By Jason Anderson, Medmont APAC Sales Manager 

Looking for a new automated perimeter for your optometry practice?  

Both the Medmont M700 (M700) and Carl Zeiss Humphrey Visual Field Analyser (HFA) are used for visual field testing—a crucial part of detecting and treating glaucoma(1). In this comparison, I put them head-to-head to show why you need an M700 in your practice. 

Research reveals that both Medmont and Humphrey perimeters may be used for clinical and research purposes with similar confidence(2). While that’s a good starting point, let’s dive deeper into their distinctions and advantages. This comparison compares each instrument’s features and capabilities, testing technology, ease of use, costs, and service and support requirements.  

Have a read to draw your own conclusion. 

Medmont M700: 

Medmont’s Australian-made, hand-assembled automated perimeter leverages over 30 years of proven technology.

Known as a value leader for its reliable performance and longevity, you’ll find the M700 in many optometry practices in Australia and beyond. It’s designed to have higher Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) accuracy for glaucoma than standard Humphrey 24-2 and 30-2 tests(3).

Tests are also fully customisable—you can adjust test speeds and design tests with varying strategies and test points. 

Zeiss Humphrey Field Analyser (HFA): 

Study shows the HFA is comparable to the M700 for visual field testing and glaucoma diagnostics(4). Until recently, the Humphrey VF Analyser driving test was the main perimetry-based test approved as evidence by Australia’s driver’s licensing authorities.

The Medmont M700 Perimeter is now listed in the Australian AustRoads Medical Standards for Licensing and Clinical Management guidelines (2022) as accepted fitness for driving tests(5). It also meets the requirements for most driving test legislation globally. 

Image source: Landers, John & Sharma, A., Goldberg, I., & Graham, S. (2003) ‘A comparison of perimetric results with the Medmont and Humphrey perimeters’ The British Journal of  Ophthalmology, 87 (6), 690-694 

Let’s explore the features and capabilities of both the Medmont and Humphrey perimeters.  

Testing bowl design 

Medmont: Open design, hemisphere bowl  

Humphrey: Closed design, hemisphere bowl(6)

The M700’s bowl boasts open ergonomics to prevent common patient complaints of claustrophobia and poor ventilation. This is important as patient comfort influences test reliability and reproducibility. Discomfort can inflate fixation errors as well as false-positive and false-negative responses. According to Groth, S (2023), this is especially true for children, who may be intimated by a large bowl surrounding their face(7).  

Stimulus type 

Medmont: LED 

Humphrey: Projection(8)

The M700 uses back-illuminated LED stimulus while the HFA uses projection stimulus. The static LED offers a quiet experience for the patient and removes the need for projection system servicing or replacement(9).


Medmont: External Windows PC 

Humphrey: Built in touchscreen(10) 

Perimeters with internal computers may need replacing when they reach their stated lifespan, to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars. The M700 allows you to select a laptop or desktop that meets Medmont’s recommended specifications, adding user flexibility, cost savings and up-to-date technology and functionality. 

Testing technology

Both the M700 and HFA offer rapid and reliable screening and visual field threshold tests. That includes age-related screening, full threshold, fast threshold and single intensity. They’re used to assist in the detection of glaucoma, macula disease, neurological conditions, retinal disease and more. 

Test Customisation Capability 

Medmont: yes (all tests) 

Humphrey: yes (some tests)(11)

The M700 offers a high density of test points in central regions for detailed information about visual field losses(12).

The stand-out advantage of the M700 is how customisable the tests are. During an exam, you can add test points, retest areas with local defects, and save partially completed tests. This unique feature prevents disturbances and rework, saving you valuable time and enhancing the patient’s experience. 

Compare test types

Medmont M700  Humphrey (based on 740 model) 
Name  Field size  Points  Strategy  Name  Field size  Points  Strategy 
Central 22  24 degrees horizontal  50  Screening (custom)  Central 40  30 degrees  40  Screening 
Central 30  30 degrees horizontal  99  Screening (custom)  Central 64  30 degrees  64   Screening 

Central 30 


30 degrees horizontal 




Screening (custom)  Central 76 

30 degrees 



Central 30 


30 degrees horizontal 




Screening (custom)  Central 80 

30 degrees 





30-50 degrees 


72  Screening (custom)  Peripheral 60 

30-60 degrees 


Glaucoma  30 degrees with 50 deg nasal step  103  Screening (custom)  Nasal step  50 degrees  14  Screening 
Full field  50 degrees  163   Screening (custom)  Full field  50 degrees  98  Screening 
  Full field 81  55 degrees  81  screening 
Full field 120  55 degrees  120  screening 
Full field 135  87 degrees (temp)  135  Screening 
N/A  Full field 246  60 degrees  246  Screening 
Macula  10 degrees  48   Fast threshold  10-2  10 degrees  68  Threshold (1 degree point) 
Central  30 degrees  99  Fast threshold  24-2   24   54  Threshold 
Central   30 degrees  99  Fast threshold  30-2  30 degrees  76  Threshold 
Peripheral  30-50 degrees  72  Fast threshold  60-4   30-60  60  Threshold 
Glaucoma  30 degrees with 50 deg nasal step  103  Fast threshold  Nasal step  50 degrees  14  Threshold 
Macula  10 degrees  48  Fast threshold  Macula  5 degrees  15  Threshold (1 degree point) 
Driving test  80 degrees, temporal  48  3 zone  Esterman Monocular  150 degrees bitemporal  120  Fixed level 10 asb 
NA  Superior 36#  60 degrees, superior hemifield  36  Fixed level 10 asb 
NA  Superior 64#  60 degrees, superior hemifield  64  Fixed level 10 asb 
Central 22A  22 degrees  45  Fast threshold spatially adaptive   
CV% 100 point (Italian driving test)  50 degrees  100  3 zone 
Flash scan test  22 degrees  40  Age related/screen 
German driving test  75 temporal, 40 nasal  101  Age related 
German binocular  150 bitemporal  105  Age related driving test 
Neurological test  50 degrees  163  Fast threshold 
Spatially adaptive  50 degrees  39  Fast threshold 


Medmont: Less than $16,000 AUD 

Humphrey: Around $20-30,000 AUD 

When considering cost, it’s important to consider the longevity of a device as well as potential servicing fees and associated productivity disturbances. 

The M700 is hand-made in Australia with no moving parts, and it pairs with external computer hardware. As a result, it has minimal maintenance needs and service requirements, which minimises practice interruptions and lost revenue.  

Plus, rather than replace your instrument, you can upgrade your Medmont Studio software to keep your M700 current. It’s no surprise Medmont sees perimeters in use for over 20 years.  

What’s more, the M700 is backed by responsive customer support that’s free of charge. 

In contrast, the HFA employs a built-in computer, projection lamps, and a replaceable air-filter(13). This may add up to a higher likelihood of part replacements, servicing costs and complete unit replacement. 

The M700 is economical, long-lasting and ergonomic. 

As you can see, our automated perimeter offers significant advantages over the HFA.  

The M700 is: 

  • highly cost effective (a low initial cost and minimal ongoing service fees), 
  • made in Australia and hand-built to last many years, 
  • built on decades of proven perimetry technology, and 
  • supported by free customer support.

It has:

  • minimal maintenance and servicing needs (for uninterrupted productivity),
  • customisable tests (a rare and clinically useful attribute),
  • ergonomics designed to enhance patient comfort and test reliability, and
  • integrates with your existing Medmont database.

To learn more about the benefits of the M700 for your practice, email  

Disclaimer: the information presented in this comparison is to the best of the author’s knowledge. You must do your own comparison research to determine the best perimeter for your practice needs. 

(1) McKendrik, Alison ‘Visual Field Tests’ Accessed December 2023 
(2), (4) Landers, John & Sharma, A., Goldberg, I., & Graham, S. (2003) A comparison of perimetric results with the Medmont and Humphrey perimeters The British Journal of  Ophthalmology, 87 (6), 690-694 
(3) Landers, John & Sharma, Alok & Goldberg, Ivan & Graham, Stuart. (2010). Comparison of visual field sensitivities between the Medmont automated perimeter and the Humphrey field analyser. Clinical & experimental ophthalmology. 38. 273-6. 10.1111/j.1442-9071.2010.02246.
(5) AustRoads, National Transport Commission (2022), ‘Assessing Fitness to Drive’ ( – accessed December 2023) 
(6) Zeiss, Humphrey Field Analyser 3 (HFA3) Instructions for Use-Models 830, 840, 850, 860 (2018) pp26 (, accessed November 2023) 
(7) Groth, Sylvia L et al. “Evaluation of Virtual Reality Perimetry and Standard Automated Perimetry in Normal Children.” Translational Vision Science & Technology – vol. 12, 1 (2023): 6. doi: 10.1167/tvst. 12.1.6 
(8) Zeiss, Humphrey Field Analyser 3 (HFA3) Instructions for Use-Models 830, 840, 850, 860 (2018) pp106 (, accessed November 2023) 
(9) Zeiss, Humphrey Field Analyser 3 (HFA3) Instructions for Use-Models 830, 840, 850, 860 (2018) pp106 (, accessed November 2023) 
(10) Zeiss, Humphrey Field Analyser 3 (HFA3) Instructions for Use-Models 830, 840, 850, 860 (2018) pp28 (, accessed November 2023)  
(11) Brochure: Humphrey Field Analyser 3 from ZEISS, Technical data, specifications, pp 7 (Accessed, December 2023) 
(12) Chen S, McKendrick AM, Turpin A. Choosing two points to add to the 24-2 pattern to better describe macular visual field damage due to glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015 Sep;99(9):1236-9. doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-306431. Epub 2015 Mar 23. PMID: 25802251. 
(13) Zeiss, Humphrey Field Analyser 3 (HFA3) Instructions for Use-Models 830, 840, 850, 860 (2018) pp68 (, accessed November 2023)