Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around calculating the diffraction-limited resolution for an optical setup involving a DMD (Digital Micromirror Device) and various lenses. Participants explore the implications of numerical aperture (NA), lens configuration, and the relationship between diffraction limits and pixel size.
Discussion Character
- Technical explanation
- Debate/contested
- Mathematical reasoning
Main Points Raised
- One participant proposes that the diffraction-limited resolution can be calculated using the Rayleigh criterion, suggesting a value of approximately 4.6 µm based on the given parameters.
- Another participant argues that the diffraction limitation of the illumination beam is independent of the DMD pixel size, stating that the resolution is defined by the size of the field aperture located between lenses 2 and 3.
- A later reply clarifies that there is no field aperture between lenses 2 and 3, indicating that the diffraction orders of the DMD are recombined using a 4f-setup.
- Further, it is suggested that Lens 2 acts like a microscope observing DMD pixels, with its resolution dependent on its numerical aperture in the object space, and that the absence of an aperture stop could lead to varying resolution across the DMD field.
- Another participant raises the issue of projection angle, suggesting that the projected field is tilted and proposing that illumination could be done at an angle with optics working orthogonally to the DMD.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express differing views on the relationship between diffraction-limited resolution and DMD pixel size, with no consensus reached on the correct interpretation of the optical setup's limitations.
Contextual Notes
Participants note the importance of defining an aperture stop for Lens 2 and the implications of projection angles on the setup's performance. The discussion highlights the complexity of the optical configuration and the potential variability in resolution across the DMD field.
