The media and even the specialized literature report that the ultraviolet (UV) protection for sunglasses is critical, on the grounds that sunglasses can have a counter effect if the lenses do not provide adequate UV protection. They reason that the primary and natural mechanism is that the pupil of the eye contracts to attenuate radiation and protect the inner eye under sun exposure. Therefore, if dark lenses do not provide appropriate UV protection, there is an increased UV incidence in the inner eye due to pupil dilation, which enhances the adverse effects and impacts the ocular tissues more severely than in situations without UV protection. However, no existing literature properly quantified or supported this argument. In this work, the influx of solar UV throughout the pupil of the eye was calculated in two situations: when a person wear sunglasses and when he/she does not. In both situations, the pupil dilation and the field of view (squint) were considered with their dependence on the brightness of the ambient, calculated by modeling the solar irradiation. Finally, it was assessed whether sunglasses with poor UV protection actually increase the UV influx throughout the dilated pupil compared to the non-dilated pupil. A set of 214 sunglasses lenses were tested and the results show that pupil dilation does not play an important role in the UV influx throughout the pupil. It was observed that the FOV is the main player, surpassing the pupil size contribution by up to 314.3%, disproving the common explanation. Because of the major role of the FOV, our results show that sunglasses with UV-A protection below 86% may have a slight potential to increase hazards to the eye compared to not wearing sunglasses at all. These results can have direct impact on sunglasses standards regarding the UV protection linked to the category of the lenses.