Abstract
One mathematical error from [Appl. Opt. 50, 6391–6398 (2011)] is corrected in this erratum.
© 2013 Optical Society of America
There is one error in [1] that is corrected here. In the simplification of Eq. (4) to Eq. (5), it was incorrectly assumed that the object wavefront radius of curvature could be related to the image wavefront radius of curvature through the magnification, . As the derivation progressed, this led Eq. (8),
to have an extraneous . A more straightforward derivation starts with Eq. (2) in [1] where the object wavefront phase difference at is defined as The same relationship holds for the image wavefront phase difference at , , where Using Fermat’s principle again, it is known that the phase between point and point must be stationary. Therefore, the pupil mapping error is After substituting Eqs. (2) and (3), the correct relationship for is The incorrect form of also appeared in the summary of the background material in [2].References
1. S. Lampen, M. Dubin, and J. H. Burge, “Implementation of sine condition test to measure optical system misalignments,” Appl. Opt. 50, 6391–6398 (2011). [CrossRef]
2. S. Lampen, M. Dubin, and J. H. Burge, “Design and optimization of the sine condition test for measuring misaligned optical systems,” Appl. Opt. 52, 7099–7108 (2013). [CrossRef]