Abstract

The camera lenses that are built into the current generation of mobile devices are extremely stressed by the excessively tight packaging requirements, particularly the length. As a result, the aspheric departures and slopes on the lens surfaces, when designed with conventional power series based aspheres, are well beyond those encountered in most optical systems. When the as-manufactured performance is considered, the excessive aspheric slopes result in unusually high sensitivity to tilt and decenter and even despace resulting in unusually low manufacturing yield. Qbfs polynomials, a new formulation for nonspherical optical surfaces introduced by Forbes, not only build on orthogonal polynomials, but their unique normalization provides direct access to the RMS slope of the aspheric departure during optimization. Using surface shapes with this description in optimization results in equivalent performance with reduced alignment sensitivity and higher yield. As an additional approach to increasing yield, mechanically imposed external pivot points, introduced by Bottema, can be used as a design technique to further reduce alignment sensitivity and increase yield. In this paper, the Q-type polynomials and external pivot points were applied to a mobile device camera lens designed using an active RMS slope constraint that was then compared to a design developed using conventional power series surface descriptions. Results show that slope constrained Q-type polynomial description together with external pivot points lead directly to solutions with significantly higher manufacturing yield.

© 2013 OSA

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. T. Hayes, “Next-Generation Cell Phone Cameras,” Opt. Photon. News23(2), 16–21 (2012).
    [CrossRef]
  2. G. W. Forbes, “Shape specification for axially symmetric optical surfaces,” Opt. Express15(8), 5218–5226 (2007).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. B. Ma, L. Li, K. P. Thompson, and J. P. Rolland, “Applying slope constrained Q-type aspheres to develop higher performance lenses,” Opt. Express19(22), 21174–21179 (2011).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. M. Bottema and R. A. Woodruff, “Third Order Aberrations in Cassegrain-Type Telescopes and Coma Correction in Servo-Stabilized Images,” Appl. Opt.10(2), 300–303 (1971).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. E. Abbe, “Lens system,” U.S. Patent 697,959, Apr. 1902.
  6. J. P. McGuire, “Manufacturable mobile phone optics: higher order aspheres are not always better,” SPIE Proceedings of the International Optical Design Conference7652, 76521O–76528 (2010).
    [CrossRef]
  7. M. Reiss, “Wide-Angle Camera Objective,” U.S. Patent 2,518,719, Aug. 1950.
  8. T. G. Kuper and J. R. Rogers, “Automatic Determination of Optimal Aspheric Placement,” in International Optical Design Conference, OSA Technical Digest (CD) (Optical Society of America, 2010), paper IThB3.
    [CrossRef]
  9. P. Murphy, J. Fleig, G. Forbes, D. Miladinovic, G. DeVries, and S. O'Donohue, “Subaperture stitching interferometry for testing mild aspheres,” Proc. SPIE6293, 62930J (2006).
    [CrossRef]
  10. Y. M. Liu, G. N. Lawrence, and C. L. Koliopoulos, “Subaperture testing of aspheres with annular zones,” Appl. Opt.27(21), 4504–4513 (1988).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. I. Kaya and J. P. Rolland, “Hybrid RBF and local phi-polynomial freeform surfaces,” Adv. Opt. Technol.2(1), 81–88 (2013).
  12. K. P. Thompson, “Description of the third-order optical aberrations of near-circular pupil optical systems without symmetry,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A22(7), 1389–1401 (2005).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2013 (1)

I. Kaya and J. P. Rolland, “Hybrid RBF and local phi-polynomial freeform surfaces,” Adv. Opt. Technol.2(1), 81–88 (2013).

2012 (1)

T. Hayes, “Next-Generation Cell Phone Cameras,” Opt. Photon. News23(2), 16–21 (2012).
[CrossRef]

2011 (1)

2007 (1)

2006 (1)

P. Murphy, J. Fleig, G. Forbes, D. Miladinovic, G. DeVries, and S. O'Donohue, “Subaperture stitching interferometry for testing mild aspheres,” Proc. SPIE6293, 62930J (2006).
[CrossRef]

2005 (1)

1988 (1)

1971 (1)

Bottema, M.

DeVries, G.

P. Murphy, J. Fleig, G. Forbes, D. Miladinovic, G. DeVries, and S. O'Donohue, “Subaperture stitching interferometry for testing mild aspheres,” Proc. SPIE6293, 62930J (2006).
[CrossRef]

Fleig, J.

P. Murphy, J. Fleig, G. Forbes, D. Miladinovic, G. DeVries, and S. O'Donohue, “Subaperture stitching interferometry for testing mild aspheres,” Proc. SPIE6293, 62930J (2006).
[CrossRef]

Forbes, G.

P. Murphy, J. Fleig, G. Forbes, D. Miladinovic, G. DeVries, and S. O'Donohue, “Subaperture stitching interferometry for testing mild aspheres,” Proc. SPIE6293, 62930J (2006).
[CrossRef]

Forbes, G. W.

Hayes, T.

T. Hayes, “Next-Generation Cell Phone Cameras,” Opt. Photon. News23(2), 16–21 (2012).
[CrossRef]

Kaya, I.

I. Kaya and J. P. Rolland, “Hybrid RBF and local phi-polynomial freeform surfaces,” Adv. Opt. Technol.2(1), 81–88 (2013).

Koliopoulos, C. L.

Lawrence, G. N.

Li, L.

Liu, Y. M.

Ma, B.

Miladinovic, D.

P. Murphy, J. Fleig, G. Forbes, D. Miladinovic, G. DeVries, and S. O'Donohue, “Subaperture stitching interferometry for testing mild aspheres,” Proc. SPIE6293, 62930J (2006).
[CrossRef]

Murphy, P.

P. Murphy, J. Fleig, G. Forbes, D. Miladinovic, G. DeVries, and S. O'Donohue, “Subaperture stitching interferometry for testing mild aspheres,” Proc. SPIE6293, 62930J (2006).
[CrossRef]

O'Donohue, S.

P. Murphy, J. Fleig, G. Forbes, D. Miladinovic, G. DeVries, and S. O'Donohue, “Subaperture stitching interferometry for testing mild aspheres,” Proc. SPIE6293, 62930J (2006).
[CrossRef]

Rolland, J. P.

Thompson, K. P.

Woodruff, R. A.

Adv. Opt. Technol. (1)

I. Kaya and J. P. Rolland, “Hybrid RBF and local phi-polynomial freeform surfaces,” Adv. Opt. Technol.2(1), 81–88 (2013).

Appl. Opt. (2)

J. Opt. Soc. Am. A (1)

Opt. Express (2)

Opt. Photon. News (1)

T. Hayes, “Next-Generation Cell Phone Cameras,” Opt. Photon. News23(2), 16–21 (2012).
[CrossRef]

Proc. SPIE (1)

P. Murphy, J. Fleig, G. Forbes, D. Miladinovic, G. DeVries, and S. O'Donohue, “Subaperture stitching interferometry for testing mild aspheres,” Proc. SPIE6293, 62930J (2006).
[CrossRef]

Other (4)

E. Abbe, “Lens system,” U.S. Patent 697,959, Apr. 1902.

J. P. McGuire, “Manufacturable mobile phone optics: higher order aspheres are not always better,” SPIE Proceedings of the International Optical Design Conference7652, 76521O–76528 (2010).
[CrossRef]

M. Reiss, “Wide-Angle Camera Objective,” U.S. Patent 2,518,719, Aug. 1950.

T. G. Kuper and J. R. Rogers, “Automatic Determination of Optimal Aspheric Placement,” in International Optical Design Conference, OSA Technical Digest (CD) (Optical Society of America, 2010), paper IThB3.
[CrossRef]

Cited By

OSA participates in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (7)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Layouts of the mobile device camera designs optimized with (a) Power Series aspheric surface departures, (b) Q-type aspheric surface departures with RMS slope constraints.

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

Lens MTF, (a) Power Series aspheres, (b) Q-type aspheres.

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Astigmatic field curves and distortion (note both solutions are nearly indistinguishable), (a) Astigmatic field curves, (b) Distortion.

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

Selected aspheric surface departure, (a) S2 of PS lens, (b) S8 of PS lens, (c) S9 of PS lens, (d) S2 of Q-type lens, (e) S8 of Q-type lens, (f) S9 of Q-type lens. The horizontal axis represents the aperture size. The vertical axis represents the aspheric departure (mm).

Fig. 5
Fig. 5

MTF for lenses after a decenter of 20 μm was introduced at element 4, tilt of image plane was used as the compensator (a) Lens with Power Series based aspheric departure, (b) Lens with Q-type aspheric departure optimized with downward pressure on the RMS slope on each aspheric surface.

Fig. 6
Fig. 6

Change of wavefront error from a base value of about 0.16 waves for change in element thickness of 10 µm, refocus was used as the compensator (a) Lens with Power Series based aspheric departure, (b) Lens with Q-type aspheric departure.

Fig. 7
Fig. 7

As-built MTF predictions to 100lp/mm (mean + 2 sigma), refocus and tilt of image plane were used as the compensators, compensator works at 50 lp/mm, (note that the edge fields kept almost the same performance for systems with external pivot points) (a) Lens with Power Series based aspheric departure, (b) Lens with Q-type aspheric departure, (c) Lens with Power Series aspheric departure with external pivot point, (d) Lens with Q-type aspheric departure with external pivot point

Tables (3)

Tables Icon

Table 1 Mobile device camera study specifications

Tables Icon

Table 2 Comparisons of maximum RMS slope and maximum aspheric departure

Tables Icon

Table 3 Pivot point position refer to the vertex position of each element (mm)

Metrics