Principles of Geometric Optics

Jared M. Maxson
Lehigh University Department of Physics
Physics 262
(Dated: March 20, 2008)
In this lab, we explore the principles and measurement of geometric optics quantities. Specifically,
the focal lengths and nodal/principle points of both a telescope objective and eyepiece lens were
measured. Then, a rudimentary telescope composed of both the eyepiece and the telescope objective
on an optical rail was constructed, and the magnification was determined with an object at a large
distance and at an intermediate distance. Finally, a microscope was constructed using an objective
and a different eyepiece, the magnification of which was measured with an object at one distance.

I. INTRODUCTION

To calculate the image position due to an optical system with a known object position, all that be known about the
system are the positions of the principal points, focal points, and nodal points of the system and the corresponding
focal lengths, rather than more complicated data concerning the indices of refraction and the radii of curvature of
the optical elements. The focal points are defined as the points at which parallel rays of light entering the system
will converge, and conversely rays emanating from the focal point will leave the system parallel. As per the principle
points, if an object is placed at one principle point, an upright image the exact size of the object will appear at the
other point. The nodal points are defined such that if a light ray enters the system through a nodal point, it will
leave the system at the nodal point parallel to the incident ray. Thus, if the entire system is immersed in the same
substance (air, in our case), the nodal points and principle points will be coincident.

II. PROCEDURE

A. Finding Nodal Points: Telescope Objective

To find the nodal points of the telescope objective, a nodal slide was used, which is an object that rotates its
entire contents about a fixed axis perpendicular to the optical axis and parallel to the plane of the image. The lens
was placed in the center of the nodal slide, and the nodal slide was placed between a mirror and an object/screen
combination (a screen attached to and in the same plane as the image). In using the mirror, called the method of
autocollimation, the light reflected off the mirror is then parallel to the incident light from the object. The nodal
slide was placed at a point at which a semi-sharp image was formed on the screen, and was secured on the rail. Then
on the slide, the position of the lens was adjusted until small rotations of the slide about it’s axis produced no (or
minimal) movement of the image. This position was recorded, and relative to the center of the nodal slide it is then
the position of the nodal point on the side of the lens closest to the object. The lens was then turned around, and
the second nodal point was located using the same procedure.

B. Focal Length Determination: Telescope Objective

Once the nodal/principle points of the system had been determined, measuring the focal length (the distance
between the principle points to the focal points) of this long-focal length system can be done in a three step process.
In the first step, the method of autocollimation was used to find the focal point, in which a mirror was placed behind
the system (lens), and a screen/object combination was placed in front of the system. Light through the lens from
the mirror is then parallel to the incident rays, and the lens was adjusted until a sharp image was formed on the
screen attached to the object. Thus, at this point, the object was at the focal point, and the position of the lens
was recorded. In the second step, a second screen/object combination was placed at the far end of the optical rail
opposite to the first object. With the second object lamp off, the position of the lens was adjusted such that a sharp
image of the first object was formed on the screen of the second object/screen combination. This position of the lens
was recorded, and the distance the lens had moved was the value of x, the distance between the focal point (in object
space) and the object. The first object lamp was shut off, and the second was illuminated. Autocollimation was used
again, with the lens between the mirror and the second object. The lens was adjusted until a sharp image appeared
on the screen of the second object, and thus the second object was located at the focal point. The position of the lens
 2

was recorded, and the distance it had moved from the second step was thus x0 , the focal point (in image space) and
the image. As xx0 = f f 0 and f 0 = f (these and other equations are derived in the lab notebook), the focal length
was then calculated.

C. Focal Length Determination: Eyepiece Lens

A different method was used to determine the focal length of the eyepiece lens, given it is very small. The eyepiece
and a reticle (with small defined rulings) were placed on the optical rail, such that the rulings were horizontal. A
thin tissue paper was placed on the back of the reticle for reference and light diffusion, and the reticle was backlit
with an fiber optic illuminator. A traveling microscope was placed such that a clear image of the reticle was seen,
and using the control knob and attached rulings, the size of the entire reticle rulings in the image was measured.
Then, knowing the actual size of the rulings, the magnification could be calculated. The object was then moved a
distance d from its original position. Using the previous procedure, the magnification was determined a second time.
As f = −d/(M2 − M1 ), the focal length may be calculated.

D. Finding Nodal Points: Eyepiece Lens

To determine the nodal point in front of the eyepiece (the side furthest from your eye), the reticle, eyepiece and
traveling microscope were set up as in the previous section, such that a clear image was visible in the microscope.
The microscope was then moved from focusing on the image, to focusing on the closest edge of the eyepiece. If the
microscope travels a distance L, the location of the principle point is given by p0 = x0 + f − L, where x0 and f
are calculated from the magnification, which was measured as in the previous section. Given time constraints and
difficulty with data, only p0 was located. If one were to find p, the necessary procedure would merely be to turn the
lens around, and repeat the above steps in this section.

E. Telescope Construction and Magnification Measurement

To construct the rudimentary telescope, the optical rail was placed on a moving table, and the telescope objective
and eyepiece were attached to the optical rail. The table was wheeled to one end of a long hall, and at the other a
meter stick was placed such that the meter stick markings were still legible, but far enough to be considered effectively
infinite. The eyepiece was adjusted so that a clear image of the meter stick could be read in the eyepiece. Looking at
both the image of the meter stick and the stick itself at the same time, the amount of the meter stick seen in the image
was recorded, as well as the length of the meter stick this image height corresponded to. The ratio of these lengths
is therefore the magnification. This procedure was repeated for a distance that is not effectively infinite, which was
measured using another set of meter sticks.

F. Microscope Construction and Magnification Measurement

The reticle was placed on the rail with tissue paper as before, except the reticle was positioned vertically. As the
microscope objective, a 5x lens was used, and the same 10x eyepiece that had been in use was used again. The
objective was placed between the eyepiece and the object, and adjusting the eyepiece a clear image of the reticle was
found. Similar to the telescope, the part of the image corresponding to the visible portion of the reticle markings
was found, using a ruler as a visual aid. Given time constraints, only one position of object and magnification were
measured.

III. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

A. Focal Length Determination: Telescope Objective

The positions of the lens in each of the three stages were measured three times. The average x found, including stan-
dard deviation of√the mean, was x = 26.90cm ±0.20cm, whereas the value of x0 was found to be x0 = 54.30cm ±0.22cm.
Thus, f = f 0 = xx0 , and including error propagation (calculated in notebook), we find f = 38.22cm±0.22cm. This
 3

error arises from my inability to read the scale on the rail exactly, as well as the ambiguity in selection of the sharpest
image, in that ”optimal” image sharpness with the lenses in use was not exceedingly sharp.

B. Finding Nodal Points: Telescope Objective

Though the measurements for the nodal points of the telescope objective were only taken once, values of error still
may be inferred. For measurement including reading a centimeter scale and including evaluations of image sharpness,
I found in the previous section that my length measurements had an error around 0.2 cm. Not only did the nodal
slide measurement include measurements on a centimeter scale, it involved discerning motion of the image, which was
complicated by the looseness of the slide in the slide holder, in that movement of the image could be due to both real
movement and movement of the side in its mount. Furthermore, this distance was adjusted by hand. Thus, I discern
that my measurements of could be off by much as 0.2 cm. However, the measured values of the principle points were
0.13 cm (on the dented side) and 0.71 cm, from the center of lens mount, which yields a separation of principal points
of 0.84cm±0.4cm.

C. Focal Length Determination: Eyepiece Objective

Though measurement of the image size and the positions of the components did involve the reading of a centimeter
scale, it did not include the adjustment of the clarity of an image (except that of the telescope objective, but this is
vastly more sensitive), thus, as these measurements were only completed once, I asses that all distance measurements
are accurate to within 0.05 cm, half of the smallest division of the ruling. The distance d that the object moved
between the two measurements was also very small, however, which was measured os 0.33 cm ±0.1 cm. The two
magnifications calculated were thus M2 = −1.10 ± 0.1 and M1 = −1.14 ± 0.1 (the image would be inverted if it were
not for the traveling microscope). Calculation of error propagation shows the error scales as (M2 − M1 )−2 , which
will be exceedingly large in this case; furthermore, the error in M1 and M2 is such that even the sign of f cannot
be accurately determined. Calculation yields a focal length of 8.25 cm ±43.25 cm, which aside from the large error,
is perhaps more than double the expected focal length. This again is probably due to the inaccuracies inherent in
measurement using such a small value of d.

D. Finding Nodal Points: Eyepiece Objective

Using the magnification M2 , and also using an error of 0.05 cm for distance measurements as before, the location
of the principle plane from the center of the lens mount p0 = x0 + f − L = 5.91cm, where L was measured to be 11.74
cm ±0.1 cm. This value is much larger than expected, in that this principle plane is expected to be inside of the
housing for this lens, but as it is calculated using seemingly incorrect values of f , this larger value of p0 is unsurprising.
Furthermore, the large error in the measurement of the focal length of the eyepiece propagates in this measurement,
such that the final value of p0 is 5.92 cm ±93.48 cm.

E. Telescope Magnification

The magnification of an object at infinity was measured three times. The mean and its standard deviation (cal-
culated in the notebook), were calculated to be Minf = 5.7 ± 0.2. The magnification was also measured three
times with an a distance of approximately 2.4 meters. This mean and its standard deviation were calculated to be
M2.4 = 5.2 ± 0.2, which given the precision of measurement, is just enough to establish a decrease in magnification
between an object at infinity and an object close to the telescope.

F. Microscope Magnification

For this, considering the unavailability of an adequate procedure to accurately measure the how much of the image
the real object occupied, the error in this measurement must be extremely high. I asses that the measurement of the
size of the real object, which was 7 cm, could be off by as much as 3 centimeters, given that a small movement of the
head during measurement produces a large change in the size of the object relative to the ruler (which was also held
by hand). With this error assessment, the magnification was calculated to be 200 ± 86.
 4

IV. CONCLUSIONS

Error analysis was a crucial component of this experiment; it offered an entirely different perspective than experi-
mentation on the validity of the measurements. Unfortunately, error analysis showed that in this experiment the only
measurements with reasonable calculated or assessed error were the measurement of the focal length of the telescope
objective and the telescope’s magnification. In the case of the determination of the nodal points of the telescope lens,
during experimentation the measurement seemed fairly straightforward. However, after considering the error associ-
ated with the play in the nodal slide, the error is comparable to nearly half the entire separation of the nodal/principle
points. Thus more precise instrumentation would be needed in order to properly measure the principle point of the
telescope lens. In the case of the measurement of the focal length of the eyepiece lens, using such a small value of d
between measurements has drastic impact on the error associated with measurement. Furthermore, it is maximizing
the value of d, and thus the difference between the two associated magnifications, that would would obtain a experi-
mental minimum of error in this measurement. Thus, as the determination of the principle points of the eyepiece is
dependent upon the determination of f , this measurement suffered similarly. Finally, with the measurement of the
magnification of the constructed microscope, the large error was a result of the reliance on a hurried procedure, and
was due more to the instability of my hands and eyes than measurement equipment.