This paper reports on an interpretation quality questionnaire relating to general quality, linguistic output quality, terminological usage, fidelity, quality of voice and delivery with a scale of five answers (very poor, poor, medium, good, very good) and asking for comments on the main weaknesses of interpretation and for general comments on interpretation. The questionnaire was distributed to delegates at a bilingual French/English conference on genetic ophthalmology. Results are more than fairly heterogeneous, with more favorable assessment on the English speaker’s side than from the francophones. Delivery was considered inferior to the other quality components, but this assessment did not influence the assessment of the general quality.