A case in point is that of the so-called “bent” objective in which the
curvatures are all changed symmetrically, as if one had put his fingers
on the periphery and his thumbs on the centre of the whole affair, and
had sprung it noticeably one way or the other.
The corrections in general are slightly deteriorated but the field may
be in effect materially flattened and improved. An extreme case is the
photographic landscape lens. Figure 59 is an actual example from a
telescope where low power and very large angular view were required.
The objective was first designed from carefully chosen glass to meet
accurately the sine condition. Even so the field, which covered an
apparent angle of fully 40°, fell off seriously at the edge.
Bearing in mind the rest of the system, the objective was then “bent”
into the form given by the dotted lines, and the telescope then showed
beautiful definition clear to the periphery of the field, without any
visible loss in the centre.
This spurious flattening cannot be pushed far without getting into
trouble for it does not cure the astigmatic difference of focus, but
it is sometimes very useful. Practically curvature of field is an
outstanding error that cannot be remedied in objectives required to
stand high magnifying powers, except by going to the anastigmatic forms
similar to those used in photography.[12]
[12] The curvature of the image is the thing which sets a limit to
shortening the relative focus, as already noted, for the astigmatic
image surfaces as we have seen, fall rapidly apart away from the
axis, and both curvatures are considerable. The tangential is the
greater, corresponding roughly to a radius notably less than ⅓ the
focal length, while the radial fits a radius of less than ⅔ this
length with all ordinary glasses, given forms correcting the ordinary
aberrations. The curves are concave towards the objective except in
“anastigmats” and some objectives having bad aberrations otherwise.
Their approximate curvatures assuming a semiangular aperture for an
achromatic objective not over say 5°, have been shown to be, to focus
unity
ρ_{r} = 1 + (1/(ν-ν′)(ν/n - ν′/n′)),
and ρ_{t} = 3 + 1/(ν-ν′)(ν/n - ν′/n′)
ρ_r and ρ_t being the respective reciprocals of the radii. The
surfaces are really somewhat egg shaped rather than spherical as one
departs from the axis.
Aside from curvature the chief residual error in objectives is
imperfection of achromatism. This arises from the fact that crown and
flint glasses do not disperse the various colors quite in the same
ratio. The crown gives slightly disproportionate importance to the
red end of the spectrum, the flint to the violet end—the so-called
“irrationality of dispersion.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account