We compared the kinetic perimetry of the Humphrey Field Anayzer and the Haag Streit Octopus 101 and assessed their use in relation to Goldmann perimetry.The Humphrey kinetic perimetry comes close to Goldmann perimetry and the Octopus shows clear advantages, notably in terms of ergonomics and its more sophisticated software. The Goldmann requires a high level of skill; examination time with the Humphrey and the Octopus is at least double the time required by a skilled Goldmann operator. The examiner can to a certain degree be passive during the static visual field examination, but is entirely active during the kinematic visual field examination. Therefore, contrary to static perimetry, the examination can only be performed by a physician. The future of automated kinematic perimetry depends on simplification of the software.