Having covered the three point aberrations, there are two lens defects associated with extended

objects. If we move the object point P in Fig. 11 closer to or farther from the z-axis, we would
expect the positions of the tangential and sagittal focal planes to shift, for it is only when the
paraxial approximation holds that these image points are independent of x. Hence, we obtain the
two curves of Fig. 14, which shows what astigmatism does to the image of a two-dimensional
object. If the astigmatism could be eliminated, the effect would be to make these curved image
planes coincide, but we have no guarantee that the common image will be flat, or paraxial. The
resulting defect is called Petzval curvature or curvature of field. For a single lens, the Petzval
surface can be flattened by a stop in the proper place, and this is usually done in inexpensive
cameras. Petzval curvature is associated with the z-axis. If we take the object in Fig. 11 and move it
along the y-axis, then all rays leaving it are skew and this introduces distortion, the aberration
associated with the coordinates normal to the symmetry axis.

7.4.1 Curvature of field and oblique astigmatism In the preceding section the paraxial
approximation was shown to be insufficient to describe the image of an axial object when this is
formed by a lens of appreciable aperture. Different problems arise when the lens aperture is small
but the object is considerably off-axis. Figure 7.14 shows the familiar example of a lens forming an
image B0 B0 1 of the object BB1. However, it is clear that the length l1 is longer than l. If,
therefore, 1 l0 ¼ 1 l þ 1 f and 1 l0 1 ¼ 1 l1 þ 1 f

be somehow like B0 B0 2. Strictly, it has a paraboloidal shape and is known as the Petzval surface.
Calculations for the single surface case (see Figure 3.17) show that this curvature may be
expressed approximately as a sphere of radius r0 i given by 1 n0 r0 i 1 nri ¼ n n0 nn0 r ð7:26Þ
where r is the actual radius of curvature of the surface and ri the radius of curvature of the object
(which may not be plano for later surfaces in a system). The right-hand side of Equation 7.26 is the
contribution of each surface to the curvature of the final image. If the contributions of two
surfaces are added together we easily obtain the thin lens contribution to field curvature as C ¼ F
n ð7:27Þ where n is the index of the lens material. If a lens system is to provide a flat image field
from a flat object, the sum of these contributions must be zero: k Fk nk ¼ 0 ð7:28Þ which is known
as the Petzval condition. Because Equation 7.27 is not affected by lens shape or image conjugates,
only by combining lenses of different refractive index can this condition be satisfied and field
curvature eliminated.

Curvature of field, as suggested by the development of Equation 7.29, is not affected by stop
position
Field curvature. The wavefront in the exit pupil through E1, generated by an on-axis object point,
is focused in O1 on the paraxial image plane. The sharp image of the complete object is formed on
a curved surface, dashed in the figure, with a radius of curvature at O1 equal to Rb and with its
centre at C. The field angle of an oblique beam (double arrows) with sharp focus at A has been
denoted by γ
Petzval Portrait Lens The mathematician Petzval tackled the design of a portrait lens immediately
after the presentation by Daguerre of his photographic chemical process Daguerrotype. Although
he never communicated any details about his research, it is evident that he developed or already
had at his disposal an aberration theory of optical imaging, probably very similar to the one which
was published 15 years later by Seidel [301]. Probably, he not only relied on the application of his
theory but included the analysis of his designs by means of finite ray-tracing. It is stated that
Petzval had been given the computational assistance of some ten soldiers who were specialised in
the calculation of cannonball trajectories. To achieve a good portrait lens design, one or more
extra degrees of freedom are needed. The addition of a third lens to the two doublets could be
considered. Petzval has chosen to split the second doublet to make it an air-spaced doublet with
different internal curvatures. Splitting the second doublet instead of the first is recommended
because field aberrations like coma and astigmatism are more easily influenced at the location of
the second doublet. The eccentricity factor is higher on the surfaces of the two split lenses than it
is on the first doublet because of the reduced beam cross-section. We use the Seidel aberration
increments due to parameter changes to guide the design process. Starting configuration for the
first doublet is a convex-plano shape with internal curvature such that the axial chromatism of the
doublet is close to zero; the glass V numbers remain unchanged. The optical power of the doublet
is approximately 60% of the total power. A small distance is then introduced between the two
lenses which formed the second doublet (originally of the flint-in-front shape). From the bending
of the first and the second lens we derive the influence on spherical aberration, coma and
astigmatism. The reduction of spherical aberration, coma and astigmatism is now possible, using
as parameters the bending of the first doublet and the independent bending of the two air-spaced
components, which emerged from the second doublet.

Third-order field curvature, calculated with the aid of the Petzval sum, is independent of lens
shape or lens magnification. It can, however, be influenced by allowing residuals of astigmatism,
coma and spherical aberration in the design (see Eq. (5.4.25)). A finite ray optimisation of the
portrait lens in which the various field points are equally weighted leads to a system with nonzero
astigmatism but reduced field curvature, as shown in Table 7.8. The third-order aberration
coefficients of this design show that the field curvature has been substantially reduced. On the
contrary, the spherical aberration has increased to a level that starts to degrade the resolution in
the centre of the field. In combination with the lower field curvature, the central region of the
image is on average better focused and this counteracts the resolution loss due to spherical
aberration. The performance of the original Petzval objective in terms of its modulation transfer
function is shown in Fig. 7.19a. The focus-setting has been chosen such that the resolution is
approximately constant up to 50% of the field radius. Beyond this value, the resolution shows a
sharp degradation due to the curvature of the optimum image surface of the lens. The off-axis
performance is relatively improved by the vignetting of up to 50% of the oblique pencils.

The original Petzval lens has no physical diaphragm. The mechanical mountings of the front
doublet and of the two air-spaced elements define an effective pupil and they allow rejection of
the outer rays of an oblique pencil that causes excessive image blur. The ‘strained’ design with
reduced field curvature has a better performance in the field, especially in the region 10◦ ≤ γ ≤ 14◦
, at the cost of increased curvatures of the surfaces of the two split elements (see Fig. 7.18c). The
better imaging performance towards the edge of the field is illustrated in Fig. 7.19b with the aid of
the geometrical modulation transfer function. The penalty that has to be paid is an increased
manufacturing complexity (optical surfaces and mounting tolerances) and mechanical sensitivity.
In conclusion, the portrait lens design from 1840 by Petzval (see Fig. 7.18b) was a very good
compromise between imaging sharpness in the centre of the field and the fall-off of image
resolution towards the border of the image field. Thanks to the application of his newly developed
aberration theory, Petzval effectively eliminated spherical aberration and coma and reduced the
combination of astigmatism and field curvature to a level that was acceptable for the relatively
small angular field in portraiture. The key innovation of the design is the air-split doublet on the
image side which adds extra degrees of freedom and, therefore, allows the substantially higher
aperture of the Petzval lens. The low imaging quality at the edge of the field is less of a problem in
portrait photography; in practice, oval-shaped photo frames were used to cut out the remote
diagonal parts of the portrait.
Figure 7.21: Field curvature (in the absence of astigmatism) and methods to suppress it. a) Curved
object (or image) surface. b) Negative field-flattening lens in close contact with object or image
plane. c) Introduction of negative power in an optical system in a region with reduced intersection
height of the marginal ray. d) Exploiting the inverted field curvature produced by a reflecting
surface.

Petzval Curvature
Petzval curvature or field curvature differs from the previous
aberrations; it does not blur the image at all. Rather, it causes the
image to lie on a surface that is not a plane. As a first approximation,
the surface is spherical. Lenses are typically used to inspect things
that lie on a plane, and most detectors, whether CCD, CMOS or film,
are also planar. This means that even though Petzval curvature
doesn’t blur the image on the Petzval image surface, it does result in a
blur on a plane image surface (as shown in figure 1.15), and the blur
increases with the square of the image height. The radius of the
Petzval surface is completely insensitive to f/#, but the blur on a flat
image plane caused by the Petzval curvature increases linearly with
entrance pupil diameter.
If our familiar example object of stars were imaged through a system
with Petzval field curvature the image would look in focus in the center
of the image, with the focus falling off near the edges as shown in figure
1.16. This is very similar to the image at the medial focus of a system
suffering from astigmatism.

Fig 1.16 Petzval Field Curvature

Correcting for Field Curvature

Since the blur from Petzval curvature on a planar image surface
increases with the square of field, decreasing the field is one option to
minimize it. Although this can help correct the blur, it is not usually
acceptable as most lenses have a specific field angle that is desirable
for their application.
Another option is to add a negative field-flattener lens to the system
placed close to the image surface. This lens’ design allows it to have
the opposite field curvature of the system to cancel it out. Due to its
position near the focal plane it will not affect other aberrations greatly.
Petzval curvature will be zero for a meniscus lens with equal radii. The
power of the lens is proportional to the thickness, so if one desires to
change the power without adding to the Petzval curvature, using a
thick meniscus can work.
Reducing Curvature Size

Using a combination of several thin lenses to adjust the Petzval

curvature can also be an option. Generally, there are no limits on
reducing the size of the curvature if there are equal amounts of
negative and positive powered lenses in the system.
Astigmatism is closely related to field curvature and when both are
present in a system the result is two image surfaces as shown in figure
1.17. The tangential and sagittal image surfaces will converge on the
Petzval surface if astigmatism is corrected for. This can be done by
lens bending, stop shift, moving elements or changing optical glasses
in a system.
A common ploy is to attempt to introduce Petzval curvature into a lens
to flatten out the astigmatic focal surfaces, giving a smaller blur on the
image plane. This, known as an artificially flattened field, results in
acceptable but not exceptional image quality.
 Fig 1.17 Tangential, Sagittal, and Petzval Image Surfaces
https://www.eckop.com/resources/optics/aberrations/

https://www.olympus-lifescience.com/en/microscope-resource/primer/anatomy/fieldcurvature/

Curvature of field in optical microscopy is an aberration that is familiar to most experienced

microscopists. This artifact is the natural result of using lenses that have curved surfaces.
When visible light is focused through a curved lens, the image plane produced by the lens will
be curved as illustrated in Figure 1. Notice that there are two curved planes that we have
labeled A and B.

The image can be focused over the range between A and B to produce either a sharp focus on
the edges or in the center. When the image is viewed in the eyepieces (oculars) of a
microscope, it either appears sharp and crisp in the center or on the edges of the viewfield but
not both. Normally, this is not a serious problem when the microscopist is routinely scanning
samples to observe their various features. It is a simple matter to use the fine focus knob to
correct small deficiencies in specimen focus. However, for photomicrography, field curvature
can be a serious problem, especially when a portion of the photomicrograph is out of focus.
This concept is illustrated in Figure 2 using photomicrographs of a stained thin section of an
elephant toe bone. The upper image (a) in Figure 2 shows the thin section with only the edges
in focus. Notice that the central portion of the image is very blurred and it is not possible to
distinguish any minor structural details present in the specimen. The bottom image (c) in Figure
2 shows the section with the central portion of the viewfield in focus and the edges blurred.
This would be the focus that a microscopist would be forced to use for photomicrography with
optics in this state. Figure 2 (b) illustrates the case of an objective that has been corrected for
curvature of field aberrations. This objective is the obvious choice for optimum results in
photomicrography.
As we have mentioned before, curvature of field can be tolerated when just scanning samples,
but it is disastrous when one is trying to produce quality photomicrographs. In the early days of
microscopy before corrected lenses were enjoying widespread use, photomicrographers would
often restrict the area recorded on film to the focused central area of the view field, thus
obscuring the blurred edges. This can be easily accomplished by inserting a projection lens in
the phototube to reduce the amount of viewfield available for the camera. Another method is to
use a bellows extension on the camera to increase the camera film distance until only the
central portion of the viewfield is visible. Adding field curvature lens corrections to an objective
that has already been corrected for optical aberrations can often add a significant number of
lens elements to the objective. For example, the typical achromat objective has two
lens doublets and a hemispherical lens, making of total of five lens elements, as shown on the
left-hand side of Figure 3. In contrast, a comparable plan achromat objective has three
doublets and three single lenses for a total of nine lens elements, making it considerably more
difficult to fabricate. Cut-away diagrams illustrating both of these objectives are presented in
Figure 3. As we have seen, the number of lens elements increases as lenses are corrected for
spherical errors as well as chromatic and field curvature aberrations. Unfortunately, as the
number of lens elements increases so does the cost of the objective.

Sophisticated plan apochromatic objectives that correct for spherical, chromatic, and field
curvature aberrations can contain as many as eighteen to twenty separate lens elements,
making these objectives the most expensive and difficult to manufacture. Plan apochromatic
objectives can cost upward of $3,000 to $4,000 each for high-magnification units that also have
a high numerical aperture. For most photomicrography applications, however, it is not
absolutely necessary to have the best correction, although this is heavily dependent upon the
specimen and the desired magnification range. When cost is important (when isn't it?), it is
often wise to select more modestly priced plan fluorite objectives that have a high degree of
correction, especially the more modern versions. These objectives provide crisp and sharp
images with minimal field curvature, and will be sufficient for over 90 percent of
photomicrography applications.
Field curvature is very seldom totally eliminated, but it is often difficult to detect edge curvature
with most plan-corrected objectives and it does not show up in photomicrographs. This artifact
is more severe at low magnifications and can be a real problem with stereo microscopes.
Manufacturers have struggled for years to eliminate field curvature in the large objectives found
in stereo microscopes. In the past ten years companies like Nikon, Olympus, Zeiss, and Leica
have made great strides in the quality of optics used to build stereo microscopes and, while the
artifacts and aberrations have not been totally eliminated, the high-end models are now
capable of producing superb photomicrographs.
https://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/sportoptics/how_to/guide/binoculars/technologies/technologie
s_08.htm

In the case of a lens fully compensated for coma aberration and

astigmatism, the light rays coming from a point apart from the optical axis
are focused at one point. But this point is not always included in the
vertical plane to the optical axis. This is called Curvature of Field. With a
lens having this aberration, even if you focus around the center of the
field, the periphery of the field appears out of focus. It can cause very bad
effects especially on wide-field-type binoculars.

https://www.jeol.co.jp/en/words/emterms/glossary_file/file/five%20seidel%20aberrations_02.pn
g

Field curvature is a simple lens aberration where the sharpest focus of the lens is
on a curved surface in the image space rather than a plane. Objects in the center
and edges of the field are never in focus simultaneously.

Most microscope objectives are corrected for field curvature, and are given the
designation "Plan" or "Plano". One method to reduce this aberration is to insert a
field stop (iris) in order to remove edge light rays. This method unfortunately
greatly decreases the light collecting power of the lens. Some lenses are not
corrected for a flat field in order to increase the light transmittance, or the span of
transmitted wavelengths. These lenses, however, can have severe distortion as
exemplified by the following Olympus lens:

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/kepler/multimedia/images/kepler-focal-
plane-assembly.html

https://books.google.com.mx/books?id=g4Wx9yKrDS0C&pg=PA158&dq=differ
ent+types+of+lens+aberrations&hl=es&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjnytD3l-
zsAhVKOs0KHSSQCuY4FBDoATAHegQIAxAC#v=onepage&q=different%20
types%20of%20lens%20aberrations&f=false

https://books.google.com.mx/books?id=IaBXn06OlWsC&pg=PA4&dq=different
+types+of+lens+aberrations&hl=es&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj6p9SzluzsAhXQXc
0KHfg2B8MQ6AEwCHoECAkQAg#v=onepage&q=different%20types%20of%
20lens%20aberrations&f=false

https://books.google.com.mx/books?id=TqASDQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover
&dq=aberraci%C3%B3n+de+lentes+de+curvatura+de+campo&hl=es&sa=X&ve
d=2ahUKEwiyxqSsj-
zsAhVMiqwKHdGSAHA4ChDoATAEegQIBhAC#v=onepage&q=aberraci%C3
%B3n%20de%20lentes%20de%20curvatura%20de%20campo&f=false