors were that it was comfortable around the ears and I liked the coverage of the lens. The quality of the Centus is questionable, even at the $25 price point. It feels cheap and the hinge creaks every time I move the temples. The primary redeeming factors to the Centus is the size of the lens. The lens provides great coverage and there is no obstruction from the frame. The Rivet and the Seek FC 2.0 showed their quality in this area, especially the Rivet. The Rivet is the most comfortable to wear out of these 3 options. The Rivet is very well made and the hardcase it came with is a nice touch. I do prefer a larger lens that provides more coverage. This would likely be the perfect sunglasses for me if it had the Centus sized lens. The Seek FC 2.0 is also very comfortable to wear for several hours and provides more coverage than the Rivet. The quality is a step down from the Rivet but not much. The one thing I did not like about the Seek FC 2.0 is that the frame creeps into view from the side and you have a dark blob in your peripheral vision. All 3 passed the toddler test. I gave all 3 to my 3 year old and let him twist them and try to put them on for 1 minute. It was a daring test but none of them cracked under the pressure. Will update if he gets his hands on them and further test their ability to withstand a toddler. Performance: By Style This is more about the lens than the frames though I did not experience any slippage on swings when wearing all three on the course. Centus mirror lens: 13 out of 25 Seek FC 2.0 Polarized: 22 out of 25 Rivet Enliven Golf: 25 out of 25 I found the mirrored lens on the Centus to be the most difficult to track the ball in the air and to spot the ball in the rough. I did not experience any issues spotting the ball with either of the Seek or Rivet sunglasses. With that said, one of my biggest struggles, other than hitting the fairway with my driver, is spotting the ball in the air. I usually need to rely on my playing partners to spot the ball. I felt more confident spotting the ball with the Polarized and the Enliven lens. I felt the Enliven showed it's true nature on the fairway and greens. I felt it was easier to see slopes and textures on greens with the Enliven Golf lens than either the polarized or the mirrored lens. Overall: Tifosi has some good options at a great price point. I would argue that the Rivet and Seek FC 2.0 likely perform above their price points where as the Centus performs below its price point. If you are looking for quality sunglasses for golf without breaking the bank, give the Rivet or the Seek FC 2.0 a try but pass on the Centus. Final scores: Rivet: 93 Seek FC 2.0: 88 Centus: 61 Let me know if you have any questions.

Introduction posted - I had some big shoes to fill with the excellent intros so far! Keep those fitter questions coming - hoping to get time setup with our fitter shortly.  In the mean-time, how about some more mock-ups?  🤣 Recently, I've been going down the rabbit hole on alignment aids (i.e. the lines / markings on top of the putter), pouring through articles, forum posts, and videos (shoutout to Edel for the EXCELLENT YT series on their fitting process).  Since I've never been officially fit for a putter, I focused first on determining eye dominance, and concluded that I'm left eye dominant (as a righty).  Here is a simple test if you need to determine eye dominance - https://www.diyphotography.net/a-neat-trick-to-determine-your-dominant-eye/.   One question I plan to dig into with my fitter is this finding - is there a certain aid that would be best for my eye dominance?   Traditionally, I've preferred a line on the top flange on the putter, but is this actually best for me?  Should I go to a simple dot (or 3 dot) setup to remove some of the "busyness" of the top of putter (and put my focus more on the back of the ball)?  More to come... Edit - looks like @jbern and I are on the same wavelength 😉

@CFreddie put together a great list of questions for the LAB fitter in the DM thread and one of them was about alignment marks on the putter. I have to admit that I'm a bit baffled with all of the choices. I watched the video below from Edel's YouTube page and it was evidence enough for me to determine that, at a minimum, alignment aids are important for aiming.  Does anyone have any insight into the more abnormal alignment marks like the ones below (e.g. what kind of putter would benefit from one over another)? This could be a rabbit hole I'm not ready to go down, but I'll still pose the question. This alignment mark is on the top of my list: These few are curious to me: Please note: these are not all on my short list of alignment marks, but they all made me look at them several times.   

@GolfSpy_BEN that is encouraging news on your Q10 testing front, and hopefully as the season unfolds the speed comes back and you find it capable of making your bag. It always seems to take some time to get acclimated to new tools or clubs, so patience is a virtue to have going forward.