Effect of atmospheric pressure on optics

A forum to ask questions, post setups, and generally discuss anything having to do with photomacrography and photomicroscopy.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

... so is anyone actually doing that here, meaning UV photography with a lens like you're referring to?

Lou Jost
Posts: 5943
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

I'm gearing up for it. Initially I am focusing on the last generation of chipmaking lenses that used visible light. I now have a decent assortment of 5x and 10x lenses for 436nm (royal blue, mercury g line) and a few old soviet lenses for green light, and a 5x lens for 248nm UV light. Not sure if my astro camera will be sensitive to that UV light. By using that wavelength, diffraction would be reduced by a factor of two. But of course this is only monochrome photography.

I don't think it is worth going farther than 248nm in a home DIY set-up. It may not even be worth it to work with UV at all. We'll see.

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

I was just curious since I have 3 super old monochrome astro cameras.

Lou Jost
Posts: 5943
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

You should experiment!

Smokedaddy
Posts: 1951
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 10:16 am
Location: Bigfork, Montana
Contact:

Post by Smokedaddy »

Lou Jost wrote:You should experiment!
Grin ... I would love to but as usual (on this forum) I am way out of my league but sounds very interesting. If it wasn't for a couple of people going out of their way, on a daily basis for 'months' helping me off-line in microscopy I would still be on first base and would have probably gave up.

Looking forward to seeing your setup and results.

-JW:

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3412
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

mawyatt wrote:Lou,

With todays technology a single sodium atom can cause a chip to malfunction!

A new fab can cost upwards of $15B and the chip processing machines cost many 100s of millions each. It takes a bunch of these machines to create a line to fabricate chips!

We are routinely dealing with 14nm now, soon 10nm and 7nm is in development.

Chip development cost can be as high as $100M and are continually rising. Intel spends way more than this on their processor development I've been told.

However this technology isn't decades away, or years away. It's in your iPhone and iPad now, and it's affordable to the average person!!!

Amazing indeed!!

And yes those lenses are incredible!!

Best,

Mike
TSMC just announced it's building a 3nm fab in Tainan Science Park to be operational in 2020.

I can't even imagine a 3nm transistor. My company is still working on 8" with legacy machines at 180nm.

Lou Jost
Posts: 5943
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Ray, do you know much about some of these legacy lenses? Or is there a source to ask?

ray_parkhurst
Posts: 3412
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 10:40 am
Location: Santa Clara, CA, USA
Contact:

Post by ray_parkhurst »

Lou...I know a little about them, but you can find a decent amount of info on the web searching for photolithographic steppers. Of course today they are scanners and use lasers instead of arc lamps. Most of what's available used is scavenged from older steppers and are designed for use with various emission line spectra.

Lou Jost
Posts: 5943
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:03 am
Location: Ecuador
Contact:

Post by Lou Jost »

Ray, there is almost nothing online about particular lenses, though there are lots of general articles and even books on the subject. Luckily the Zeiss lenses are well-labeled, usually with m, NA, and optimal wavelength. But GCA/Tropel lenses usually only have model numbers and serial numbers.

mawyatt
Posts: 2497
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 6:54 pm
Location: Clearwater, Florida

Post by mawyatt »

ray_parkhurst wrote:
mawyatt wrote:Lou,

With todays technology a single sodium atom can cause a chip to malfunction!

A new fab can cost upwards of $15B and the chip processing machines cost many 100s of millions each. It takes a bunch of these machines to create a line to fabricate chips!

We are routinely dealing with 14nm now, soon 10nm and 7nm is in development.

Chip development cost can be as high as $100M and are continually rising. Intel spends way more than this on their processor development I've been told.

However this technology isn't decades away, or years away. It's in your iPhone and iPad now, and it's affordable to the average person!!!

Amazing indeed!!

And yes those lenses are incredible!!

Best,

Mike
TSMC just announced it's building a 3nm fab in Tainan Science Park to be operational in 2020.

I can't even imagine a 3nm transistor. My company is still working on 8" with legacy machines at 180nm.
Pretty amazing, that fab must cost well upwards of $15B!!

On 8" I think you are limited to 90nm, at least that's the smallest available to us @ 8" (GF 9HP).

At 3nm you could probably put ten 486 processors under a single 100 microns square bond pad!! Crazy device density!!

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic