English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The imaging performance of an optical microscope can be degraded bysample-induced aberrations. A general strategy to undo the effect of theseaberrations is to apply wavefront correction with a deformable mirror (DM). Inmost cases, the DM is placed conjugate to the microscope pupil, called pupiladaptive optics (AO). When the aberrations are spatially variant, analternative configuration involves placing the DM conjugate to the main sourceof aberrations, called conjugate AO. We provide theoretical and experimentalcomparison of both configurations for the simplified case where spatiallyvariant aberrations are produced by a well defined phase screen. We payparticular attention to the resulting correction field of view (FOV). ConjugateAO is found to provide a significant FOV advantage. While this result is wellknown in the astronomy community, our goal here is to recast it specificallyfor the optical microscopy community.

Field of view advantage of conjugate adaptive optics in microscopy applications