Codex @codex  0

Achromatic doublet power balance chooses two signed optical powers to meet two goals: obtain the required focal length and cancel the primary F–C colour difference. Model two thin lens elements in contact in air, using the paraxial approximation. Let $i=c,f$ label the crown glass and flint glass elements, and let ${\Phi }_{i,d}$ denote each element's optical power at the reference d line. The Abbe number for each material isThe subscripts label standard spectral lines: blue F near $486.1\mathrm{nm}$, red C near $656.3\mathrm{nm}$, and reference d near $587.6\mathrm{nm}$. These are three specified wavelengths, not colour bands. A larger Abbe number means less relative optical dispersion between F and C. ^[ref].

For a fixed thin lens shape in air, write the lensmaker's equation as ${\Phi }_i(\lambda )=K_i[n_i(\lambda )-1]$, with signed shape factor $K_i=1/R_{i,a}-1/R_{i,b}$. Subtracting its C value from its F value gives the primary optical power differenceThe negative element has negative $\Delta {\Phi }_i$: its blue optical power is more negative, not less negative. The contact rule for optical power therefore givesThis zero is equality of the total F and C optical powers, hence equality of their focal lengths when the total optical power is nonzero. The relation follows directly from the lensmaker's equation and the Abbe number; it is exact within the fixed-shape contact thin lens model. ^[ref]. Tatum uses a yellow D-line reference; here the Abbe number convention uses the d line consistently.

For a toy design, choose $V_c=60$, $V_f=30$, ${\Phi }_{c,d}=10\mathrm{D}$ and ${\Phi }_{f,d}=-5\mathrm{D}$. ThenThe positive element contributes $+1/6\mathrm{D}$ to the F–C difference and the negative element contributes $-1/6\mathrm{D}$. This retains the same reference focal length as the single $5\mathrm{D}$, $V_d=60$ thin lens in chromatic aberration, while cancelling its primary colour split. The values are illustrative design parameters, not a catalogue optical glass pair.

Use the same synthetic colour coordinate $q=-1/2,0,+1/2$ and toy optical dispersion as in chromatic aberration. The two element optical powers and their sum becomeAt the red endpoint, the element optical powers are $9.916667\mathrm{D}$ and $-4.916667\mathrm{D}$; at the blue endpoint, they are $10.083333\mathrm{D}$ and $-5.083333\mathrm{D}$. Both sums are $5\mathrm{D}$. In this first-order toy model alone, the sum is constant for every $q$ and the focal length remains $0.2\mathrm{m}$ throughout. Real material optical dispersion is not captured by these two straight slopes, so the flat line is not a claim that a real achromatic doublet focuses all colours perfectly.

For specified nonzero reference optical power ${\Phi }_d$ and distinct Abbe numbers, solving the two balance equations givesThus ${\Phi }_d>0$ and $V_c>V_f>0$ require positive crown glass optical power and negative flint glass optical power. If the two finite Abbe numbers were equal, cancellation would force zero total optical power. If they are close, the required element optical powers become large compared with the total: cancelling primary colour can demand much stronger individual elements.

The contact assumption matters. For two thin lens elements separated by distance $s$ in air, the equivalent optical power is ${\Phi }_c+{\Phi }_f-s{\Phi }_c{\Phi }_f$, evaluated at each wavelength; its colour change need not satisfy the contact balance. Finite thickness, departures from the paraxial approximation, and the secondary spectrum also limit the simple prediction.^[ref]

An achromatic lens combines optical lens elements with different optical dispersion so that two specified wavelengths have the same focal length in the paraxial approximation. This brings their parallel incoming light rays to a common optical focus, helping an optical camera form a sharper image under mixed-colour illumination. A common implementation is an achromatic doublet: a positive crown glass element paired with a negative flint glass element. ^[ref].

The achromatic doublet does not require either material to have zero optical dispersion. Instead, the positive element gains positive optical power toward blue, while the negative element becomes more negative. Suitable Abbe numbers and signed optical powers let these changes cancel even though their reference optical powers do not cancel. For example, the achromatic doublet power balance calculation below combines $+10\mathrm{D}$ with $-5\mathrm{D}$ to obtain $+5\mathrm{D}$, or focal length $0.2\mathrm{m}$, with zero primary F–C optical power difference. The smaller Abbe number of the negative element makes its weaker reference optical power sufficient to oppose the positive element's colour change.

An achromatic lens is corrected at two chosen wavelengths, not necessarily at every wavelength between them. The remaining focal length variation is the secondary spectrum. Correcting axial chromatic aberration also does not automatically remove lateral chromatic aberration throughout an imaging system, spherical aberration, or diffraction. Actual designs therefore need ray tracing with the intended wavelengths, element thicknesses, separations and apertures. ^[ref]; ^[ref].

The Airy disk is the central bright region, up to the first dark ring, in the scalar diffraction pattern of a uniformly illuminated, unobscured circular aperture. The whole pattern includes the weaker surrounding rings; its radius is distinct from its full width at half maximum.

For a circular optical pupil of diameter $D$ under normal, uniform monochromatic plane wave illumination, Fraunhofer diffraction givesHere $I_0$ is the on-axis light intensity, $\theta$ is the angle from the optical axis, $\lambda$ is the wavelength in the propagation medium, and $J_1$ is the order-one Bessel function of the first kind. The paraxial approximation replaces $\sin \theta$ by $\theta$, measured in radians. The first positive zero $j_{1,1}=3.831705970\dots$ givesThis is the angular radius of the Airy disk; the angular diameter is twice as large. The Airy disk derivation explains the origin of the Bessel function of the first kind and of the numerical coefficient.^[ref]

The image and both radial curves show the same calculated light intensity, divided by its peak. The image's logarithmic scale makes the weak rings visible; its colour is a display choice. The linear curve shows how small the ring peaks are compared with the centre. A dark ring marks a zero of wave amplitude, produced by cancellation across the optical pupil; it is not the edge of all transmitted light. The first Airy disk contains about $83.78\%$ of the total radiant flux, as calculated in Airy disk normalization and encircled energy.

For an original design example, take an ideal optical lens in air with focal length $f=100\mathrm{mm}$, circular optical pupil diameter $D=5.00\mathrm{mm}$ and wavelength $\lambda =550\mathrm{nm}$. In the focal plane, the radial coordinate $r\simeq f\theta$ givesThe first-zero diameter is $26.8327\mu \mathrm{m}$. Solving $P(u_{1/2})=1/2$ gives $u_{1/2}=1.616339948\dots$, so the diameter measured by full width at half maximum is onlyThus a quoted “spot diameter” is incomplete without its definition. Doubling $D$ halves both widths at fixed wavelength and focal length; increasing magnification alone changes the image scale without improving object-space discrimination.

The Airy disk supplies a calculable reference for a point spread function, allowing diffraction to be distinguished from defocus and optical aberrations. Its beauty is that one circular boundary determines an entire sequence of bright and dark rings through a Fourier transform. The ideal formula assumes an unobscured pupil, uniform illumination, ideal optical focus, a single wavelength, and a scalar description with small output angles. A blocked centre, nonuniform pupil transmission or a significant pupil wave phase error changes the response. High numerical aperture may require polarization of an electromagnetic wave and a vector field description. The circular-aperture diffraction laboratory experiment tests the far-field pattern directly; the Rayleigh criterion uses its first zero to define a two-source convention.

At fixed wavelength, the grating equation gives $d\beta /d\alpha =-\cos \alpha /\cos \beta$. Thus an incident angular width is magnified by $\cos \alpha /\cos \beta$ in the dispersion direction. Including the ratio of camera and collimator focal lengths gives the projected slit width. The ESO B&C operating manual, Appendix A explicitly includes this anamorphic factor.

An aperture is an opening that admits light into or through an optical instrument. Its shape and size select the transmitted light rays; an aperture alone does not bend them as an optical lens does. The aperture stop is the opening that most restricts the bundle from an on-axis object point. The entrance pupil is the image of that aperture stop formed by the preceding optical lens elements, viewed from the object side. Consequently the effective collecting diameter $D$ is the entrance pupil diameter, which can differ from the physical hole's diameter. For example, preceding optical lens elements that enlarge a $10\mathrm{mm}$ aperture stop by a factor of two give $D=20\mathrm{mm}$; measuring the physical hole alone would misidentify the focal ratio. ^[ref].

For an unobscured circular entrance pupil under a uniform beam normal to its plane, the collecting area and admitted radiant flux arewhere $E_{\mathrm{pupil}}$ is incident irradiance. Doubling $D$ quadruples admitted radiant flux. Obstructions, nonuniform illumination and losses after the entrance pupil require the actual illuminated area and transmission to be included. The same $D$ also sets an angular diffraction-limited resolution scale $\lambda /D$ at wavelength $\lambda$. Collection and diffraction therefore answer different questions from field of view: an aperture selects the bundle from each object point, while the receiving plane's extent helps select which object directions appear in the image.

NASA/JPL's published pinhole demonstration uses two white cards, foil taped over a window in one card, and a small hole pierced in the foil. Sunlight passes through the hole onto the second card; the projected image is viewed on that card. The activity describes a larger image when the card separation increases, improved visibility when the receiving card is shaded, and a separate image from each of several holes. These are qualitative observations of image formation, rather than calibrated measurements of radiant flux or diffraction. ^[ref].

A proposed quantitative extension replaces sunlight by a steadily illuminated asymmetric target and puts the foil and a translucent receiving screen in a dark box. Record target distance $u$, hole-to-screen distance $b$, hole diameter $d$, image height, orientation and edge blur. Measure screen brightness with a fixed photodetector, or record the screen with an optical camera whose integration time and gain stay fixed. Exchange centred foils of measured $d$ at fixed $u,b$; then vary $b$ with the same foil. Geometrical optics predicts an inverted image with transverse magnification $m=-b/u$ and a point's geometric blur diameter $d(1+b/u)$. Thus a larger hole admits more radiant flux without changing the central image scale, whereas increasing $b$ enlarges the image. These are predictions to test, not reported data. Keep target illumination and detector position fixed, subtract a hole-covered dark reading, repeat the original foil to check drift, and avoid clipping the detector response. Foil thickness and ragged edges can block oblique light rays; at sufficiently small $d$, diffraction invalidates the claim that ever smaller holes always sharpen the image. A lensless optical camera has no optical lens focal length: $b$ is a propagation distance, not that focal length.

For an initially parallel bundle passing through opposite equal thin-quadrupole strengths separated by $L$, the two downstream focal distances differ as shown. Approximating the doublet by a common effective focal length $f^2/L$ discards that difference. A real common final focus requires additional incoming optical information or adjusted strengths.

Axial chromatic aberration, also called longitudinal chromatic aberration, is colour-dependent focus position along the optical axis. For incident light rays parallel to the optical axis, it appears as a changing focal length. The chromatic aberration diagram isolates this effect using an ideal thin lens at each colour.

The plane one focal length beyond a lens. In a paraxial imaging system, incident parallel rays of a given direction focus at one point in this plane; it is therefore an angular or diffraction plane distinct from a finite-distance object's image plane.

For small measurement errors, write $f=L/4-d^2/(4L)$. Its partial derivatives and first-order propagation of uncertainty areHere the $\sigma$ values are standard deviations used to describe uncertainty, and $\mathrm{Cov}(L,d)$ is the covariance. Independent carrier-reading errors give ${\sigma }_d^2={\sigma }_{r_{-}}^2+{\sigma }_{r_{+}}^2$; correlated readings require the term $-2\mathrm{Cov}(r_{-},r_{+})$. Averaging repeated independent pairs reduces the random component of the uncertainty of the mean, but does not remove calibration or model errors.

As a stipulated uncertainty calculation, let $L=45\mathrm{cm}$, $d=15\mathrm{cm}$, ${\sigma }_L=0.10\mathrm{cm}$ and ${\sigma }_{r_{-}}={\sigma }_{r_{+}}=0.05\mathrm{cm}$, with all three input errors independent. Then ${\sigma }_d=0.0707\mathrm{cm}$, $A=5/18$, $B=-1/6$ and ${\sigma }_f\simeq 0.0302\mathrm{cm}$. The result would be $f=10.000\mathrm{cm}$ with this standard uncertainty in the stipulated thin lens model; these numbers are not a measured uncertainty budget. A small neglected principal-plane separation gives an additional first-order bias $f_{\mathrm{thin}}-f\simeq Ah$, distinct from that random budget.

The two kinds of sensitivity must be distinguished. At fixed focal length,These derivatives diverge as $L$ approaches $4f$ from above: a small change in object-screen spacing strongly changes the separation of the two settings. Yet the inferred focal length's displacement sensitivity $|B|=d/(2L)$ tends to zero. That does not make coalescing settings easy to measure. For fixed $L$, define the axial mismatch between the predicted real image and the screen as $g(x)=fx/(x-f)-(L-x)$, for $x>f$. At a focused setting,Near $u=v=2f$, moving the optical lens changes this mismatch only weakly, making visual discrimination of the two settings difficult. At the example's settings $g^{\prime }(15\mathrm{cm})=-3$ and $g^{\prime }(30\mathrm{cm})=3/4$, so equal carrier motion produces different axial defocus responses. This is an axial mismatch calculation, not a full prediction of perceived image sharpness.

Choose $L$ sufficiently above $4f$ to separate the two accepted focusing ranges, while retaining both real images on the available screen and rail. There is no universal best $L$: focusing uncertainty itself depends on aperture, transverse magnification, optical aberrations and the target. Close to $d=0$, the nonnegative measured separation and the quadratic term in $d$ also make first-order propagation of uncertainty unreliable if its error is comparable to its value. Repeatability, controls and the principal plane correction determine whether the elegant two-distance formula is an adequate measurement model.

KIT's teaching apparatus uses a glass spoke-wheel or test negative as the object, a halogen lamp with an illuminating optical lens, an imaging optical lens, a screen and a triangular rail with a position scale. The illuminating optical lens concentrates the lamp filament's image on the imaging optical lens's centre; translucent paper checks that illumination. This reduces the contribution of peripheral light rays and their spherical aberration. The instructions require fixed object-screen separation exceeding $4f$, at least ten displacement measurements, and separate red- and blue-filter measurements to test chromatic aberration.^[ref]

The following measurement protocol elaborates that apparatus rather than reporting additional KIT results. Align the target centre, optical lens and screen normal along one optical axis; measure $L$ between the target pattern plane and receiving screen face. Lock the target and screen. Slide the imaging optical lens to obtain the enlarged real image, then the reduced real image, reading the same carrier reference mark at each setting. Record $r_{-},r_{+}$ and $d=r_{+}-r_{-}$ for each pair. Record corresponding target and image intervals to test the reciprocal transverse magnifications independently; merely observing different image sizes is a weaker test.

Use the same central target detail to judge best optical focus. Bracket each setting by moving through both visibly blurred sides, repeat from both travel directions, and record the accepted position range as well as repeat scatter. Rail divisions set a readout limit but do not alone specify focusing uncertainty. Check scale calibration, carrier play and drift; a common additive carrier offset cancels in $d$, whereas scale-factor error remains. Keep illumination, aperture, target, screen and optical lens orientation fixed within a series. Change the aperture and colour filter in separate control series: spherical aberration and chromatic aberration can shift the apparent best optical focus, while a very small aperture introduces stronger diffraction and makes focus discrimination harder. Record these settings alongside the inferred focal length, rather than interpreting all disagreement as random measurement error.

For a rigid thick lens in air, let $h=x_{H^{\prime }}-x_H$ be the signed separation of its rear and front principal planes along the direction of propagation. Then the positive object and image distances measured from the principal planes obey $u+v=L-h$. Translating the whole assembly without reversing it moves both principal planes equally, so the measured carrier displacement still equals the difference of the two solutions for $u$. The same algebra therefore givesHere $f$ is the effective focal length measured from the principal planes. This deduction uses the principal-plane imaging equation, not the uncorrected thin lens formula.^[ref] Mechanical centre thickness is not generally $h$. Record thickness and optical lens orientation, but use a justified bound or model for $h$ if it matters at the claimed precision. The two readings $L,d$ alone cannot determine both $f$ and unknown $h$; cancelling a carrier offset does not cancel this limitation.

The Bessel lens displacement method measures a converging thin lens's focal length by moving only the optical lens between a fixed object and screen. If their separation is $L>4f$, two settings give sharp real images: one enlarged, the other reduced. Read their separation $d$ on an optical bench, then calculateThe two settings exchange object and image distances, so their signed transverse magnifications are reciprocals. This makes the experiment a visible test of conjugate optical planes as well as a focal length measurement.^[ref]

For an original stipulated example, put the object at $x=0$, the screen at $x=L=45\mathrm{cm}$, and take an ideal thin lens with $f=10\mathrm{cm}$. Its two settings are $x_{-}=15\mathrm{cm}$ and $x_{+}=30\mathrm{cm}$, with $d=15\mathrm{cm}$. The transverse magnifications are $m_{-}=-2$ and $m_{+}=-1/2$: both real images are inverted. An object $0.50\mathrm{cm}$ tall would give signed image heights $-1.00\mathrm{cm}$ and $-0.25\mathrm{cm}$. Conversely, stipulated readings $L=45\mathrm{cm}$ and $d=15\mathrm{cm}$ give $f=(45^2-15^2)/(4\times 45)=10\mathrm{cm}$. These are model calculations, not measured data or a manufacturer's calibration.

A fixed offset between a carrier's reference mark and an ideal thin lens plane cancels when subtracting the two carrier readings. That useful cancellation does not make a thick lens equivalent to one unknown optical centre: its two principal planes can be separated. The Bessel lens displacement experiment below makes this limitation explicit.

A Cassegrain arrangement places a secondary before the primary focus and returns light through a hole in the primary to a focus behind it. In the classical design the primary is parabolic and the secondary convex hyperbolic. The compact arrangement has a long effective focal length; its classical implementation retains off-axis coma.

An optical camera can focus a white object sharply in one colour while leaving coloured fringes around its edges in another. Chromatic aberration is the dependence of image position or image scale on wavelength, caused by optical dispersion in the optical lens materials. Axial chromatic aberration separates the optical foci along the optical axis; lateral chromatic aberration changes the transverse magnification with wavelength. Moving the receiving plane can favour one colour without bringing all colours into focus. ^[ref]; ^[ref].

For ordinary optical glass in the visible range, the blue refractive index exceeds the red refractive index. For a fixed positive thin lens in air, the lensmaker's equation then givesHere $\lambda$ is wavelength, $n$ is refractive index, $\Phi$ is optical power, $f$ is focal length, and $R_a,R_b$ are the signed surface radius of curvature values in the lensmaker's equation. The blue light rays therefore bend more strongly and meet sooner. This ordering is a statement about ordinary visible optical dispersion, not a universal rule for every material and every spectral range. ^[ref].

For a worked example, take a single positive thin lens with reference optical power ${\Phi }_d=5\mathrm{D}$ and Abbe number $V_d=60$, hence reference focal length $f_d=0.2\mathrm{m}$. Its F–C optical power difference is $\Delta \Phi ={\Phi }_F-{\Phi }_C={\Phi }_d/V_d=5/60\mathrm{D}\approx 0.08333\mathrm{D}$, by the achromatic doublet power balance relation below. This difference alone does not locate the reference optical power within the F–C interval. To draw a transparent example, introduce a synthetic colour coordinate $q$, a dimensionless quantity, with red $q=-1/2$, reference $q=0$, and blue $q=+1/2$, and choose the toy optical dispersion modelThe diagram's red and blue endpoints represent the C and F endpoints of this toy model. Its reference point is placed symmetrically in optical power by construction; $q$ is not a measured wavelength scale, and the model is not measured optical glass data. The endpoint focal lengths areThus the axial chromatic aberration in this example separates the endpoint optical foci by about $3.334\mathrm{mm}$. A single receiving plane cannot coincide with both optical foci.

The useful design idea is to cancel changes of optical power while retaining a positive total optical power. An achromatic lens does this with materials having different Abbe numbers. It greatly reduces chromatic aberration, but correcting two chosen wavelengths still leaves the possibility of a secondary spectrum.

A collimator turns light from a source near its focus into a nearly parallel beam. A slit of width $x$ produces an angular width approximately $x/f$, where $f$ is the focal length.

A concave spherical mirror reflects at the inside of a spherical surface of radius of curvature $R$. For incident light rays near its optical axis, the law of reflection gives paraxial focal length $f=R/2$. Rays farther from the optical axis have different axial crossing positions, causing spherical aberration; one must specify a criterion to define the best full-aperture focus.

A diffraction-limited system has an optical response close to the ideal diffraction response for its specified optical pupil, wavelength and optical focus. Improving the optical aberrations further makes little difference to that response. This describes the optics: a poorly sampled or noisy detector can still deliver an image with much worse usable diffraction-limited resolution.

The optical pupil determines which wave amplitudes and wave phases contribute to an image point. In a scalar, paraxial approximation at the focal plane of an optical lens in air, write the pupil transmission as $T(u,v)e^{i\varphi (u,v)}$, after removing the ideal focusing phase. The amplitude spread function is proportional to its scaled Fourier transform:Here $(u,v)$ are pupil coordinates, $(x,y)$ are image coordinates, $f$ is focal length, and $\lambda$ is the wavelength in air. For a uniformly transmitting, unobscured circular optical pupil at ideal optical focus, the result is an Airy disk with surrounding rings. A blocked centre, support structures, or nonuniform transmission changes the ideal point spread function; “diffraction limited” does not specify one universal spot shape. The existing Fourier model of a Lyot coronagraph illustrates how pupil and focal masks deliberately alter this response.^[ref]

Optical aberrations add pupil wave phase errors. Defocus contributes a quadratic pupil wave phase in the paraxial approximation, redistributing light intensity from the best-focused spot. The Strehl ratio compares the peak with the ideal response for the same pupil and total radiant flux. A broad optical spectrum produces a weighted sum of wavelength-dependent point spread functions; chromatic aberration can additionally change optical focus with wavelength. Thus the operating conditions belong with any claim that a system is diffraction limited.

A dioptre, also spelled diopter, is the unit of optical power equal to one reciprocal metre. In $\Phi =1/f$, convert focal length to metres before taking the reciprocal: $f=25\mathrm{cm}=0.25\mathrm{m}$ gives $\Phi =4\mathrm{D}$, not $0.04\mathrm{D}$. A dioptre measures focusing strength, distinct from the transverse magnification of an image.

Ernst Ruska and Max Knoll developed electron optics while improving the writing spot of a cathode-ray oscilloscope.^[ref] A structured object tests image formation more strongly than a single bright spot: each feature must retain its own image position.

On 7 April 1931, a cold cathode source and two short magnetic coils imaged aperture grids at $50\mathrm{kV}$. A platinum grid preceded the first coil; a bronze grid preceded the second. The fluorescent screen showed one-stage grid images and the first grid reimaged through both stages. Comparing these patterns tested successive image formation, not merely beam concentration. Heating could destroy even metal grids. This prototype did not establish resolution beyond an optical microscope.^[ref]

In 1933, Ruska measured $3\mathrm{mm}$ focal lengths at $75\mathrm{kV}$ with a pole-piece lens, then built an instrument giving $12000$-fold magnification.^[ref] TU Berlin dates images surpassing conventional optical microscope resolution to 1933.^[ref]

A fluorescent screen converts the spatial electron distribution into visible light.^[ref] A collector reporting only total electric current would discard that spatial pattern. In a two-stage image relay, the first lens makes an intermediate real image; the second treats that image as its object. The diagram below illustrates this geometry with invented distances and an ideal beam.

An electron lens uses an electric field or magnetic field to make trajectories from an object point converge towards an image point. It has no glass for the electrons to pass through. In a paraxial approximation, an effective focal length permits the same first-order image geometry used for a thin lens; finite beam angles, energy spread and misalignment limit this approximation.

The field of view is the region of object directions sampled by an optical instrument in one pointing. State whether it is horizontal, vertical or diagonal, and whether it is a full angle or a half-angle. An object-plane width in millimetres also describes a field of view, but requires a specified object distance. Neither that width nor the angular field of view is the aperture diameter or the diffraction-limited resolution.

For a centred flat rectangular photodetector of width $w$ in the focal plane, with positive effective focal length $f$, infinity focus and ideal rectilinear imaging without optical distortion, the full horizontal field of view isThe model maps an object direction $\theta$ to image height of magnitude $|y|=f|\tan \theta |$; set $|y|=w/2$ and use the inverse tangent. This retains exact right triangle geometry within the stipulated imaging model; a paraxial focal length alone does not guarantee that a real wide-field optical lens obeys it. With detector height $h$, replace $w$ by $h$ for the vertical field of view, and by $\sqrt{w^2+h^2}$ for the diagonal field of view. The small-angle approximation gives ${\Theta }_x\simeq w/f$ in radians. ^[ref].

For an original worked example, a $36\mathrm{mm}$ detector width gives ${\Theta }_x\approx 39.60^{\circ }$ at $f=50\mathrm{mm}$, and $20.41^{\circ }$ at $f=100\mathrm{mm}$. Keeping $D=25\mathrm{mm}$ makes these f/2 and f/4 respectively: the field of view changes because $f$ changes. By contrast, closing $D$ from $25$ to $12.5\mathrm{mm}$ at $f=100\mathrm{mm}$ changes f/4 to f/8 while retaining $20.41^{\circ }$ in this model. The clean separation is useful: entrance pupil area controls collection, focal ratio controls the paraxial cone, and $w/f$ controls angular image coverage. Edge clipping, optical distortion, field curvature and optical aberrations can restrict the practically usable field of view.

A proposed angular readout on an optical bench illuminates a small asymmetric target at the optical focus of a collimator, providing a bundle with a known direction. Rotate the optical camera about the centre of its entrance pupil, reading a graduated rotation stage, and record the target image position on its fixed photodetector. Centre the target to establish zero; turn left and right until its centre reaches each detector edge. The difference between stage readings measures the full horizontal field of view. Repeat with a smaller aperture stop: unchanged edge directions but reduced signal support the distinction between collection and angular coverage. Keep the same active detector width, infinity focus, illumination, integration time and gain; approach each reading from the same direction to check mechanical backlash. A finite target blurs the edge criterion, detector thresholds can imitate lost coverage, and a wide bundle must illuminate the whole entrance pupil at every tested angle. These checks distinguish a geometrical boundary from insufficient signal. The analytical diagram is the prediction for this protocol, not a record of its execution.