When is the image produced by a thin lens sharp?

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
1 replies · 2K views
JulienB
Messages
408
Reaction score
12

Homework Statement



Hi everybody! Being given three identical thin lenses with the same focal length, I have to determine ##a## (distance object-screen), ##d_a## (distance lens 1-lens2) and ##d_b## (distance lens 2-lens 3) so that a sharp image of the object appears on the screen regardless of the position of the optical system between the object and the screen (see picture).

Homework Equations



Lens equation: ##\frac{1}{f} = \frac{1}{s_i} + \frac{1}{s_o}## with ##s_i##: distance from lens to screen and ##s_0##: distance from lens to object.

The Attempt at a Solution



Well I didn't get very far because I don't really know what is the condition for an image on the screen to be sharp. Is it the case only when the lens equation is fulfilled, that is when I have a certain ##s_i## and ##s_o## so that the sum of their inverses is equal to ##1/f##?

And if so, is the following thinking correct? Say a ray of light is going from ##S## to ##L_1##. I want it to be sharp when meeting ##L_2##, so the following equation has to hold:

##\frac{1}{x} + \frac{1}{d_a} = \frac{1}{f}##.

Is that correct? If so I can set up an equality with three equations, but I am afraid it remains dependent of ##x## then. Any clue about how to tackle such problems?Thanks a lot in advance for your answers.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0953.jpg
    IMG_0953.jpg
    18.3 KB · Views: 490
on Phys.org
What about the matrix method for example? If I put one after the other translation and refraction matrices I would say that a ray reaching the screen has for incident angle and height:

##\begin{bmatrix} \theta_r \\ r_r \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} A & B \\ C & D \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} \theta_i \\ r_i \end{bmatrix}##
##= \underbrace{\begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ x & 1 \end{bmatrix}}_{\mbox{object} \to L_1} \underbrace{\begin{bmatrix} 1 & -1/f \\ 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix}}_{\mbox{refraction } L_1} \underbrace{\begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ d_a & 1 \end{bmatrix}}_{L_1 \to L_2} \underbrace{\begin{bmatrix} 1 & -1/f \\ 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix}}_{...} \begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ d_b & 1 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} 1 & -1/f \\ 0 & 1 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ k_3 & 1 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} \theta_i \\ r_i \end{bmatrix}##

where ##k_3## is the distance between the third lens and the screen. Is that expression correct? And more importantly, could that bring me somewhere? I just started using the matrix notation for lenses today, so I am very unexperienced with that method and unsure about what I can and can't do with it.

I think the image will be sharp if all rays intersect at some point on the screen. I read somewhere that ##C## has to be zero for the rays to intersect at the same point independently of ##\theta##, does that make sense? If so I get a crazy equation that doesn't simplify so easily, so I'd rather wait for an answer before diving into it. :)

Thank you in advance.Julien.
 
Last edited: