Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/10/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19961007024100.00722b50@roanoke.infi.net> msmall@roanoke.infi.net writes: > In response to David Morton's lengthy-but-interesting post: > > a) No one has suggested that there was any great secrecy or > exclusivity in > the Leitz' use of residual aberrations for enhanced optical effect as > developed by Berek. In the message to which I was commenting, "Dave" <gannet@cftnet.com> wrote: "Are there Secret Black Forest Optical Formulas? Do they use trial and error to get the results they want?" I was merely answering the question. > Now that Leitz has moved to MTF/OTF > standards, expect their lenses to begin performing a bit more like Zeiss > optics. It is my understanding that Leitz have been using these techniques for nearly 30 years. > c) I doubt if optical scientists spend a lot of time disassembling > their > competitors' products. I have seen it done, and it is very widely practiced. Physically measuring samples of a lens can tell you much about the competition's manufacturing tolerances and, *much* more importantly, the optimisation algorithms used to translate the design overview which one might publish in a technical paper, into a real product capable of mass production. Such algorithms really do represent the 'family silver' of an optical engineering company. Finding the point in the n-dimensional (where N is a jolly large number indeed) number space which represents the best performance *that you can actually make* and make repeatedly, is a phenomenally complex problem. dmorton@cix.compulink.co.uk | "The loss of an old man david@cassandra.compulink.co.uk | is like the destruction Kilburn, London, England. | of a library"