Unless you've been shot with a marble or well above 300fps a lens should suffer no damage from paint even at short range surely?
Isn't the point of a lens is to protect the user from any possible paintball scenario therefore should suffer no damage even from a point blank shot?
Discussion point?
Personally I wouldn't look to change a lens unless there was visible damage or I felt the structural integrity of the lens was compromised.
Contrary to general opinion the standards test for paintball goggles and lenses involves shooting with paintballs, not shooting with shotguns etc. There are videos etc using shotguns etc showing that lenses have survived, e.g. the Vio video:
Noting that this standard is out of date (it will cost you money to get a copy of current standards) the following gives the ASTMF1776 standard, and demonstrates testing which is conducted with paintballs fired repestedly at up to 420fps (Highest velocity 400fps with a tolerance of +/- 20fps)
http://www.a5og.net/how-to/F1776.pdf
The tests not only involve the lens surviving but also no distortion and the whole set of goggles retaining their integrity / not falling off etc.
Manufacturers give the recommendations which include replacement over time and if there is a direct impact.
Both are a degree of covering them if something fails, you are fine if you have been shot in the lens. But if theres anything showing you should do as directed and replace, but the choice is yours.
