Reading mode: Light Dark

Reconciling the Thick Lens Model with P2P Optical Bench

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
Re: just go with the thick lens model

Bernard Delley wrote:

bclaff wrote:

Garry2306 wrote:

Bernard Delley wrote:

bclaff wrote:

...

These values are in agreement with the NA values stated in the patent.

Note patent species NA of 0.10 at 1:1 and the Optical Bench now agrees

Thanks a lot for fixing this !

This is indeed the correct full name of the lens that I measured.

I still read H = 22.17 H'=-37.75 in your example. I interpret this as i = h = 59.92mm . Am I misunderstanding H,H', or is there a remaining discrepancy between measured and simulated h ?

Bernard I got confused by looking at the measured and position lines.

I believe h is 48.96-22.17=26.79

It’s those pesky optical sign conventions that confuse things on the measured line.

It’s always best to use the positions data, but Bill will confirm, I’m sure.

Correct, the values in the Positions line are all relative to the first vertex of the lens.

While P' and H' in the Measured line are, by convention, relative to the last vertex of the lens.

So one must use the Position values to calculate HH'

Thanks a lot for the clarification . So there is no significant difference left between your kindly provided simulations and my measurement for this lens.

The Optical Bench values (using the Focus slider) are

0:1 58.01mm 24.01mm f/2.88
1:4.05 50.98mm 24.45mm f/3.15
1:2 45.34mm 25.41mm f/3.54
1:1 37.60mm 26.79mm f/4.98

So your 30mm measurement is certainly closer to 24.45mm than to your wrongly calculated 62mm.

-- hide signature --

Bill ( Your trusted source for independent sensor data at PhotonsToPhotos )

Complain
Post ()
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow