Microscopeclub.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. Additionally, Microscopeclub.com participates in various other affiliate programs, and we sometimes get a commission through purchases made through our links.

Where, d is the depth of field, λ is the wavelength of the light from the light source, n is the refractive index of the medium between the specimen and the objective lens, and NA is the numerical aperture of the objective lens.

Below is a detailed explanation of what the depth of field and depth of focus are, the different factors that affect the depth of field, and how to calculate it.

Glan thompsonpolarizer newport

Knowing the depth of field of the microscope at any given setting is important since it affects how much you have to move the specimen slide up, down, left, or right to image certain areas of the specimen, especially since it determines the required stability of the focusing axis.

Glanpolarizer

The depth of field is inversely proportional to the numerical aperture of the objective lens, directly proportional to resolution, contrast, and working distance, and is also affected by magnification.

It’s a somewhat more advanced and complex microscopy concept, since it takes into account the tilt and tip of the space between the image plane and the objective lens sensor plane. It’s also affected by aberrations and diffraction figures extending above and below the image plane.

Glan Thompson polarizer is made of two calcite prisms or α-BBO prisms cemented together. Two types of Glan Thompsons are available. One is the standard form and the other is the long form. Their length to aperture ratios is 2.5:1 and 3.0:1 respectively. Glan Thompsons tend to have higher extinction ratio than air spaced polarizers. In the ultra violet spectrum, their transmission is limited by absorption in birefriengent materials as well as the cement layer.

An important concept in microscopy is the depth of field, and the depth of focus, which are two related principles that are often interchangeably used. Both of these things have to do with the range of distance where the image is clear and in focus.

In terms of magnification, this also has an influence on the depth of field of the microscope, especially when it comes to high magnification lenses, such as oil immersion lenses. Here, the depth of focus may be high, but the depth of field may below.

Glan-Taylor Polarizer

The general rule is that depth of field is inversely proportional to the numerical aperture, which is the size of the opening of an optical component where light passes through- in this case, the objective lens. So, a high numerical aperture results in a low depth of field, and vice versa.

The depth of field is defined as the distance between the nearest and farthest object planes that are both in focus at any given moment. In microscopy, the depth of field is how far above and below the sample plane the objective lens and the specimen can be while remaining in perfect focus.

At this range, advanced auto-focus systems such as laser trackers are essential, since manual focusing is almost impossible to achieve.

Glan-Taylor Prism

While the depth of field refers to the object space, or the quality of the image coming from a stationary lens as the specimen is being repositioned, depth of focus talks about the image space, or the ability of the sensor to retain the focus of the image as the sensor changes positions.

It is the axial or longitudinal resolving power of the objective lens, measured parallel to the optical axis. This number is largely determined by the numerical aperture of the objective lens, and is considerably small that it’s typically measured in microns.

The depth of focus is determined by both the numerical aperture or sensor size and the magnification of the objective lens, and is also, in a way, related to the resolution.

Where d is the depth of field, λ is the wavelength of the illuminating light, n is the refractive index of the medium, NA is the numerical aperture of the objective lens, M is the lateral magnification of the lens, and e is the smallest resolvable distance of a detector on the image plane.

Glan-Taylor vsGlan-Thompson

As such, there is a higher chance of making an error in focusing an image at higher magnifications, making the depth of field immensely important for thick and irregularly shaped objects with complex geometries or a variety of high and low surface points.

The average depth of field at certain magnifications and apertures is 3 to 5 microns at 4x magnification, 0.5 microns at a 0.8 numerical aperture, and 0.1 to 0.2 microns at a 1.47 numerical aperture.

Having said that, since the depth of field concerns the objective lens, there are a few other factors that must also be taken into account.

In relation to resolution is the contrast of the specimen and its magnified image. Different resolutions and contrasts have different corresponding depths of field. Smaller specimen details require a higher spatial frequency, and results in a smaller depth of field, while a lower contrast benefits from a higher depth of field.

We have provided a general formula above for calculating the depth of field of the microscope, and this works perfectly well for low to average magnification lenses. But, there is actually another formula that is especially for high magnification optics.

This is because the distance between the angular resolution of the lens and the two intersecting points of the light path coming through the aperture are what determines the range of the depth of field.

The working distance of the objective lens also has an effect on the depth of the field. A short working distance results in a smaller depth of field, while a longer working distance, as when focusing at the farthest point from the lens, creates a higher depth of field where almost everything before that point is in focus.

The numerical aperture of the objective lens is the main factor that determines the depth of field. In this sense, the microscope’s depth of field and depth of focus are somewhat similar, since these both generally increase as the numerical aperture is decreased.

Glan Thompsonprism

When it comes to image resolution or the clarity of detail of a specimen’s magnified image, this is typically inversely proportional to the numerical aperture, and therefore directly proportional to the depth of field.

Hence, arguably the best way to calculate the depth of field is by combining both wave and geometrical optical depths of field.

This is because the two are governed by different principles, where the phenomenon of circles of confusion governs low magnification, and high magnification is governed by the principles of wave optics.