The same 10-2 program but obtained with the maia™. If one mentally flips one of the visual fields, the results are grossly similar. However, with the Humphrey Zeiss, only 5 points have a 0 sensitivity but with the maia™ .16 points have a 0 (or below) sensitivity. It is unclear at this time whether the Zeiss Humphrey field is underestimating the visual field loss in this case or whether the maia™ is overestimating the reduction in sensitivity. We have begun testing in glaucoma patients comparing the two fields. Alternatively, the differences demonstrated may be due in part to the fact that the stimuli are not identical, hence requiring further consideration and analysis.