Abstract

The aim of this reply to comments is to show how the Fourier transform in depth of the defocused two-dimensional (2D) weak-object transfer function is to be physically interpreted in a confocal microscope. The origin of discrepancies in the shape of the three-dimensional (3D) transfer function as presented by Sheppard and Gu [ Opt. Commun. 81, 281 ( 1991)] and by the present author [ J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 9, 725 ( 1992)] are also explained. Finally, a class of 3D objects is presented to which the 3D transfer function of my earlier paper applies.

© 1993 Optical Society of America

Dependence of two- and three-dimensional optical transfer functions on pinhole radius in a coherent confocal microscope—comments

C. J. R. Sheppard and Min Gu
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 10(3) 533-534 (1993)

Dependence of two- and three-dimensional optical transfer functions on pinhole radius in a coherent confocal microscope

Valter Drazic
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 9(5) 725-731 (1992)

Three-dimensional coherent transfer functions in fiber-optical confocal scanning microscopes

Min Gu, X. Gan, and C. J. R. Sheppard
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 8(7) 1019-1025 (1991)

Three-dimensional transfer functions in 4Pi confocal microscopes

Min Gu and C. J. R. Sheppard
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11(5) 1619-1627 (1994)

Vector Fresnel equations and Airy formula for one-dimensional multilayer and surface-relief gratings: reply to comment

Sumanth Kaushik
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 15(4) 1009-1011 (1998)