This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
To the Editor:
—I should like to thank Dr. Dekking for his interest in the binocular modification of the Schepens-AO indirect ophthalmoscope. I was particularly impressed with his elaborate and accurate discussion of the pupillary aperture problem, which confronted me also several years ago. I must agree with Dr. Dekking that—with the binocular attachment that he has described—very little can be seen and his conclusions are absolutely correct.Unfortunately, Dr. Dekking did not employ the same binocular in his experiments that I described in my article. The distance between the center of the objectives on my miniature prism binocular (Selsi Company, Inc., 29 E. 22d St., New York, 7×18 mm., ind. focus) is 29 mm. at a maximum separation (for a 74 mm. P.D.) as contrasted with 44 mm. in Dr. Dekking's model. Therefore, Dr. Dekking has run headlong into the same problem that is confronted with all larger
L'Esperance FA. GREATER IMAGE MAGNIFICATION IN INDIRECT OPHTHALMOSCOPY. AMA Arch Ophthalmol. 1960;64(1):161–162. doi:10.1001/archopht.1960.01840010162020
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: