Great video, it's really amazing to see how far we've come and to learn how far we have to go before the technology is perfected. Hopefully I'll live to see what comes next.
How sharp is the focus of light hitting the Metasurface lens a few degrees away from the main axis? A focused image requires a range of sharply focused points over a plane instead of just 1 focal point. I wonder if a conventional lens' thickness and slowing of light near the middle helps it get a better focused image over many square degrees instead of just the 1 point that perfectly aligns with the optics. Fresnel lenses are also quite flat and fairly good at focusing light to the focal point but they're uselessly bad at focusing light that is just a few degrees away from perpendicular to the lens.
They are supposed to be better than normal lenses in keeping focus along the normal to the lens and it is claimed that they can replace a multi-lens optical device with a single lens. I can't see any reason why the performance would be bad off-axis. They seems to be able to do anything a standard optical lens system can do and more.
@@Andrew-rc3vh why aren't Metasurface lenses replacing the optics in telescopes, cameras, microscopes, and binoculars then? If they're extremely expensive, space telescope projects could still budget for them.
@@IARRCSim They will replace all of those because they are higher performance and very cheap to manufacture. China has managed to use them for photolithography in high end chip fabrication (0.8nm).
So.....does this mean cell phone manufacturers can stop chasing ridiculous pixel count numbers and put decent sensors with larger 'buckets' in phones while maintaining this addiction to copying the iphone style thin case (that is inherently crippling phone innovation and usability, IMHO)? Because I dont know about anyone else....but any company that tries to lie to me by putting on wide excited eyes and a fake smile while making up BS about a sensor I can loose in my pocket that has "100+ MP" (or whatever con banking on customer stupidity and number chasing they are pulling now), especially after removing the sensors and peripherals I actually used and relied on, has lost my business for good..... Basically, the current state of phone technology is a joke, and I want large pixel format sensors in my phone without the lens bulk!!! Tell me it can be a thing.....please?!?
Great video, it's really amazing to see how far we've come and to learn how far we have to go before the technology is perfected. Hopefully I'll live to see what comes next.
could you please tell me how you found the Phase map for flat lens designed(radius vs wavelength)?. any script or info will be very helpful for me
How sharp is the focus of light hitting the Metasurface lens a few degrees away from the main axis? A focused image requires a range of sharply focused points over a plane instead of just 1 focal point. I wonder if a conventional lens' thickness and slowing of light near the middle helps it get a better focused image over many square degrees instead of just the 1 point that perfectly aligns with the optics. Fresnel lenses are also quite flat and fairly good at focusing light to the focal point but they're uselessly bad at focusing light that is just a few degrees away from perpendicular to the lens.
They are supposed to be better than normal lenses in keeping focus along the normal to the lens and it is claimed that they can replace a multi-lens optical device with a single lens. I can't see any reason why the performance would be bad off-axis. They seems to be able to do anything a standard optical lens system can do and more.
@@Andrew-rc3vh why aren't Metasurface lenses replacing the optics in telescopes, cameras, microscopes, and binoculars then? If they're extremely expensive, space telescope projects could still budget for them.
@@IARRCSim They will replace all of those because they are higher performance and very cheap to manufacture. China has managed to use them for photolithography in high end chip fabrication (0.8nm).
So.....does this mean cell phone manufacturers can stop chasing ridiculous pixel count numbers and put decent sensors with larger 'buckets' in phones while maintaining this addiction to copying the iphone style thin case (that is inherently crippling phone innovation and usability, IMHO)?
Because I dont know about anyone else....but any company that tries to lie to me by putting on wide excited eyes and a fake smile while making up BS about a sensor I can loose in my pocket that has "100+ MP" (or whatever con banking on customer stupidity and number chasing they are pulling now), especially after removing the sensors and peripherals I actually used and relied on, has lost my business for good..... Basically, the current state of phone technology is a joke, and I want large pixel format sensors in my phone without the lens bulk!!! Tell me it can be a thing.....please?!?