- •Lens Design Fundamentals
- •Contents
- •Preface to the Second Edition
- •Preface to the First Edition
- •A Special Tribute to Rudolf Kingslake
- •1.1. Relations Between Designer and Factory
- •1.1.1 Spherical versus Aspheric Surfaces
- •1.1.2 Establishment of Thicknesses
- •1.1.3 Antireflection Coatings
- •1.1.4 Cementing
- •1.1.5 Establishing Tolerances
- •1.1.6 Design Tradeoffs
- •1.2. The Design Procedure
- •1.2.1 Sources of a Likely Starting System
- •1.2.2 Lens Evaluation
- •1.2.3 Lens Appraisal
- •1.2.4 System Changes
- •1.3. Optical Materials
- •1.3.1 Optical Glass
- •1.3.2 Infrared Materials
- •1.3.3 Ultraviolet Materials
- •1.3.4 Optical Plastics
- •1.4. Interpolation of Refractive Indices
- •1.4.1 Interpolation of Dispersion Values
- •1.4.2 Temperature Coefficient of Refractive Index
- •1.5. Lens Types to be Considered
- •2.1. Introduction
- •2.1.1 Object and Image
- •2.1.2 The Law of Refraction
- •2.1.3 The Meridional Plane
- •2.1.4 Types of Rays
- •2.1.5 Notation and Sign Conventions
- •2.2. Graphical Ray Tracing
- •2.3. Trigonometrical Ray Tracing at a Spherical Surface
- •2.3.1 Program for a Computer
- •2.4. Some Useful Relations
- •2.4.1 The Spherometer Formula
- •2.4.2 Some Useful Formulas
- •2.4.3 The Intersection Height of Two Spheres
- •2.4.4 The Volume of a Lens
- •2.5. Cemented Doublet Objective
- •2.6. Ray Tracing at a Tilted Surface
- •2.6.1 The Ray Tracing Equations
- •2.6.2 Example of Ray Tracing through a Tilted Surface
- •2.7. Ray Tracing at an Aspheric Surface
- •3.1. Tracing a Paraxial Ray
- •3.1.1 The Standard Paraxial Ray Trace
- •3.1.2 The (y – nu) Method
- •3.1.3 Inverse Procedure
- •3.1.4 Angle Solve and Height Solve Methods
- •3.1.6 Paraxial Ray with All Angles
- •3.1.7 A Paraxial Ray at an Aspheric Surface
- •3.1.9 Matrix Approach to Paraxial Rays
- •3.2. Magnification and the Lagrange Theorem
- •3.2.1 Transverse Magnification
- •3.2.2 Longitudinal Magnification
- •3.3. The Gaussian Optics of a Lens System
- •3.3.1 The Relation between the Principal Planes
- •3.3.2 The Relation between the Two Focal Lengths
- •3.3.3 Lens Power
- •3.3.4 Calculation of Focal Length
- •3.3.5 Conjugate Distance Relationships
- •3.3.6 Nodal Points
- •3.3.7 Optical Center of Lens
- •3.3.8 The Scheimpflug Condition
- •3.4. First-Order Layout of an Optical System
- •3.4.1 A Single Thick Lens
- •3.4.2 A Single Thin Lens
- •3.4.3 A Monocentric Lens
- •3.4.4 Image Shift Caused by a Parallel Plate
- •3.4.5 Lens Bending
- •3.4.6 A Series of Separated Thin Elements
- •3.4.7 Insertion of Thicknesses
- •3.4.8 Two-Lens Systems
- •3.5. Thin-Lens Layout of Zoom Systems
- •3.5.1 Mechanically Compensated Zoom Lenses
- •3.5.2 A Three-Lens Zoom
- •3.5.4 A Four-Lens Optically Compensated Zoom System
- •3.5.5 An Optically Compensated Zoom Enlarger or Printer
- •Endnotes
- •4.1. Introduction
- •4.2. Symmetrical Optical Systems
- •4.3. Aberration Determination Using Ray Trace Data
- •4.3.1 Defocus
- •4.3.2 Spherical Aberration
- •4.3.3 Tangential and Sagittal Astigmatism
- •4.3.4 Tangential and Sagittal Coma
- •4.3.5 Distortion
- •4.3.6 Selection of Rays for Aberration Computation
- •4.3.7 Zonal Aberrations
- •4.3.8 Tangential and Sagittal Zonal Astigmatism
- •4.3.9 Tangential and Sagittal Zonal Coma
- •4.3.10 Higher-Order Contributions
- •4.4. Calculation of Seidel Aberration Coefficients
- •Endnotes
- •5.1. Introduction
- •5.2. Spherochromatism of a Cemented Doublet
- •5.2.4 Secondary Spectrum
- •5.2.5 Spherochromatism
- •5.3. Contribution of a Single Surface to the Primary Chromatic Aberration
- •5.4. Contribution of a Thin Element in a System to the Paraxial Chromatic Aberration
- •5.5. Paraxial Secondary Spectrum
- •5.7.1 Secondary Spectrum of a Dialyte
- •5.7.2 A One-Glass Achromat
- •5.8. Chromatic Aberration Tolerances
- •5.8.1 A Single Lens
- •5.8.2 An Achromat
- •5.9. Chromatic Aberration at Finite Aperture
- •5.9.1 Conrady’s D – d Method of Achromatization
- •5.9.3 Tolerance for the D – d Sum
- •5.9.5 Paraxial D – d for a Thin Element
- •Endnotes
- •6.1. Surface Contribution Formulas
- •6.1.1 The Three Cases of Zero Aberration at a Surface
- •6.1.2 An Aplanatic Single Element
- •6.1.3 Effect of Object Distance on the Spherical Aberration Arising at a Surface
- •6.1.4 Effect of Lens Bending
- •6.1.6 A Two-Lens Minimum Aberration System
- •6.1.7 A Four-Lens Monochromat Objective
- •6.2. Zonal Spherical Aberration
- •6.3. Primary Spherical Aberration
- •6.3.1 At a Single Surface
- •6.3.2 Primary Spherical Aberration of a Thin Lens
- •6.4. The Image Displacement Caused by a Planoparallel Plate
- •6.5. Spherical Aberration Tolerances
- •6.5.1 Primary Aberration
- •6.5.2 Zonal Aberration
- •Endnotes
- •7.1. The Four-Ray Method
- •7.2. A Thin-Lens Predesign
- •7.2.1 Insertion of Thickness
- •7.2.2 Flint-in-Front Solutions
- •7.3. Correction of Zonal Spherical Aberration
- •7.4. Design Of an Apochromatic Objective
- •7.4.1 A Cemented Doublet
- •7.4.2 A Triplet Apochromat
- •7.4.3 Apochromatic Objective with an Air Lens
- •Endnotes
- •8.1. Passage of an Oblique Beam through a Spherical Surface
- •8.1.1 Coma and Astigmatism
- •8.1.2 Principal Ray, Stops, and Pupils
- •8.1.3 Vignetting
- •8.2. Tracing Oblique Meridional Rays
- •8.2.1 The Meridional Ray Plot
- •8.3. Tracing a Skew Ray
- •8.3.1 Transfer Formulas
- •8.3.2 The Angles of Incidence
- •8.3.3 Refraction Equations
- •8.3.4 Transfer to the Next Surface
- •8.3.5 Opening Equations
- •8.3.6 Closing Equations
- •8.3.7 Diapoint Location
- •8.3.8 Example of a Skew-Ray Trace
- •8.4. Graphical Representation of Skew-Ray Aberrations
- •8.4.1 The Sagittal Ray Plot
- •8.4.2 A Spot Diagram
- •8.4.3 Encircled Energy Plot
- •8.4.4 Modulation Transfer Function
- •8.5. Ray Distribution from a Single Zone of a Lens
- •Endnotes
- •9.1. The Optical Sine Theorem
- •9.2. The Abbe Sine Condition
- •9.2.1 Coma for the Three Cases of Zero Spherical Aberration
- •9.3. Offense Against the Sine Condition
- •9.3.1 Solution for Stop Position for a Given OSC
- •9.3.2 Surface Contribution to the OSC
- •9.3.3 Orders of Coma
- •9.3.4 The Coma G Sum
- •9.3.5 Spherical Aberration and OSC
- •9.4. Illustration of Comatic Error
- •Endnotes
- •10.1. Broken-Contact Type
- •10.2. Parallel Air-Space Type
- •10.3. An Aplanatic Cemented Doublet
- •10.4. A Triple Cemented Aplanat
- •10.5. An Aplanat with A Buried Achromatizing Surface
- •10.6. The Matching Principle
- •Endnotes
- •11.1. Astigmatism and the Coddington Equations
- •11.1.1 The Tangential Image
- •11.1.2 The Sagittal Image
- •11.1.3 Astigmatic Calculation
- •11.1.5 Astigmatism for the Three Cases of Zero Spherical Aberration
- •11.1.6 Astigmatism at a Tilted Surface
- •11.2. The Petzval Theorem
- •11.2.1 Relation Between the Petzval Sum and Astigmatism
- •11.2.2 Methods for Reducing the Petzval Sum
- •11.3. Illustration of Astigmatic Error
- •11.4. Distortion
- •11.4.1 Measuring Distortion
- •11.4.2 Distortion Contribution Formulas
- •11.4.3 Distortion When the Image Surface Is Curved
- •11.5. Lateral Color
- •11.5.1 Primary Lateral Color
- •11.6. The Symmetrical Principle
- •11.7. Computation of the Seidel Aberrations
- •11.7.1 Surface Contributions
- •11.7.2 Thin-Lens Contributions
- •11.7.3 Aspheric Surface Corrections
- •11.7.4 A Thin Lens in the Plane of an Image
- •Endnotes
- •12.1.1 Distortion
- •12.1.2 Tangential Field Curvature
- •12.1.3 Coma
- •12.1.4 Spherical Aberration
- •12.2. Simple Landscape Lenses
- •12.2.1 Simple Rear Landscape Lenses
- •12.2.2 A Simple Front Landscape Lens
- •12.3. A Periscopic Lens
- •12.4. Achromatic Landscape Lenses
- •12.4.1 The Chevalier Type
- •12.4.2 The Grubb Type
- •12.5. Achromatic Double Lenses
- •12.5.1 The Rapid Rectilinear
- •12.5.3 Long Telescopic Relay Lenses
- •12.5.4 The Ross “Concentric” Lens
- •Endnotes
- •13.1. The Design of a Dagor Lens
- •13.2. The Design of an Air-Spaced Dialyte Lens
- •13.4. Double-Gauss Lens with Cemented Triplets
- •13.5. Double-Gauss Lens with Air-spaced Negative Doublets
- •Endnotes
- •14.1. The Petzval Portrait Lens
- •14.1.1 The Petzval Design
- •14.1.2 The Dallmeyer Design
- •14.2. The Design of a Telephoto Lens
- •14.3. Lenses to Change Magnification
- •14.3.1 Barlow Lens
- •14.3.2 Bravais Lens
- •14.4. The Protar Lens
- •14.5. Design of a Tessar Lens
- •14.5.1 Choice of Glass
- •14.5.2 Available Degrees of Freedom
- •14.5.3 Chromatic Correction
- •14.5.4 Spherical Correction
- •14.5.5 Correction of Coma and Field
- •14.5.6 Final Steps
- •14.6. The Cooke Triplet Lens
- •14.6.2 The Thin-Lens Predesign of the Bendings
- •14.6.3 Calculation of Real Aberrations
- •14.6.4 Triplet Lens Improvements
- •Endnotes
- •15.1. Comparison of Mirrors and Lenses
- •15.2. Ray Tracing a Mirror System
- •15.3. Single-Mirror Systems
- •15.3.1 A Spherical Mirror
- •15.3.2 A Parabolic Mirror
- •15.3.3 An Elliptical Mirror
- •15.3.4 A Hyperbolic Mirror
- •15.4. Single-Mirror Catadioptric Systems
- •15.4.1 A Flat-Field Ross Corrector
- •15.4.2 An Aplanatic Parabola Corrector
- •15.4.3 The Mangin Mirror
- •15.4.4 The Bouwers–Maksutov System
- •15.4.5 The Gabor Lens
- •15.4.6 The Schmidt Camera
- •15.4.7 Variable Focal-Range Infrared Telescope
- •15.4.8 Broad-Spectrum Afocal Catadioptric Telescope
- •15.4.9 Self-Corrected Unit-Magnification Systems
- •15.5. Two-Mirror Systems
- •15.5.1 Two-Mirror Systems with Aspheric Surfaces
- •15.5.2 A Maksutov Cassegrain System
- •15.5.3 A Schwarzschild Microscope Objective
- •15.5.4 Three-Mirror System
- •15.6. Multiple-Mirror Zoom Systems
- •15.6.2 All-Reflective Zoom Optical Systems
- •15.7. Summary
- •Endnotes
- •16.1. Design of a Military-Type Eyepiece
- •16.1.1 The Objective Lens
- •16.1.2 Eyepiece Layout
- •16.2. Design of an Erfle Eyepiece
- •16.3. Design of a Galilean Viewfinder
- •Endnotes
- •17.1. Finding a Lens Design Solution
- •17.1.1 The Case of as Many Aberrations as There Are Degrees of Freedom
- •17.1.2 The Case of More Aberrations Than Free Variables
- •17.1.3 What Is an Aberration?
- •17.1.4 Solution of the Equations
- •17.2. Optimization Principles
- •17.3. Weights and Balancing Aberrations
- •17.4. Control of Boundary Conditions
- •17.5. Tolerances
- •17.6. Program Limitations
- •17.7. Lens Design Computing Development
- •17.8. Programs and Books Useful for Automatic Lens Design
- •17.8.1 Automatic Lens Design Programs
- •17.8.2 Lens Design Books
- •Endnotes
- •Index
14.6 The Cooke Triplet Lens |
419 |
|
|
H′ |
S |
|
|
|
3.10 |
Principal ray |
V |
|
|
|
|
|
Upper |
3.08 |
V |
rim |
|
||
3.06 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.04 |
|
|
|
Lower rim |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||
3.02 |
|
|
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y at stop |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
–1.0 |
–0.8 –0.6 –0.4 –0.2 |
0 |
0.2 |
0.4 |
0.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
0.8 1.0 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Figure 14.27 Meridional ray plot for Tessar system with c6 |
¼ |
0.325 (17 ). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
14.6 THE COOKE TRIPLET LENS
The English designer H. Dennis Taylor was led to this design15 in 1893 by the simple consideration that if an objective was to consist of a positive lens and a negative lens of equal power and the same refractive index, the Petzval sum would be zero, and the system could be given any desired power by a suitable separation between the lenses. However, he quickly realized that the extreme asymmetry of this arrangement would lead to an intolerable amount of lateral color and distortion, and so he split the positive element into two and mounted the negative element between them, thus making his famous triplet objective (Figure 14.28). He also tried the alternative arrangement of dividing the negative element into two with the positive lens between, but this is much less favorable than the classic arrangement.
Marginal
Principal
Figure 14.28 The Cooke triplet lens.
420 |
Unsymmetrical Photographic Objectives |
The triplet objective is tricky to design because a change in any surface affects every aberration, and the design would be impossibly difficult without a preliminary thin-lens predesign using Seidel aberrations. We assign definite required residuals for each primary aberration, and then by ray tracing determine the actual aberrations of the completed thick-lens system. If any aberration is excessive, we adopt a different value for that primary aberration and repeat the entire predesign. The thin-lens residuals used in the following example are the result of experience with prior designs that result in the final thick system being satisfactory. Of course, in making a design differing from this in any important respect such as aperture, field, or glass selection, we would require a different set of Seidel aberration residuals, which would have to be found by trial.
14.6.1The Thin-Lens Predesign of the Powers and Separations
If we place the stop at the negative thin element inside the system, we can solve for the powers and separations of the three elements to yield specified values of the overall focal length and primary chromatic aberration, primary lateral color, Petzval sum, and one other condition that will eventually be used for distortion control. This last requirement might be the ratio of the two separations, the ratio of the powers of the outside elements, the ratio of the power of the combination of elements a and b to the power of the system, or some other similar criterion. We thus have five variables (three powers and two separations) with which to solve five conditions, after which we shall have three bendings to correct for the three remaining aberrations: spherical, coma, and astigmatism. Without this convenient division of the aberrations into two groups, those depending only on powers and separations and those depending also on bendings, the entire design process would be hopelessly complicated and almost impossible to accomplish.
The first part of the thin-lens predesign can be performed in several ways, the one employed here having been introduced by K. Schwarzschild around 1904. It uses the formulas for the contributions of a thin element to power, chromatic aberration, and Petzval sum, given in Section 11.7.2. These contributions may be written for each aberration in turn, as follows:
ðyaÞfa þ ðybÞfb þ ðycÞfc ¼ ðu00 uaÞ ¼ yaF |
if ua ¼ 0 |
ðpowerÞ |
||||||||
ð |
y2 |
=V |
aÞfa þ ð |
y2=V |
y2=V |
L0 |
u02 |
chromatic |
Þ |
|
a |
|
b |
bÞfb þ ð c |
cÞfc ¼ ch 0 |
ð |
|
||||
|
|
ð1=naÞfa þ ð1=nbÞfb þ ð1=ncÞfc ¼ Ptz |
ðPetzvalÞ |
|
|
|||||
These three equations are linear in the three lens powers, and they can be easily solved for the powers once we know the three axial-ray heights ya, yb, and yc. The first of these, ya, is known when the focal length and f-number
14.6 The Cooke Triplet Lens |
421 |
are known, but yb and yc must be found by trial to satisfy the remaining two conditions, namely, the correction of lateral color and the ratio of the two separations S1/S2 ¼ K. Reasonable starting values of the other ray heights are yb ¼ 0.8ya and yc ¼ 0.9ya .
As an example, we will proceed to design an objective of focal length 10.0 and aperture f/4.5 covering a field of 20 . We shall assume that K ¼ 1, and use the following types of glass:
ða; cÞ SK-16; nD ¼ 1:62031; nF nC ¼ 0:01029; V ¼ 60:28
ðbÞ F-4; nD ¼ 1:61644; nF nC ¼ 0:01684; V ¼ 36:61
In our predesign we shall aim at the following set of thin-lens residuals, hoping that these will give a well-corrected system after suitable thicknesses have been inserted:
f 0 ¼ 10 |
Petzval sum ¼ 0.035 |
ya ¼ 1.111111 |
chromatic aberration ¼ –0.02 |
ua ¼ 0 |
lateral color ¼ 0 |
u00 ¼ 0.111111 |
spherical aberration ¼ –0.08 |
upr,a ¼ –0.364(tan 20 ) |
comas0 ¼ þ0.0025 |
K ¼ S1/S2 ¼ 1.0 |
asts0 ¼ –0.09 |
with ya ¼ 1.111111, yb ¼ 0.888888, and yc ¼ 0.999999. Solving the three Schwarzschild equations for the three powers gives
fa ¼ 0:192227; fb ¼ 0:291104; fc ¼ 0:156285
The paraxial ray and the paraxial principal ray passing through the middle of the negative lens have the values shown in Table 14.17. Inspection of this table shows that, for the paraxial ray,
ua ¼ 0, ub ¼ ua þ yafa, uc ¼ ub þ ybfb |
|
|
||||
S1 ¼ (ya – yb)/ub, |
S2 ¼ (yb – yc)/uc |
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
Table 14.17 |
|
|
|
|
|
Paraxial Ray Traces for Cooke Triplet Predesign |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
f |
|
fa |
fb |
fc |
|
|
d |
|
S1 |
|
S2 |
|
|
|
|
Paraxial ray |
|
|
|
|
y |
|
ya |
yb |
yc |
|
|
u |
ua |
ub |
|
uc |
u00 |
|
|
|
Paraxial principal ray |
|
|
|
|
ypr |
|
ypra |
yprb ¼ 0 |
yprc |
|
|
upr |
upra |
uprb |
|
uprb |
|
422 |
Unsymmetrical Photographic Objectives |
Substituting the numerical values of our example gives |
|
ua ¼ 0, ub ¼ 0.2135856, |
uc ¼ –0.0451736 |
S1 ¼ 1.040436, S2 ¼ 2.459647
where K ¼ S1/S2 ¼ 0.423002. Now it is found that K varies almost linearly with yb, and a couple of trials tells us that @K/@yb ¼ –46.0. Thus retaining the previous ya ¼ 1.111111 and yc ¼ 0.999999, we find that with yb ¼ 0.876380 we have
fa ¼ 0.153234, ub ¼ 0.1702602, S1 ¼ 1.378661,
fb |
¼ –0.296588, |
fc ¼ 0.200775 |
uc |
¼ –0.0896636 |
K ¼ 0.999965 |
S2 |
¼ 1.378709, |
This is virtually perfect, so we return to the thin-lens ray-trace table and we see that for the paraxial principal ray
S1upra
ypra ¼ 1 S1fa ¼ 0:636244
yprb ¼ 0; yprc¼ ypra=K¼ þ0:636266
We can now determine the contribution of each element to the lateral color by the relation
TchC ¼ yyprf=Vu00
where
TchCa ¼ 0:0161736; TchCb ¼ 0; TchCc ¼ 0:0190729
with the total lateral color ¼ –0.002899. To correct this, we must change yc and repeat the whole process.
Omitting all the intermediate steps, we come to the final solution:
ya |
¼ 1.111111, |
yb ¼ 0.861555, |
yc ¼ 0.962510 |
|
fa ¼ 0.1684127, |
fb ¼ –0.3050578, |
fc ¼ 0.1940862 |
||
ub ¼ 0.1871252, |
uc ¼ –0.0756989 |
K ¼ 0.999995 |
||
S1 |
¼ 1.333632, |
S2 ¼ 1.333639, |
||
With upra ¼ 0:364, we find |
|
|
||
|
ypra ¼ 0:6260542; yprb ¼ 0; |
yprc ¼ 0:6260573 |
||
where |
|
|
|
|
|
TchCa ¼ 0:0174910; TchCb ¼ 0; |
TchCc ¼ 0:0174616 |
||
Hence the thin-lens lateral color is þ0.0000294, which is acceptable.
