Imaging with flat optics: metalenses or diffractive lenses?
Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:W5UPTNNDrecord.jsonopen to challenge →
read the original abstract
Recently, there has been an explosion of interest in metalenses for imaging. The interest is primarily based on their sub-wavelength thicknesses. Diffractive lenses have been used as thin lenses since the late 19th century. Here, we show that multi-level diffractive lenses (MDLs), when designed properly can exceed the performance of metalenses. Furthermore, MDLs can be designed and fabricated with larger constituent features, making them accessible to low-cost, large area volume manufacturing, which is generally challenging for metalenses. The support substrate will dominate overall thickness for all flat optics. Therefore the advantage of a slight decrease in thickness (from ~2{\lambda} to ~{\lambda}/2) afforded by metalenses may not be useful. We further elaborate on the differences between these approaches and clarify that metalenses have unique advantages when manipulating the polarization states of light.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.