"Code 5" versus "Zemax" ?
LEO
Hi, everybody !
Could anybody give me in couple of words
comparison of “CODE 5” versus “ZEMAX”.
Thank you in advance.
Leo.
LEO
> Hi, everybody !
>Could anybody give me in couple of words
>Thank you in advance.
>Leo.
>
Leo.
reiley@w+.flw.att.com
>
>> Hi, everybody !
>>Could anybody give me in couple of words
>>Leo.
>>
>Sorry for my mistake, "Code 5" should read "Code V".
>Leo.
I have experience with doing real work with several lens design programs,
including Code V, Zemax, and Synopsys. Because of the frequent requests for
information on lens design programs, I have decided to begin building a
file about what I think is important in lens design programs and how I
think the various programs compare under these criteria.
I think it would be a good idea if other people with experience with
several programs did the same thing. I would be happy to maintain the
compilation of views.
Please understand that I think all three of the programs are excellent.
I have used others which I don't think are worth discussing.
NOTE TO LENS DESIGN PROGRAM VENDORS: Please see this post as a service
to your potential customers. The reviews in the trade literature are
little more than cataloging of features. Even if they were more than
this, their editorial integrity would be jaded by advertising revenue.
MY FINANCIAL INTERESTS: Two years ago, ORA (the Code V people) supported
me for about one quarter in grad school to help upgrade their polarization
raytracing. Other than that, I have never had any economic interest in any
of the products or companies listed here.
[Sorry about that nonsense. After I wrote a similar note a few weeks ago,
I received a message from an obviously upset vendor. Oddly enough, it was
the vendor of the program I use most often.]
IMPORTANT CHARACTERISTICS OF A LENS DESIGN PROGRAM:
Naturally, cost fits in here somewhere. Exactly where is up to you.
1. Platform compatibility
By "platform compatibility" I mean the ease with which the lens design
program works with your other computer programs. Can you bring drawings
easily into your drawing program? Can you bring textual output easily into
your word processor? Does the program help you create your final design
report in your word processor? Does the program act like other programs
on your platform? Does the program use a reasonable amount of memory?
Platform compatibility will depend on your platform. Most programs
can work on a variety of platforms, but most of them seem to belong on
only one or two. A lot of them feel like running a Mac program on a PC
through a Mac emulator - it's just not right.
Platform compatibility seems to be overlooked in the vendors' literature;
they seen to like to list their program capabilities. I think platform
compatibility has become more important that program capabilities now that
most of the programs have so many similar capabilities.
2. Special needs
Sometimes your main project is something weird that one program just happens
to do better than another. Occasionally, these special needs outweigh
everything else.
3. Documentation, help screens, intelligent defaults, and manual
All of this amounts to user-friendliness.
A good program will not only help you through the program, but will also
help you through the design process and even teach you about optics a little.
Everyone has seen friendly and unfriendly word processors, spreadsheets,
mathematical analysis programs, and other programs. Don't get stuck with
manual problems in your lens design program that you have seen in other programs.
4. Technical support
The best technical support is a program designed to not need it. Howver,
sometimes you just need to talk with someone. That person should be sympathetic
to your needs, knowledgeable about the program, and should have a thorough
understanding of the underlying optics principles.
5. Special features
Many types of surfaces, many types of analysis, etc. are what the programs
are meant to do. Even the programs I don't like (which I don't list here)
have very good special features. I wouldn't recommend making this a primary
consideration in your buying decision.
PROGRAMS I LIKE (in alphabetical order):
I currently use Code V and Zemax regularly. I last used Synopsys 12/93
Code V
Platform Compatibility - good on the VAX, fine on the SUN, and only fair on the PC
Special Needs - excellent (For my special needs. As always, YMMV)
User Friendliness - excellent (great manuals, intelligent defaults)
Technical Support - excellent (they have a huge staff, it would be hard for them to miss)
Special Features - excellent
Synopsys
Platform Compatibility - good on the VAX, I don't know about the others
Special Needs - excellent (YMMV)
User Friendliness - fair (manuals seem to be for the programmer, not the designer)
Technical Support - never used it, we had local gurus
Special Features - excellent
Zemax
Platform Compatibility - excellent on a PC (it feels like it actually belongs there)
Special Needs - fair (I only have the lowest version, YMMV)
User Friendliness - Good (excellent program design keeps you from getting
lost, but the manual and help screens could be better in getting
you un-lost)
Technical Support - fair (you can tell they have a small staff)
Special Features - excellent
--
Dan Reiley, Ph.D. AT&T Bell Labs Naperville, IL
rei...@iexist.att.com (708)713-5444
Scott Ellis
>>Leo.
This is a little like comparing a Mercedes to a Honda: Both do
essentially the same job, but one's got more 'features' than the other.
If your question is prompted not by idle curiousity, but with the intent
to obtain one or the other, then you'd better look very seriously at
how you intend to use it. Code V is certainly more powerful, maybe
more efficient. However, much of its power is built into features you
may never need: polarization analysis, multilayer coating design and
analysis, interferometric alignment capability, etc. Zemax offers much
of the same ray trace capability and aberration analysis in a much
simpler package. Both can handle spherics, aspherics, conics,
cylindrical, etc. surfaces. Code V gives an option of non-sequential
ray tracing and handles tilts and decenters more elegantly than Zemax.
Optimization routines are probably a little better in Code V, but I
wouldn't swear by it. The biggest difference between the 2 is cost:
Code V will run you better than $10K/year to lease, while Zemax will
set you back $2K or $3K and a maintenance fee of a few hundred dollars
a year.
Don't know if it helped, but I just thought I'd put my $0.02 in.
Scott Ellis
NASA LaRC
* usual disclaimers here *
Nelson Wallace
I hope you include Sinclair Optics' OSLO programs; I understand they
have an extremely installed user base.
JBCooper3
Code V: Does everything.
Zemax: Does lens design.
Code V: $$$$
Zemax: $ (4 months of leasing Code V (you can't buy it) is about the same
as the -EE version of Zemax).
Code V: get this if you are going to do major optical system design every
day for a long time.
Zemax: get this if you don't need everything, can't afford Code V, or
don't do lens design all the time.
The comparison is kind of like between MatLab or Mathmatica versus
MathCad; it just depends on what you need. I'd get the vendor lit on both
products if you're still unsure of the differences.
John
jbco...@aol.com
Elliot Burke
writes:
IMHO it isn't necessary for a program to do everything. Zemax can
export data in many formats to be further processed by whatever other
graphics or math or CAD programs you have. It does this very well.
Also, IMHO a program that attempts to be jack of all trades is master
of none.
Put Zemax on a laptop, drive up into the mountains, do your lens design
under a nice big tree. Now which program do you like better?
Charlie Ih
>reiley@w+.flw.att.com () wrote:
>
>I hope you include Sinclair Optics' OSLO programs; I understand they
>have an extremely installed user base.
>
I used Super Oslo for 4 to 5 years many years ago (10 years ?) when it
was first released. I paid high price for it ( > $10K, Code V was even
more expensive then!) plus $600 "uninterrrupted" annual (university)
maintenance fee! You cannot simply buy an upgrade 2 or 3 years later.
Later the prices went down because of competition.
All the versions I got tend to be bugy. I have to ask for the
upgrades. They did not send them to me automatically even
I paid the maintenance fee! The program crushed frequently even
we followed instructions carefully. I don't know their current
program status nor their price structure. If I need to use a
design program now, I probably will go to Zemax.
Thanks for Dr. Dan Reiley's summary.
Charles S. Ih
>>In article <3vrvc0$4...@ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>, LEO <le...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>>
>
>>I have experience with doing real work with several lens design programs,
>>including Code V, Zemax, and Synopsys. Because of the frequent requests for
>>information on lens design programs, I have decided to begin building a
>>file about what I think is important in lens design programs and how I
>>think the various programs compare under these criteria.
>.....
JBCooper3
> IMHO it isn't necessary for a program to do everything. Zemax can
>export data in many formats to be further processed by whatever other
>graphics or math or CAD programs you have. It does this very well.
>Also, IMHO a program that attempts to be jack of all trades is master
>of none.
>Put Zemax on a laptop, drive up into the mountains, do your lens design
>under a nice big tree. Now which program do you like better?
BTW, I do all of the above with Zemax (keep the pine straw out of the
key!).
Code V does a lot of things very well IMHO. Your mileage may vary. Note
that I don't use it; I use Zemax (no affiliation with either Focusoft or
ORA).
John
jbco...@aol.com
chris.b...@gmail.com
I'd love to revisit this discussion. I am researching the best optical engineering software packages and note that the offerings have changed a lot since the 90's! Zemax, OSLO and FRED seem to be lower-cost, more basic packages, while Synopsys' Code V and LightTools as well as ASAP and TracePro seem to be more high-end solutions. What I am having a tough time understanding is why anyone would pay so much extra for the high-end solutions, when the less expensive ones seem to have broad functionality across optical/illumination/laser applications. What software packages do you think are best suited for light vs. heavy users for optical, illumination and laser? I'd really appreciate you passing along any resources and opinions you have. And if anyone can provide more in-depth consulting services for my research, let me know because I'm willing to provide compensation.
Thanks everybody and warm wishes,
Chris