LENS without moving parts

Started Jun 9, 2006 | Discussions
René Garneau Regular Member • Posts: 276
LENS without moving parts

Here is an interesting story in the lens department.

http://rense.com/general65/newlensmayrevolution.htm

-- hide signature --

René
C A N O N Twenty Dee
http://www.pbase.com/reneg
'You are here'
– Anonymous City Worker

lisitsa Regular Member • Posts: 133
Re: LENS without moving parts

Looks extremely interesting. It would mean that one piece of glass would have a large focal range, super fast focus (as focus will be electric not manual), and full aperture through its whole range.

Of course its just a prototype, and most fall out in some part of the design stage.. so don't sell all your lenses yet

omr Senior Member • Posts: 1,118
we discussed this last year ;-)

René Garneau wrote:

Here is an interesting story in the lens department.
http://rense.com/general65/newlensmayrevolution.htm

On May 24th 2005 (a couple of days after that article appeared
in the Globe & Mail), DPReview ran a news item on the same subject,
quoting a May 18th press release.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0505/05052401thin_lens.asp

The story was briefly discussed in the forums, e.g.:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&message=13613381

-- hide signature --

omr

Eric Fossum
Eric Fossum Senior Member • Posts: 1,517
Re: we discussed this last year ;-)

These lenses, liquid lenses (several companies) and other tunable lenses tend to work alright at VGA (0.3Mpixel) and maybe 1.3Mpixel resolutions.

However, prescriptions to achieve performance for 2 Mpixels etc. need to be very precisely controlled and this is difficult. My opinion is that the 1-part in a million (spatia) control for tunable lenses will be difficult to obtain.

Liquid lenses have already been totally rejected, for the most part, for even cell phone cameras, based on performance and environmental reliability (e.g. freezing temps, hot temps, etc.). Furthermore, tunable lenses tend to wind up thicker than conventional lenses, believe it or not, just because of the difficulty of mounting and attaching signal lines.

Last but not least, computational lenses - lenses where the focus is computed by a processor, will also be limited. Remember, we could not adequately restore the focus in the Hubble Space Telescope by computation even though we knew exactly the prescription of the errant optics. This is because numerical round off etc. limits computational accuracy, esp. in the presence of shot noise (low light photon noise).

-Eric

 Eric Fossum's gear list:Eric Fossum's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon Coolpix P1000 +1 more
Step Forward Regular Member • Posts: 155
Re: we discussed this last year ;-)

Eric, what do you mean by "computational lens"? Is this something like CDM Optics, Omnivision by now?

Eric Fossum
Eric Fossum Senior Member • Posts: 1,517
Re: we discussed this last year ;-)

yes, or other techniques to focus a blurry image by deconvolution or heuristic techniques. Sorry, the term "computational lens" just jumped out of my brain when I was typing my posting -- I don't think it is regularly used. On the other hand, I kind of like it.

 Eric Fossum's gear list:Eric Fossum's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon Coolpix P1000 +1 more
Joe0Bloggs Veteran Member • Posts: 5,391
DxO lens?

Would this be another example of the 'computational lens'?
http://www.dxo.com/en/business/cameraphones/dos.php

Eric Fossum
Eric Fossum Senior Member • Posts: 1,517
Re: DxO lens?

yup. there are probably about half a dozen of these solutions that have surfaced in the past 2 years. No takers, so far, I think.

 Eric Fossum's gear list:Eric Fossum's gear list
Sony RX100 II Nikon Coolpix P1000 +1 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads