Is there anyone who has chosen intermediate focus with cataract surgery

You aren't the only one. I've procrastinated for more than a year over this decision. Unless the surgeon I'm seeing in January talks me out of it, I've decided on intermediate (as in computer) and near (as in sitting down and reading a book comfortably) as what I want, and distance (which I only use at this point in my life for driving, where I'm almost always using sunglasses anyway) as what I'm willing to use glasses for.

The one person in the forum I remember having done this is RebDovid. I think if you search for his posts, you'll find threads about his decision and his results and how he feels about it.

My first suggestion is to think about what you want to see without any glasses. Also consider that both eyes do not have to be targeted for the same distance. You may want to do a bit of research on mini-monovision, so you don't have to settle for just intermediate vision.

.

Also consider that intermediate vision in both eyes kind of puts you in no man's land. You will need glasses for reading and for distance.

I have not, but how would you define intermediate? Best focus at 1 meter maybe?

@Bookwoman is our resident near/ intermediate vision person here.

"I do not need glasses to read if less than a foot away and I would like to keep that or close to it."

.

One of the problems with categorizing vision as intermediate or near, is that there is no standard definition of what that is. You would be best to become familiar with the diopters scale and use that to specify the vision you want. A starting point would be to look at your eyeglass prescription to see what it says. The way you describe your current vision I am thinking that is near vision, not intermediate, and you possibly need an eyeglass prescription in the range of -2.5? If so that is near vision. I would suggest that intermediate vision would be more in the range of -1.0 D.

.

Some people do maintain their myopia and accept they will need distance glasses or progressives. It certainly is an option that some choose. I would just be careful to get enough near vision that you don't end up needing glasses for both near vision and distance vision, or essentially progressives.

Ron wrote: My first suggestion is to think about what you want to see without any glasses.

This is the key point. If you want to be able to read well/use a computer, then targeting what I think of as near vision (i.e. around -2.0/-2.5, which is what I wound up with) is probably the way to go. This works especially well if you don't mind wearing glasses for driving, watching TV, etc.

If you target intermediate (maybe -1.0/-1.5), you probably won't be able to read smaller print comfortably, but some people can. And of course it can depend on what kind of reading you're doing, print vs online. Mini-monovision can split the difference, so to speak, and some people wind up completely glasses-free that way, although it's not a given. In any event, these are definitely things to discuss with your surgeon before you make a decision.

"intermediate focus"

That would mean that you'd likely need glasses for both distance and reading wouldn't it?

The worst of both worlds

I chose intermediate (-1.5D) for my first eye but the one week post op result was near (-2.0D). My near/ intermediate vision provides only a few feet of crisp vision. Once outside that range, my vision becomes blurry.

This result makes best distance for mini-monovison unlikely. Adding to the uncertainty, the final result can easily be .5D off the target in either direction (if not more). My choice now is wearing progressives except for reading and using the computer OR mini-monovision with near bias (-2.0D and -1.0D). The problem again is that there is no guarantee that this target will be successful and will certainly require progressives for crisp vision at best.

All that said, there are many people who have been happy with a target such as -1.5D but I wanted to share the problems I have experienced.