Abstract

We comment on the recent paper by Harvey and Krywonos [Appl. Opt. 41, 3790–3795 (2002)], in which approximate irradiance calculations along the axis of a circular aperture illuminated by a plane wave are performed. As the starting point of their calculations, an approximated version (valid for z > λ) of the Rayleigh-Sommerfeld diffraction integral is used. They based their numerical conclusions on a misleading “near field criterion,” which guides the readers to the wrong idea that their calculations are valid even for the very near field behind the aperture. Their ideas are not original; the exact calculations of diffracted fields behind a circular aperture have been known for 40 years [J. Opt. Soc. 51, 1050–1054 (1961)].

© 2003 Optical Society of America

Axial irradiance distribution throughout the whole space behind an annular aperture: reply to comments

James E. Harvey and Andrey Krywonos
Appl. Opt. 42(19) 3792-3794 (2003)

Axial irradiance distribution throughout the whole space behind an annular aperture

James E. Harvey and Andrey Krywonos
Appl. Opt. 41(19) 3790-3795 (2002)

Comment: absolute measurement of roughness and lateral-correlation length of random surfaces by use of the simplified model of image-speckle contrast

H. T. Yura and S. G. Hanson
Appl. Opt. 42(14) 2521-2522 (2003)

Comment: influence of illuminating beyond the object support on Zernike-type phase contrast filtering

Jesper Glückstad, Vincent R. Daria, and René L. Eriksen
Appl. Opt. 42(5) 792-793 (2003)

Atmospheric correction of SeaWiFS imagery for turbid coastal and inland waters: comment

Yan Li
Appl. Opt. 42(6) 893-895 (2003)