Highlights d Monovision induces interocular blur differences and a mismatch in processing speed d The speed mismatch means a common lens correction can cause dramatic motion illusions d Drivers may misperceive the distance of cyclists by the width of a narrow street lane d Novel combinations of non-invasive ophthalmic interventions can abolish the illusion

Tunable lenses are becoming ubiquitous, in applications including microscopy, optical coherence tomography, computer vision, quality control, and presbyopic corrections. Many applications require an accurate control of the optical power of the lens in response to a time-dependent input waveform. We present a fast focimeter (3.8 KHz) to characterize the dynamic response of tunable lenses, which was demonstrated on different lens models. We found that the temporal response is repetitive and linear, which allowed the development of a robust compensation strategy based on the optimization of the input wave, using a linear time-invariant model. To our knowledge, this work presents the first procedure for a direct characterization of the transient response of tunable lenses and for compensation of their temporal distortions, and broadens the potential of tunable lenses also in high-speed applications.

Interocular differences in image blur can cause processing speed differences that lead to dramatic misperceptions of the distance and three-dimensional direction of moving objects. This recently discovered illusion—the reverse Pulfrich effect—is caused by optical conditions induced by monovision, a common correction for presbyopia. Fortunately, anti-Pulfrich monovision corrections, which darken the blurring lens, can eliminate the illusion for many viewing conditions. However, the reverse Pulfrich effect and the efficacy of anti-Pulfrich corrections have been demonstrated only with trial lenses. This situation should be addressed, for clinical and scientific reasons. First, it is important to replicate these effects with contact lenses, the most common method for delivering monovision. Second, trial lenses of different powers, unlike contacts, can cause large magnification differences between the eyes. To confidently attribute the reverse Pulfrich effect to interocular optical blur differences, and to ensure that previously reported effect sizes are reliable, one must control for magnification. Here, in a within-observer study with five separate experiments, we demonstrate that (1) contact lenses and trial lenses induce indistinguishable reverse Pulfrich effects, (2) anti-Pulfrich corrections are equally effective when induced by contact and trial lenses, and (3) magnification differences do not cause or impact the Pulfrich effect.