Talk:Spherical aberration

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Spherical aberration is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.

I thought this subject needed a short, concise article instead of being redirected to the complex article on aberration in general. If someone is really strongly against this then go ahead and change it back. Rsduhamel 03:12, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No, that's a fine idea. As much as I like the old Britannica article, I nevertheless agree with the idea of splitting the important named effects into small articles. In the end, but this would need a tough amount of work, all the elementary treament of aberrations should be separate articles, and the Aberration in optical systems would be reduced to (still lengthy)
  • Definition and overview
  • History
  • Integreated mathematical treatment (eiconal)
Pjacobi 11:23, 2005 Feb 23 (UTC)

The page really needs a simple line drawing of light rays being focused at different distances depending on their radial positions. Mglg 20:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

There are some simple pictures of spherical aberration here: http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/sciences/physics/Optics/Optical/Lens/Lens.htm Probably the best I have found on the web so far.

[edit] "Short focal ratio" versus "small f-number"

For me at least, the article would be easier to understand if the term "short focal ratio" were replaced with "small f-number." Clicking on the "focal ratio" hyperlink takes the reader to f-number after all. I guess different parts of the optics community use different jargon. Other than this quibble, I think the article is excellent. Alison Chaiken 18:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Interference?

The various pictures of point-spread functions appear to show interference patterns, which could confuse people expecting to see the kind of bokeh you see in photography rather than what you find in microscopy. Could someone more familiar with the details add that? —Ben FrantzDale 00:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regularity of rings

I expected the rings to be evenly-spaced and fading toward the edges according to Fraunhofer diffraction, yet the beautiful illustrations show brighter rings at the outside and decreasing frequency. What's up with that? 155.212.242.34 (talk) 21:28, 20 November 2007 (UTC)