I Tilted plane wave through a 2 lens system

AI Thread Summary
In a two-lens system with focal lengths f1=910mm and f2=40mm, the magnification is calculated as M1=-f2/f1=0.044. When a tilted, collimated beam passes through this system, the output angle is related to the incident angle by the formula θ' = M θ, with a negative sign indicating a direction flip. The distance between the lenses is d=f1+f2, and the beam's diameter is scaled by the same magnification factor. Additionally, diffraction effects and the finite size of the focused spot can influence the output characteristics, particularly in the far field.
Skaiserollz89
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
How does the incident angle of a collimated beam relate to the output angle after passage through a two-lens system with f1=910mm and f2=40mm and Magnification=-f2/f1=.044?
I have 2 lenses. L1 and L2 with focal lengths f1=910mm and f2=40mm, respectively. They are separated by a distance d=f1+f2. The magnification of the system is M1=-f2/f1=.044. If I have a normally incident, collimated beam pass through my system I will have a beam, parallel to the optic axis exit the system, whose diameter is scaled by a factor of M1. I would like to know what happens if the incident beam is tilted at an angle theta? How does this incident angle relate to the output angle after passage through the second lens?

My initial thought was that the angle would also be scaled by a factor of M1, but I don't think this is right. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Science news on Phys.org
Parallel rays incident on the first lens at angle ## \theta ## will converge to a point in the focal plane of the first lens at distance off-axis of ## d= f_1 \theta ##. When they start out in the focal plane of the second lens at a distance ## d ##off axis, they will emerge at angle ## \theta'=d/f_2 ##. The result is that ## \theta'=M \theta ## with a minus sign to show its direction is flipped.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Skaiserollz89 and Gleb1964
Charles Link said:
Parallel rays incident on the first lens at angle ## \theta ## will converge to a point in the focal plane of the first lens at distance off-axis of ## f_1 \theta ##. When they start out in the focal plane of the second lens at a distance ## d ##off axis, they will emerge at angle ## \theta'=d/f_2 ##. The result is that ## \theta'=M \theta ## with a minus sign to show its direction is flipped.
This is for a telescope, of course, where the focal planes are the same.
 
  • Like
Likes Skaiserollz89, sophiecentaur and Charles Link
Skaiserollz89 said:
TL;DR Summary: How does the incident angle of a collimated beam relate to the output angle after passage through a two-lens system with f1=910mm and f2=40mm and Magnification=-f2/f1=.044?

They are separated by a distance d=f1+f2.
DaveE said:
This is for a telescope, of course, where the focal planes are the same.
. . . . and the angular magnification is f1/f2
Skaiserollz89 said:
TL;DR Summary: How does the incident angle of a collimated beam relate to the output angle after passage through a two-lens system with f1=910mm and f2=40mm and Magnification=-f2/f1=.044?

I will have a beam, parallel to the optic axis exit the system, whose diameter is scaled by a factor of M1.
I think the 'diameter' will relate to the the aperture of the lenses. In practice, internal apertures are used.
 
Probably outside of the scope of what the OP presently needs, but the "perfectly collimated" beam is interesting in that the light, even with perfect optics will never focus to a perfect point. Instead there is a diffraction limited focused spot size whose diameter is inversely proportional to the diameter of the collimated beam. The finite sized focused spot then becomes a source for the second lens. In the near field the beam can still be considered to be perfectly collimated, but for calculations in the far field, the beam will have a finite divergence because of the finite spot size.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur and DaveE
Charles Link said:
but for calculations in the far field, the beam will have a finite divergence because of the finite spot size.
There is another factor here which kicks in without diffraction effects. Taking a typical arrangement of two lenses to make a telescope, the eyepiece (second) lens usually has the smaller diameter and any collimated beam, focussed at 'infinity' (parallel sides, visible through smoke), for instance, will have a diameter the same as the EP. This width I not governed by focal lengths but by a limiting 'stop', somewhere in the scope. Details like the actual focussing of the arrangement and the diffraction due to each lens edge.
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
After my surgery this year, gas remained in my eye for a while. The light air bubbles appeared to sink to the bottom, and I realized that the brain was processing the information to invert the up/down/left/right image transferred to the retina. I have a question about optics and ophthalmology. Does the inversion of the image transferred to the retina depend on the position of the intraocular focal point of the lens of the eye? For example, in people with farsightedness, the focal point is...
Thread 'A quartet of epi-illumination methods'
Well, it took almost 20 years (!!!), but I finally obtained a set of epi-phase microscope objectives (Zeiss). The principles of epi-phase contrast is nearly identical to transillumination phase contrast, but the phase ring is a 1/8 wave retarder rather than a 1/4 wave retarder (because with epi-illumination, the light passes through the ring twice). This method was popular only for a very short period of time before epi-DIC (differential interference contrast) became widely available. So...

Similar threads

Back
Top