> Offhand, I can't think what advantage this would have over an aspheric
element (or two). The aspherics would probably be easier to control from a
production
> point of view, also. Can't help thinking that the acronym is as it is for
a reason..
I know the acronym (GRIN) sounds funny and somehow suspicious, but I can
assure you that the photo magazine I mentioned was totally serious when
explaining the benefits of gradient index technology. I can't recall how
this process compared with respect to the adoption of aspherical elements...
Later I'll give a look and post something about that.
For what I remember it seemed (we are still dating back to1984!) that the
machinery needed to mold aspherical glass surfaces was way too expensive and
complex: for this reason the adoption of gradient index glasses was hailed
as a simpler (!) solution towards the aim of minimizing optical aberrations
together with the number of total elements.
Dunno how this evolved. We all know that aspherical elements are quite
common nowadays, although they often are built using spherical glass
elements (easy to obtain) with resin layers injected on their outer
surfaces.
For what I know (very little, I do admit) no gradient index lenses have ever
been marketed, expecially the Zuiko 85mm f/1.4 :'( .
Ciao!
Fabio
> Julian
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|