The Focimeter—

Measuring Eyeglass Lenses

Douglas A. Kerr
Issue 5
May 24, 2016

ABSTRACT
The focimeter (also called lensmeter, Lensometer, and Vertometer, the
last two being trademarks) is an instrument for measuring the optical
parameters (“prescription”) of an eyeglass lens. Although there exist
today digital readout, and wholly automatic, focimeters, in this article
we concentrate on the classical manual focimeter. After the
instrument is introduced, background is given on various topics in lens
optics and human vision correction. Then the operation of a typical
focimeter is described. Appendixes give background in the scheme of
measurement used for vision correction lenses, describe the actual
optical principles of the focimeter, and give some history of the
instrument.

CAVEAT
I am not an eye care professional, nor do I have any formal training in
the practice in that field nor in its own unique branch of optical
science. The information in this article is my own interpretation of the
results of extensive (mostly quite recent) research into the available
literature, through the prism of my own scientific and engineering
background and outlook.

INTRODUCTION
The focimeter is an instrument for measuring the optical parameters
(“prescription”) of an eyeglass lens. It is also called “lensmeter”,
“Lensometer”, and “Vertometer”, the last two being trademarks,
originally of American Optical Company and Bausch & Lomb,
Incorporated, respectively. It is useful in a number of situations,
notably:

• Allowing an ophthalmologist to become acquainted with the

current corrective lens context of a new patient.

• Confirming that a new pair of eyeglasses has been correctly made.

• Making certain determinations of an eyeglass lens “blank”, or a

partially-finished lens, to allow it to be properly mounted for
completion.

Copyright © 2010-2016 Douglas A. Kerr. May be reproduced and/or distributed but only intact,
including this notice. Brief excerpts may be reproduced with credit.
The Focimeter Page 2

There exist today focimeters with digital readouts, and

computer-driven fully-automated focimeters, but here we will
concentrate on the classical manual focimeter.

In figure 1, we see my favorite manual focimeter, a Bausch and Lomb

“Model 70” (formally, model 21-65-70), considered by many to be the
sine qua non of manual focimeters. The photo is of our personal
machine.

Figure 1. B&L Model 70 Vertometer

This particular specimen was evidently manufactured in 1963 (based

on its serial number). It is in fine working condition (although its
calibration is a tad out of date).

Before we take this beauty out for a test spin, I’ll provide some
background in pertinent areas.

LENSES
Lens refractive power
The refractive power (“power”) of a lens is the degree to which it will
converge (or diverge) rays of light emanating from the same point on
an object and entering the lens at different points on its face.

Quantitatively, the power of a lens is the reciprocal of its focal length.

The traditional unit of power is the diopter (symbol D) . A lens with a
power of one diopter has a focal length of one meter.

In connection with ophthalmic (vision correction) lenses, a different

definition of power is used from the one most often found in general
The Focimeter Page 3

optical work. It is called the vertex power. An explanation of this, and

why it is used, is covered in Appendix A.

Spherical lenses
In optometric work, a spherical lens is any lens that has rotational
symmetry, whether or not its surface is actually a portion of the
sphere. Thus we can (and often do) have aspherical “spherical”
lenses.

A spherical lens exhibits the same power along any direction.

A converging lens (which has a positive focal length) has a positive

power. A diverging lens (which has a negative focal length) has a
negative power.

We can present the variation (if any) in the refractive power of a lens
with direction on a polar chart. In figure 2, panel A, we see a plot of a
spherical lens with refractive power +1.0 D (a converging lens). This
is a trivial case, and hardly requires a chart to explain. But we show
the plot here to establish the format and notation.

The radius to the curve in a certain direction indicates the refractive

power (in diopters) for that direction. Recall that a “direction” here
means both ways: either way along the line at a certain angle (“a
meridian”). Because of that symmetry, we only need to plot half the
curve. But I show the curve for a full 360° for aesthetic
completeness.

90° 90°
1.5 1.5

1.2 1.2

1.0 1.0

0.7 0.7

0.5 0.5

0.2 0.2

180° 0° 180° 0°

A B
Spherical lens Spherical lens
(refractive power+1.00 diopter) (refractive power -0.50 diopter)

Figure 2. Spherical lens—power plot

In this field, the usual scientific convention is followed, with the angle
reference (0°) being to the right.1

1
In optometric practice, the angle can vary over only the range 0° to 180°, and by
custom, exactly 0° is called 180°.
The Focimeter Page 4

It is difficult to express negative values on a chart in polar

coordinates—a “negative” radius would put the point on the opposite
side of the chart, where it would just look like the (positive) value for
an angle 180° from the actual angle.

To escape this difficulty, here I will plot negative values of the

refractive power as a dotted line. And we see that in figure 2, panel B,
the plot for a spherical lens with a refractive power of –0.5 D (a
diverging lens).

90° 90°
1.5 1.5

1.2 1.2 cylinder

1.0 1.0 axis
(30°)
0.7 0.7

0.5 0.5

0.2 0.2
0°
cylinder 0°
180° axis
(0°, but
called
180°)

A B
Cylindrical lens Cylindrical lens
(refractive power+1.00 diopter, axis "180°") (refractive power -0.50 diopter, axis 30°)

Figure 3. Cylindrical lens—power plot

Cylindrical lenses
A cylindrical lens has a surface that is a portion of a cylinder (which
may or may not be exactly a circular cylinder). A cylindrical lens
exhibits a certain power (its “rated” power) in one direction
(perpendicular to its axis). Along its axis, it exhibits zero power. At
intermediate angles, it exhibits intermediate values of power.

We see this illustrated in figure 3 for two cylindrical lenses, one with a
positive power and one with a negative power.

Imagine that we combine a spherical lens and a cylindrical lens (and

we assume here the convenience of the fanciful “thin lens” conceit,
which, although impossible to have in practice, makes all the math
work out in a very simple way).

In the direction of the cylinder lens axis, where the cylinder lens has
zero power, there is no effect of the cylindrical lens on the overall
result. In the direction at right angles to that, the power of the
cylindrical lens combines with that of the spherical lens (taking into
account the applicable algebraic signs) and so we have a power
different from that of the spherical lens alone (perhaps even of the
opposite sign).
The Focimeter Page 5

1.5 1.5 1.5

1.2 1.2 1.2

1.0 1.0 cylinder 1.0 cylinder

axis axis
0.7 0.7
(30°) 0.7
(30°)
0.5 0.5 0.5

0.2 0.2 0.2

A B C
Sphere component Cylinder component Lens net refractive power
(+1.00 D) (+0.50 D, axis 30°)

Figure 4. Composite lens—power plot

In figure 4, we see one example of this.

cylinder axis cylinder axis

1.5 1.5 1.5
(120°) (120°)
1.2 1.2 1.2

1.0 1.0 1.0

0.7 0.7 0.7

0.5 0.5 0.5

0.2 0.2 0.2

Sphere component Cylinder component Lens net refractive power

(+1.50 D) (-0.50 D, axis 120°)

Figure 5. Composite lens—power plot

In figure 5 we see a different example.

Note that the result here is identical to the previous case.2 This is
reminiscent of the two ways we might make an ellipse. We might
start with a circle of small diameter, and stretch it in the direction of
the ellipse’s major axis. Or we might start with a circle of large
diameter, and shrink it in the direction of the ellipse’s minor axis.3

We can of course make a single lens that will exhibit this overall
behavior. A simple version (not actually used in modern practice)
would have a front surface that is a portion of a sphere and a rear
surface that is a portion of a cylinder. Note that this would have the
result shown regardless of which of the two “recipes” we thought of
as describing it.

2
The specific mathematical variation of the power of a cylindrical lens with angle—
cos2— makes this equivalence exact.

3
This is only a metaphor; the plot of the power of such a composite lens is not an
ellipse.
The Focimeter Page 6

HUMAN VISION
Accommodation
Ideally, the human eye can focus on objects at a wide range of
distance, from very near to “infinity”. This is called accommodation.

Typically, with advancing age, the eye’s accommodation ability can

become compromised (and the same may be true of young people as a
result of congenital malformation of the eye or of various ailments).
Several types of deficiency are common.

Hyperopia (also called hypermetropia, and often, but

somewhat-misleadingly, called “far-sightedness”) is the deficiency in
which the total range of accommodation is “offset out”, such that the
person cannot focus on near objects, and in some cases not even on
far objects.

Myopia (“near-sightedness”) is the deficiency in which the total range

of accommodation is “offset in”, such that close objects can be
focused on but the far limit is not to infinity.

Presbyopia (the term means “old person’s seeing”) is the deficiency in

which the total range of accommodation (the accommodation
amplitude) is decreased. The remaining limited range may be in the far,
intermediate, or near regimes, in the individual case.

Astigmatism
Astigmatism is the deficiency in which the refractive power of the
eye’s lens is not the same in different directions. An illustrative result
is that if we have astigmatism and look at a cross of thin lines on a
card, we can focus so that the vertical line is sharp, or the horizontal
line is sharp, but not both at the same time.

Correction with lenses

We can overcome basic deficiencies in accommodation with the use
of a corrective lens. For farsightedness, we can use a (spherical)
corrective lens with a positive power; this will shift the range of focus
in the “nearer” direction. For nearsightedness, we can use a (spherical)
corrective lens with a negative power; this will shift the range of focus
in the “farther” direction.

We can overcome astigmatism with the use of a cylindrical lens.

Not surprisingly, in typical cases, both “spherical” and “cylindrical”

components are combined to deal with the overall visual syndrome.
The Focimeter Page 7

Two notations for the prescription

Recall that, as we saw in figures 4 and 5, the identical lens result can
be conceptually implemented with either of two conceptual “recipes”.
For that particular example, we could combine:

• A spherical lens with power +1.00 D

• A cylindrical lens with power +0.50 D and axis 30°
or

• A spherical lens with power +1.50 D

• A cylindrical lens with power –0.50 D and axis 120°
Recall that in reality the way the lens is actually made may not directly
follow either of those “recipes”.

Either model could be used as the premise for defining the desired
result in written form: the lens prescription. It turns out that, when the
prescription is written by an ophthalmologist (a physician and surgeon
specializing in the eyes), it would be in the first form (the cylinder
component always being with a positive power), called the “plus
cylinder” form. When the prescription is written by an optometrist
(a Doctor of Optometry, qualified and certified to examine eyes and
issue eyeglass prescriptions), it would be in the second form, (the
cylinder component always being with a negative power), called the
“minus cylinder” form.

Figure 6. Focimeter parts and controls

To get a little ahead of the story, we might wonder, when we ask a

focimeter to tell us the nature of an eyeglass lens submitted to it, how
it knows whether we are an optometrist or an ophthalmologist. It
The Focimeter Page 8

doesn’t know; we manipulate it following one of two procedures to

force the answer to be delivered in the desired form.4

OPERATING THE FOCIMETER

Refer to figure 6. We will assume that the lenses being measured are
part of a complete pair of eyeglasses (as seen in the figure).

We place the glasses on the spectacle table with the lens to be

measured in front of the measuring aperture, with its optical center (as
best we can guess where that is) aligned with the aperture. (We will
refine that shortly). The spectacle table can be raised or lowered as
needed for this. A “lens chuck”, an articuating spider-like assembly
with four plastic-tipped prongs, under spring pressure, presses on the
face of the lens to hold it against the rim (“nose”) of the aperture. This
assures that the rear vertex of the lens is at exactly the proper
position along the instrument axis, and that the lens surface at the
aperture is perpendicular to the instrument axis.

When we look through the eyepiece, we see a pattern of green lines,

illuminated by a lamp at the far end of the instrument shining through
a reticle bearing the pattern.

The basic pattern is seen, all in focus, in figure 7. There are three thin,
closely-spaced lines in one direction, and three wider, more
widely-spaced lines in the direction exactly 90° to that.

Figure 7. All lines in focus

(The field of view in this photo is less than the operator would see;
more of the length of the fat lines would be visible.)

4
This is quite different from the situation with the refractor, or phoropter, the
instrument used to determine the optimal prescription for a patient‘s eye. There, the
practitioner orders one of two versions of the instrument, one which always delivers
the result in “plus cylinder” form and one in “minus cylinder form”.
The Focimeter Page 9

The location of the reticle carrying these lines can be shifted along the
axis of the instrument by rotation of the large wheel on the right side
(called the power drum). It carries markings in diopters, from –20
through zero and on to +20, and there is a fiducial pointer against
which that scale can be read.

The reticle can also be rotated about the instrument axis. In this
instrument, this is done with a drum on the left side of the instrument,
seen in figure 8. It has a scale (0º-180°), read against a fiducial line,
showing the orientation of the recticle. In an instrument of the
American Optical Company design, there is a different arrangement
(we will see it later).

Figure 8. Cylinder axis drum

If the lens has no cylindrical power component, then the lens does not
exhibit astigmatism: its power is the same in all directions. When the
power drum is turned to the optimum position, the entire pattern (both
sets of lines) will be seen in sharp focus (just as we saw in figure 7).
The overall optical arrangement is such that, at this point, the reading
of the power drum will be the power of the lens.

If the lens has a cylindrical power component, then (just as for a

human eye with astigmatism) the two sets of lines cannot both be in
sharp focus at the same time.

If we have the orientation of the thin lines of the reticle at 90° to the
axis of the cylindrical component, and the power drum is set to the
value corresponding to the power of the spherical component (which
is the power of the entire lens in the direction along the cylindrical lens
axis, where the cylinder power has no effect), the set of three thin
lines will be in perfect focus. And the fat ones won’t.
The Focimeter Page 10

Figure 9. Fine lines in focus

Figure 9 shows that situation (we have a slightly larger field of view in
this, and the following, photos).

Incidentally, the pattern of black lines we see here is the eyepiece

reticle, used for various purposes (more about it in Appendix B).

With that same orientation of the reticle, but the power drum set to
the power of the lens along the direction perpendicular to the cylinder
lens axis (which is affected by the cylinder power of the lens), the set
of three fat lines will be in perfect focus.

Figure 10 shows what that looks like.

Figure 10. Fat lines in focus

The difference between these two readings of the power drum (the
second minus the first, observing the sign) will be the power of the
cylindrical component of the lens behavior. And the orientation of the
reticle (read from the axis knob) is the value of the cylindrical
component axis.

Use for plus vs. minus cylinder notation

That description of the test regimen didn’t seem to offer the operator
any choice as to whether the cylinder power (the second power drum
reading minus the first) comes out positive or negative. How to we
cater to the two different conventions?
The Focimeter Page 11

If we want the cylinder power to come out positive, we start this

process by moving the power drum to a large negative power. Then
we rotate it in the positive direction, with the other hand on the axis
knob, manipulating it as required, until we first5 have the three fine
lines in focus. We note the first power drum reading (the spherical
power for this case). Then we leave the axis knob alone and continue
the positive-ward motion of the power drum until the three fat lines
come into exact focus. We note this as the second power drum
reading.

Clearly, when we subtract the first power drum reading from the
second, the sign of the difference will be positive. Thus we have a
positive value of the cylinder power, as needed for the plus-cylinder
notation we wanted to use.

If we want the cylinder power to come out negative (for minus

cylinder notation), we just start with the power drum at a large
positive power setting and then move it in the negative-ward direction.
In this case, the cylinder power will come out negative, as desired.

Note that the first drum setting at which we can get the three fine
lines in focus is not the same setting as it was in the first case—it will
be at a more positive setting of the power drum. And the axis setting
for that event will be 90° from the axis setting for that event in the
first case. Thus all the ingredients of the prescription, the spherical
power (first power drum reading), the cylinder axis (axis knob reading
at that time) and the sign of the cylinder power, will differ between
the cases, as we expect between a positive-cylinder and
negative-cylinder “prescription” for the same lens.

Help with the axis setting

We have said that in the first phase of the procedure we move the
power drum and the cylinder axis drum until the three thin lines are in
best focus. Small discrepancies in axis setting do not make a
prominent change in the apparent degree of focus of the thin lines, so
it may be difficult to find the precisely correct axis setting. The
instrument includes an ingenious scheme to help with this. It is very
reminiscent of the “split-prism” focus aid found on some single-lens
reflex (SLR) cameras (although it occurs in a completely different
way—See Appendix B).

We see it in figure 11. On the left, we have the axis setting not quite
at the proper point. Notice that, although the thin lines might not be

5
This is important. If we keep going, we will find another power drum setting (with
a different axis setting) where the fine lines will also be in focus. This event will in
fact come into play in the next portion of the description, but is not what we want
in the present scenario.
The Focimeter Page 12

noticeably out of focus, there are breaks in the lines, certain segments
of them seem to be “rotated” out of alignment with the other
segments. (It is actually only their end portions in which this effect
occurs.) This clearly reveals that we are not quite at the proper axis
setting.

Figure 11. Axis adjustment help

On the right, we have the axis setting “right on the money”. Not only
is the degree of focus better (maybe not noticeably so), but (more
prominently) all portions of the lines are now aligned.

MEASURING BIFOCAL LENSES

Bifocal lenses of the traditional type have a “near vision segment”
located in the lower part of the lens. This region has a more positive
cylinder component than the rest of the lens, intended to make it
possible for a subject with presbyopia (limited range of focus change)
to focus on nearer objects.

This is ordinarily specified in the prescription as an “add” clause:

“Add +2.00”. This means that the spherical power in the near vision
segment is to be 2.00 D more positive than in the lens generally.

There are three methods of determining this “incremental” spherical

power with a focimeter:

Method 1
In the basic determination of the lens prescription, with the “eye side”
of the lens toward the nose, and the optical center of the main part of
the lens centered in the aperture, we set the power drum and the
cylinder axis control until the fine lines are in focus. We note that
drum reading (reading A). Then, leaving the cylinder axis unchanged,
we move the power drum until the fat lines are in focus. We note that
drum reading (reading B).

The spherical power of the lens is judged to be A. The cylinder power

is judged to be B-A (observing the algebraic signs).
The Focimeter Page 13

We then move the lens so the optical center of the near vision
segment is centered in the measuring aperture. We leave the cylinder
axis unchaged, and move the power drum (always in the positive-ward
direction) until the fat lines are again in focus, and record the drum
indication (reading C).

The near vision add power is judged to be C-B (observing the algebraic
signs).

For reasons associated with the working of the vertex power

convention in the case of near vision segments, this basic approach
does not give a “correct” indication of the power of the segment as it
affects near vision. The next two methods overcome this problem. I
will describe them briefly here. A more complete description of these
processes, and their theoretical underpinnings, is given in the
companion paper, “The Vertex Power of Ophthalmic Lenses”, by this
same author.

Note that the near vision effective vertex power of the lens must be
stated in the light of the specific distance of near vision that is
contemplated.

Method 2
In this method, to measure the power in the segment, an auxiliary lens
is placed on the near side of the lens under test. This lens must have a
negative vertex power corresponding to the distance of near vision
contemplated for the lens under test. For example, if distant vision at
500 mm is the premise for the lens, the auxiliary lens should have a
vertex power of -2.00 D.

On the lens under test, the segment is aligned with the focimeter
nose. The spherical power of that situation is read. Then the power of
the auxiliary lens is subtracted from the reading (observing the
algebraic sign, to give the near vision effective vertex power of the
segment. For example, if the auxiliary lens has a vertex power of
-2.00 D, and the drum reading for the spherical power is +2.50 D,
then the near vision effective vertex power of the segment is
+4.50 D.

We then subtract from that the measured spherical power of the

distant vision part of the lens (done earlier, without the auxiliary lens).
The difference is the “near vision effective add” of the lens (which
should match the “add” of the prescription.

The theory and technical details of this are given in appendix C.

Method 3
I’ll “take it from the top” for completeness. I’ll indent the unchanged
part.
The Focimeter Page 14

In the basic determination of the lens prescription, with “eye

side” of the lens toward the measuring aperture, and the optical
center of the main part of the lens centered in the aperture, we
set the power drum and the cylinder axis control until the fine
lines are in focus. We note that drum reading (reading A). Then,
leaving the cylinder axis unchanged, we move the power drum
until the fat lines are in focus. We note that drum reading
(reading B).

The spherical power of the lens is judged to be A. The cylinder

power is judged to be B-A (observing the algebraic signs).

We then reverse the glasses so the eye side is away from the
measuring aperture. Again, we center the optical axis of the main part
of the lens in the aperture.

We adjust the power drum and the cylinder axis control until the thin
lines are in focus, and note that drum reading (reading D). With the
glasses still “eye side out”, we move the lens so an appropriate point
in the near vision segment is centered in the measuring aperture. We
leave the cylinder axis unchaged, and move the power drum (always
in the positive-ward direction) until the thin lines are again in focus,
and record the drum indication (reading E).

The near vision add power is judged to be E-D (observing the algebraic
signs).

Where did we tell the process the assumed near vision distance? We
didn’t. This method only gives the near vision effective add power
precisely if in fact that value corresponds to the near vision distance
assumed for the lens. That is, if the assumed near vision distance is
500 mm, and the technique gives us a near vision add of +2.00 D,
that is accurate. This will generally be the case in the case of lenses
for a patient with severe presbyopia.

If the near vision effective add power does not correspond to the
assumed distance of near vision, then the result is not quite accurate.

Again, the theory and technical details of this are given in the
companion article cited above.

ODDS AND ENDS

Why is everything green?
What we see in the eyepiece is mostly green owing to a green filter in
the upper part of the system. This is to minimize “spreading” of the
lines due to chromatic aberration (the differing behavior of the optical
system at different light wavelengths).
The Focimeter Page 15

The American Optical approach to axis setting

The classical focimeter made by American Optical Company (AO)
(under the name “Lensometer”) uses a different scheme of adjusting
the orientation of the recticle. Rather than using a drum on the left
side of the machine (as in the Bausch and Lomb unit illustrated
before), these units have an axial handwheel that directly rotates a
barrel containing the reticle.

We see it in figure 12, a lovely advertising illustration (ca. 1920) for

the first commercial American Optical Lensometer, the “Wellsworth” 6
Lensometer.

Figure 12. American Optical Wellsworth Lensometer (1920)

The operator’s left hand is on the axis handwheel, or “protractor”.

You may note the two pins projecting from the rear of the unit at the
right. This is where the power cord for the lamp is to be attached.
Evidently the photographer (or director) decided that having the cord
in place would mess up the beauty of the scene.

Many operators find the side-mounted axis drum of the B&L design
(adopted on modern AO units) to be more convenient.

The marking feature

Especially when making measurements of partially-finished lenses, it is
desirable to mark the location of the optical center and the reference
axis that should be horizontal when the lens is mounted in the frame
(often called “spotting” the lens). Once the lens is positioned

6
The name “Wellsworth” was a common AO trademark at the time, honoring the
name of George Washington Wells, who founded the company that was AO’s
principal ancestor.
The Focimeter Page 16

appropriately, a marking device will place three small ink dots in a line
along the horizontal axis, the centermost being at the optical center.
We see this in figure 13.

Figure 13. Marking device

On the left, we see the marking head (the shiny bar with the three
prongs) in its rest position. Using the knob just below the eyepiece,
the operator moves the marking head forward so the prongs contact
an ink roller in the small black rectangular box (this unit did not have
an ink roller when that shot was taken). In the center, we see that the
operator has allowed the head to retract from the ink box and rotated
it to its upper position (in front of the lens). On the right, we see the
head pressed forward so the three inked prongs contact the lens.

Centering the lens

I referred to this earlier, but delayed discussing it until now so as to
not disrupt the overall story.

For the measurement process to work properly, the optical center of

the lens must be centered in the measuring aperture. When it is, the
pattern of lines will be centered on the pattern of the eyepiece reticle,
as we see in figure 7 (but not in figure 9 and later, since I had
neglected to make that adjustment before taking those shots).

Reference axis
On completed eyeglasses, the horizontal reference direction for the
specification of cylindrical axis7 is a line tangent to the bottom of both
frame sides. When measuring completed glasses, this is automatically
set as the reference since the bottoms of both frame sides sit on the
spectacle table.

In some work involving lens blanks (which are round), we must also
orient horizontally a reference direction on the lens, which is often
marked on the blank as a line in temporary ink.

7
Scientists would call this 0°; in optometry, it is called 180°.
The Focimeter Page 17

Figure 14. B&L Model 70 Vertometer—Reference axis locating pins

The B&L Model 70 Vertometer has provision for dealing with this (see
figure 14).

We see, on either side of the nose, two brass pins with blunt points,
which are spring-loaded and removable.8 The lens blank is put in place
so that the tips of these pins fall on the marked reference line.

In the photo, the lens chuck, has been “retracted” to allow a clear
view of the pins.9

CONTACT LENSES
We have concentrated here on conventional eyeglass lenses. Contact
lenses use essentially the same principles for vision correction, and
their refractive properties are specified by a prescription following
generally the same conventions we discussed here (with certain
additional parameters, primarily relating to the lens dimensions,
included).

The refractive behavior of a contact lens can be measured by a

focimeter. An issue, though, is properly holding the lens in place. The
arrangement described above for “classical” focimeters is not
workable.

If the axis of the focimeter can be placed in the vertical position (true
for most “modern” focimeters, but not the B&L Model 70), it is

8
On our machine, they had indeed been removed, and not replaced before we got it.
The picture is of another specimen of the same model.

9
Actually, we believe that on that specimen, the chuck arm was maladjusted so
that, at the “6 o’clock” position, as seen, it could only be retracted (that is, couldn’t
really be used). Normally, when at “6 o’clock”, the spring would always push the
arm toward the lens, but it can be “parked” retracted at the “12 o’clock”,
“3 o’clock”, and “9 o’clock” positions.
The Focimeter Page 18

possible to just have the contact lens lie on the measuring aperture
nose. There are other ploys for placing contact lenses in a focimeter.
These techniques are beyond the scope of this article.

“NEUTRALIZING” A LENS WITH THE FOCIMETER

We will often see determining the prescription of a lens with a
focimeter called “neutralizing” this lens. This is a nostalgic nod to the
earlier (pre-focimeter) way of determining the prescription of a lens.

In this technique, standard “trial” lenses drawn from a large set, with
known powers (both spherical and cylindrical), were placed in contact
with the lens under test until its refractive power was entirely
canceled out (“neutralized) along both meridians. This situation was
determined by visual observation: if we look through a positive lens (of
modest power, such as a typical vision correction lens), held a short
distance from our eye, and move the lens from side to side, we will
see a shift in the apparent location of the “scene” beyond. This
motion, compared to the motion of the lens, will be in one direction
(contrary to the motion of the lens) for a positive power in the
direction of movement, in the other direction (consistent with the
motion of the lens) for a negative power, and absent in the case of
zero power in the direction of movement.

Thus, when the stack comprising the lens under test, a spherical trial
lens, and a cylindrical trial lens, exhibits no such scene shift, when the
lens is moved in either of two directions at right angles, we accept the
negative of the trial lens powers as the prescription of the lens under
test (noting the cylinder axis from the cylinder axis of the trial cylinder
lens).

FOR MORE DETAIL

Appendix B discusses the internal arrangement of the optical system
of a typical focimeter, and shows why the position of the power drum
is able to run linearly with the power of the lens under test, allowing
its scale to be a linear one in terms of power.

ISSUE NOTE
This article is reissued (as issue 5) principally in order to delete two
appendixes related to the “auxiliary lens” and “revered” measurement
techniques for the near vision segment of bifocal lenses and replace
them with a reference to the extensive coverage of the topic in a
companion article. Some minor editorial improvements were also
made.

#
The Focimeter Page 19

Appendix A
Vertex Power

Effective focal length

In most optical work, when we mention the focal length of a lens, we
mean what is called formally the “effective focal length” of the lens.
That term suggests that this is not the “real” focal length of the lens,
but instead is the “real” value adjusted in some way to suit some
situation.

But that’s not so—it is the “real” focal length of the lens. It gets that
misleading name from a matter of historical evolution.

When lens behavior was first studied, it became apparent that if we

had a well-behaved lens regard a very distant object ("at infinity"), an
image of that object was formed behind the lens. The distance to that
image varied with the surface curvature of the lens, and it was clearly
an important parameter of the lens.

The location of this image was said to be the rear focal point of the
lens, and the distance to it was measured from the rearmost point of
the lens (on the axis)—the rear vertex of the lens. This distance was
called the "back focal distance", or back focal length, of the lens.

But soon it was realized that the number that affected many properties
of the lens (and thus that was needed in many equations about lens
behavior) was not the back focal length, but rather a slightly greater
(in most cases) distance. Not surprisingly, given the history, this came
to be called the "effective focal length".

This was in fact the distance to the rear focal point from a place
(usually) inside the lens called the rear principal plane. That's not
something we can see, nor locate in any simple way, so it was
understandable that the effective focal length remained an ethereal, if
theoretically important, distance. In formal writing, the designation
effective focal length continued in use to denote it. In other than
formal writing, it is just called the focal length of the lens.

And this distance is the "real" focal length of the lens—the only
number that is of importance in such things as focus equations,
photographic magnification and field of view reckoning, and so forth.
It is a constant for the lens, not dependent on any "circumstance" of
its deployment.

The power of a lens

The refractive power of a lens (often called just its power) tells us the
degree to which it converges, or diverges, arriving rays of light. In
regular optical science, we quantify the power of a lens as the
The Focimeter Page 20

reciprocal of its effective focal length (to again use the full formal
name to avoid any misunderstanding).

The modern scientific unit of power is the inverse meter (m-1), but in
traditional work, and always in ophthalmic work, the same unit is
called the diopter (D). A lens with an effective focal length of one
meter has a power of one diopter.

Vertex power
A different convention is used in connection with ophthalmic lenses.
Their power "rating" is not the reciprocal of the effective focal length
but rather the reciprocal of their back focal length. The rationale for
doing so is rarely clearly explained in the literature. Here is the short
story.

The effect of a lens on the correction or near- or farsightedness

depends both on the power of the lens and its distance in front of the
eye. In conventional optical theory work, we would define the power
as the reciprocal of the effective focal length (to be formal), and the
distance that matters is from the second principal point of the lens to
the first principal point of the eye’s lens system.

To facilitate the whole process of prescribing, making, and fitting

eyeglass lenses, wherever possible we place the lens at a fixed
standard distance from the eye. But this is not measured to the
second principal point of the lens. If we did that, then lenses of
differing shape, in which the second principal point falls at different
physical locations, would not have a consistent “overall” location—
“meniscus” lenses, which have an overall curvature, would be much
closer to the face than lenses that are flat on the rear.

Accordingly, the practice emerged of placing the lenses so that the

rear vertex of the lens is at a consistent distance from the eye.10

Having adopted that practice, of course for lenses of differing shape

the distance from the eye to the second principal point will vary. And
thus, for lenses of differing shape, the power (in the normal optical
sense) needed for proper vision correction will vary. Not handy at all—
for one thing, the prescriber of the lens has no idea what shape will be
used for the actual glasses to be made.

But it turns out that for lenses placed with their rear vertex a
consistent distance from the eye, the effect on vision correction is
consistently given by the back focal length of the lens.

10
And that’s from the front of the cornea, not the eye’s first principal point. It is of
course hard to measure the latter, and the distance between them is very consistent.
Thus measuring from the front of the cornea is much more practical.
The Focimeter Page 21

But of course we would rather speak in terms of power than focal

length. So we define the vertex power of a lens as the reciprocal of its
back focal length. And we describe, or prescribe, the power of an
ophthalmic lens in terms of its vertex power.

Because this is the value that describes the “effect” of the lens on
vision correction (assuming that the rear vertex is at a standard
distance from the eye), regardless of the shape of the lens, in
ophthalmic work it is called the effective power of the lens.

Sometimes is it even spoken of, in an ophthalmic lens context, as the

“true power” of the lens! (That’s hard to justify. Guys, you should
have quit when you were ahead with “effective power”!)

The focimeters we discuss here inherently measure the vertex power

of the lens, and in fact that is the premise for the tradename,
“Vertometer”, used by Bausch & Lomb for their instruments.

A small wrinkle deserves mention. This handy situation in which the

effect of a lens on vision correction, regardless of lens shape, is
(assuming that the lens is a certain distance from the eye) given by
the vertex power of the lens does not hold when the lens is employed
for correction of near vision (as in the near vision segment of a bifocal
lens).

There are various ramifications of this. These are notes when they
appear in the body of this article and in the other appendixes.

#
The Focimeter Page 22

Appendix B
Optical system of the focimeter

Introduction
First, we will first examine the conceptual principle for the
determination of lens power upon which the focimeter is based, and
we see why it would not be practical to directly implement that in an
actual instrument.

Then, we will examine (in somewhat simplified way) the actual optical
system of the focimeter, and see how the power is indicated on a
linear scale on the power drum.

Finally, we will look into an elaboration in the basic mechanism found

in the first commercial American Optical Company focimeter, the
Wellsworth Lensometer.

The concept of measurement in a focimeter

Figure 15 shows a conceptual setup for measuring the power of a
lens.

Lens under
test Nose
Eyepiece Reticle
Lamp

Viewing telescope Measuring

aperture

Carriage

Power scale

Figure 15. Principle of power measurement

On the left, we have the viewing system, a telescope focused at

infinity. The lens being measured is placed in a controlled axial
position by being held against the fixed “nose” of a measuring
aperture. Thus its rear apex is in a fixed location, as by now we might
suspect would be needed to fit in with the apex power concept.

Behind the aperture is a reticle, carrying a transilluminated pattern of

crossed lines. It is mounted on a carriage allowing its axial position to
be changed. A fiducial on the carriage is read against a scale to
indicate the carriage position.

If the reticle is placed so that it lies at the back focal point of the lens
under test, then from the front of the lens we could see a “virtual
image” of the reticle apparently at infinity. Since the viewing telescope
is focused at infinity, then in this situation, the image of the reticle will
appear in perfect focus.

Thus, in general, if we move the recticle until the image appears

perfectly focused in the telescope, then the distance from the nose to
The Focimeter Page 23

the reticle is the back focal length of the lens, and the reciprocal of
that is its vertex power, the parameter in which we are interested.

But there are several flies in the ointment, particularly:

• This will only work for converging lenses (with positive powers).
The nearsighted need not apply.

• For the range of powers we are likely to encounter, the distance to

the reticle will be quite large (making it impractical for it to remain
inside an instrument of any reasonable size). For example, for a
lens with a power of 1.00 D, the reticle would have to be one
meter behind the aperture nose; for a power of +0.125 D
(typically the smallest value accommodated on a focimeter), it
would have to be eight meters behind the nose (over 26 feet).

• The reading of the scale on the carriage would be linear with back
focal length, but would therefore not be linear with power, its
inverse (the parameter of interest, in terms of which we would like
to mark the scale). This would not be suave in such an instrument
(even once we get over the scale being over 26 feet long).

Thus, a clever optical trick is employed. Rather than trying to place a

physical “target” (a pattern on the recticle) at the back focal point of
the lens under test, we can create (using a lens in the instrument) a
virtual image of the pattern on the reticle, which will itself be the
target for the lens under test. This virtual image can be placed at any
distance necessary (to accommodate the location of the back focal
point of the lens under test). Having done this, we find that the scale
on our “new” reticle carriage will in fact be linear with the power of
the lens under test. (Sometimes a designer just gets lucky!)

The actual optical system

Figure 16 shows the optical system of a typical focimeter, taking
advantage of the ploy just mentioned, in schematic form. We will
describe it from scratch, as if we had not heard of the unworkable
scheme.

Lens under
test Nose
Eyepiece Reticle
Lamp
Standard
lens
Viewing telescope Measuring
aperture
F2 F1
Positioning tube
Carriage
Fiducial
+ 0 –
Power scale

Figure 16. Focimeter optical system schematic

The lens under test is held by the chuck against the nose of the
measuring aperture, at the end of the positioning tube.
The Focimeter Page 24

The reticle and the illuminating lamp are on a carriage that can move
axially under control of the power drum (not shown). The drum carries
markings, on which we read the power of the lens under test. In the
figure, we suggest this with a straight scale for the carriage itself.

The eyepiece through which we observe is part of a Keplerian

telescope, focused at infinity. We will not look into its internal details
just now.

As a result of the telescope being focused at infinity, if we place a

target object at the back focal point of the lens under test, it will
appear to be in perfect focus looking through the telescope at the
lens. Instead of a physical target, we can have a source image—in this
case, an image of the pattern on the reticle, created by the standard
lens. (Any image can serve as the object of a lens.)

If we know where that source image is located when it is seen in

focus through the telescope (through the lens under test), we know
where the back focal point of the lens is, and thus know its (back)
focal length, and thus its (vertex) power.

The standard lens has its focal length carefully controlled (it is actually
a compound lens, and its focal length can be tweaked by adjusting the
spacing between certain of its elements), and the plane of the nose of
the measuring aperture is precisely at the rear focal point (F2) of the
standard lens (shown as a black dot). This relationship, once set, is
precisely maintained by the positioning tube.

The standard lens forms an image of the reticle pattern. Where it falls
along the axis of the instrument depends on the position of the reticle
(following the customary focus equations). If the power drum is set to
zero (the situation illustrated), the reticle will fall at the front focal
point (F1) of the standard lens, and the image falls at an infinite
distance forward of the measuring aperture, or behind it if we want to
think of it that way (this is a “singularity” in the focus equation—one
of those “divide by zero” things).

If we move the power drum a little in the direction of positive powers,

the image is now a substantial but finite distance toward the rear of
the instrument; with the drum set to +0.25 D, it will be four meters
to the rear of the measuring aperture, wholly out of the instrument
(thus it must be a “virtual image”).

If instead we move the power drum a little in the direction of negative

powers, the image is now a substantial but finite distance toward the
front of the instrument; with the drum set to –0.25 D, it will be four
meters to the front of the measuring aperture, behind the operator
(again it is a “virtual image”).
The Focimeter Page 25

In fact, for all drum settings in the range of the instrument, the image
will be a virtual one—it will never, for example, fall between the lens
under test and the standard lens. But never mind—the telescope,
looking thorough the lens under test, will be able to focus on it. (In a
camera, when we look through the viewfinder, we see—and focus
on—a virtual image, typically about one meter in front of us. A
telescope can do the same thing.)

A little algebra
Now, it’s time for some optical algebra.

Lens
Focal length: f
Object
Image

F1 F2

x x'

Figure 17. Reference for the Newtonian focus equation

(not to scale)

In figure 17, the points F1 and F2 are the front and rear focal points,
respectively, of a lens. (The figure is not drawn to scale.) We then
consider the “Newtonian” form of the focus equation:
2
xx'  f (1)

where x is the distance of the object from the front focal point of the
lens, x’ is the distance of the image from the rear focal point of the
lens, and f is the focal length of the lens. (We have to be careful about
the algebraic signs in all this!)

Now, if we consider our standard lens (figure 16), we note that its
rear focal point is located at the measuring aperture (at the rear vertex
of the lens under test). Thus, x’ also is the distance of the image from
the rear focal point of the standard lens—which is thus the distance of
the image from the rear vertex of the lens under test, which is the
value we want to know, since it indicates the power of the lens.11 In
particular:

1
 (2)
x'

11
Note again that, since the image of the reticle pattern is a virtual image, and may
not even lie inside the instrument (and in no case between the lens under test and
the standard lens), we cannot think of figure 17 as actually illustrating the situation.
The algebra still holds, however.
The Focimeter Page 26

where  (upper-case Greek phi) is the power of the lens under test.

Now, solving equation 1 for x’, we get:

f2
x'  (3)
x

Substituting for x’ from equation 2, we get:

1 f2
 (4)
 x

Inverting, we get:

x
 (5)
f2

which we can rearrange as:

 1 
   2  x (6)
 f 

Now, 1/f 2 is a constant (the square of the power of the standard lens,
in fact). Thus, we see that the power of the lens under test () is
proportional to the position of the reticle (given by x). Accordingly, the
scale of the power drum, which linearly moves the reticle, can be
directly marked to indicate , the power of the lens under test.

How nicely this worked out for the designers of the instrument!

Telescope focus at infinity

We note that the theory of all this is predicated on our observing
telescope being focused at infinity. Changes in the refractive situation
of the observer can disrupt this, albeit very slightly, leading to a very
slight error in measurement. Nevertheless, the designers of the
focimeter were very fastidious,12 and made provisions to avert any
such slight discrepancy.

Inside the telescope is an eyepiece reticle (we see it as the pattern of

black lines and circles in figure 9). One of its roles is to make
measurements beyond what I have described here (such as the
orientation and magnitude of a prism component in the lens, used to

12
A principal developer of the AO focimeter shown in figure 12 described it in an
article in the Journal of the Optical Society of America (December, 1922) as being
equivalent in precision to the company’s standard reference lenses, traceable to the
National Bureau of Standards.
The Focimeter Page 27

correct misconvergence of the eyes). In fact, in connection with such

measurements, it can be rotated with a ring behind the eyepiece,
marked to show the angular orientation of this reticle.

But this reticle has a second purpose. It is at the front focal point of
the telescope objective lens. The eyepiece lens proper, in this kind of
telescope, working in conjunction with the viewer’s eye, should be
focused on the point where the eyepiece reticle is located.

This focus situation can be changed by turning the eyepiece, moving it

axially. It is adjusted so the eyepiece reticle is in perfect focus as seen
by the operator. Then, the intended focus of the “operator plus
telescope” at infinity is perfected.

Aid in making the axis setting

In the body of the article, we saw that making the proper setting of
the axis was helped by an interesting display phenomenon (seen in
figure 11). I drew the parallel with the split-prism focusing aid familiar
in SLR cameras. But in fact, in the focimeter, this effect is produced
without benefit of any such special optical components. It is inherent
in the behavior of the image of the target.

We will now examine the form of that target more carefully than
before. In Figure 18, on the left, we see the way that the target is
ordinarily visualized. But in fact, its actual arrangement more nearly as
shown on the right.

Simplified Actual
Figure 18. Focimeter target pattern
The little segments of the thin lines are sometimes called “boxes”.

When the lens has correction for astigmatism, by way of a cylinder

component of its power, the lens itself exhibits astigmatism, which is
why, in such a case, we can selectively perfect the apparent focus of
either the thin lines or the fat lines. I say apparent because it is only
across the width of the chosen lines that focus is perfected, not along
its length. At the ends of a line that is “in focus”, we will see a
blurring along the length of the line (as if the line had been cut with a
“fuzzy cut”).
The Focimeter Page 28

If the axis of the cylindrical component of the lens power is oblique to

both sets of lines, that blurring at the ends “goes off to one side” of
the length of the line, as if the line were cut off at an angle to its
length with a fuzzy cut.

Figure 19. Fine lines in focus but axis not proper

The visual appearance of this is seen again in figure 19. The visual
impression given is that the line segments are rotated, and do not
form an unbroken line.

When the axis is set ideally (as it is almost 13 in figure 9), the line
segments appear to have the same azimuth and thus appear as an
unbroken line.

Figure 20. Fine lines in focus and axis (almost) proper

Here, we can clearly see the “fuzzy” extension of the short thin line
segments (although the ones from adjacent segments “overlap” a
little.

In fact, in the case illustrated by these figures, where there is a

substantial difference between the focus in the two medians (the lens
having a substantial cylinder component), the “fuzzy angular cut” at
the ends of the short segments (seen in figure 19) really has an effect

13
Well, I was a little sloppy while doing this.
The Focimeter Page 29

from about the middle of the segment on. Thus the “rotation” of the
segment is not just an optical illusion resulting from the fuzzy angular
cut at the ends—the whole “shaft” of the segment really is rotated in
azimuth.

In cases where the cylindrical component is smaller, and thus the

degree of blurring is less when one or the other set of lines is brought
to the best apparent focus, the phenomenon is more limited to the end
regions of the line segments. Still, it is compelling visually.

Although this phenomenon is given glancing mention in Charles J.

Troppman’s definitive patent on this instrument (U. S. Patent
1,609,895, issued in 1926), and is even represented there in a
fanciful portrayal of the development of the blurred image under an
“oblique” axis setting, the wonderful advantage given by this
phenomenon in facilitating axis adjustment is not claimed. It is almost
as if it were discovered by accident. (Or perhaps it was “prior art” and
not eligible to be claimed.)

A more elaborate system

The AO “Wellsworth” Lensometer (see figure 12) has a more elaborate
design in one respect than the B&L instrument described earlier (and
more modern AO instruments). In this instrument, the fine lines and
fat lines are on separate reticles, which can be separately moved along
the instrument axis, using separate, coaxial knobs on the power drum.

Thus, even for a lens with a cylindrical component, both sets of lines
can be brought into focus at the same time. The power implications of
both reticles’ positions are shown on two separate, adjacent rings on
the power drum. Therefore the sphere and cylinder power result can
be read simultaneously. (But you still have to subtract two readings to
get the cylinder power!)

What if there were no cylindrical component? Then the two reticles

would have to be at the same place, obviously not possible.

To avert this, the instrument includes a cylindrical lens immediately in

front of the fat line reticle (the frontmost one), oriented so that it
affects the focus of the fat lines (upon which we rely in ascertaining
the cylinder power). This shifts “forward” the physical range over
which the fat line reticle must operate, avoiding the possibility of any
collision.14 The cylinder markings on the power drum for the fat line
reticle are offset to recognize this.

There are other, rather subtle advantages of this arrangement, which

are beyond the scope of this article.

14
If the cylinder power is not too large and negative.
The Focimeter Page 30

Evidently, the complications of this feature were later found to not be

justified by its benefits. In all “modern” instruments, we consecutively
set the single power drum to two positions to make the complete
measurement, not really any more complicated.

#
The Focimeter Page 31

Appendix C
Some historical background

In 1876, Herman Snellen (whom we mostly honor for the development

of the widely-used eye chart, the one with the big “E”) developed a
technique for determining the power of eyeglass lenses which serves
as the principle of today’s focimeters.

In 1912, Charles J. Trottman, of F. A. Hardy & Co., developed the

first practical instrument exploiting that principle. Successive designs
were covered by U. S. patents 1,803,309 (1914), 1,187,579 (1916),
and 1,281,717. The name “Lensometer” was evidently first used in
connection with instruments made by the Hardy firm.

In 1913, F. A. Hardy & Co. was merged into American Optical

Company. Troppman continued his work on lens measurement
instruments, evidently in collaboration with Edgar D. Tillyer, American
Optical’s chief optical wonk for many years. Tillyer presumably helped
refine the design, helped to articulate the theoretical basis of the
instrument, and contributed to its introduction as a practical
commercial product in 1922 (see figure 12 in the body of this article).
Tillyer become widely associated with the instrument.15

Essentially that commercial instrument configuration was essentially

the premise of Troppman’s 1926 U. S. Patent (1,609,895),
considered the definitive patent in this area.

In December, 1922, Tillyer co-authored (not with Troppman—rather

with Tillyer’s boss, Charles Sheard) the seminal paper on the
instrument for the Journal of the Optical Society of America. Although
AO often applied Tillyer’s name to commercial products (such as an
important series of eyeglass lens blanks), in the case of their
focimeter, they declined to honor either of the key figures in its
development, but rather called it the “Wellsworth Lensometer”.

Later, Bausch & Lomb, Incorporated, AO’s chief United States rival in
the optical field, introduced their Vertometer (made under license from
AO under an early Troppman patent). Figure 21 shows what I believe
to be essentially its first commercial version, the “Model 90” (type
21-05-90). It is suspected that this specimen dates from ca. 1940.

15
The May, 1922 issue of the Rutgers Alumni Monthly (Tillyer got his undergraduate
degree at Rutgers in 1902) said, “Mr. Tillyer’s latest invention is an instrument called
the Lensometer.” We might conjecture that there were could have been some ill
feelings between Troppman and Tillyer over this state of affairs, although I have
never seen this spoken of in the historical record.
The Focimeter Page 32

Figure 21. Bausch & Lomb “Model 90” Vertometer

Photograph by Maria Felix
Used by permission

As in the AO instrument, the axis control here is coaxial, a small

knurled knob at the front of the rearmost portion of the instrument
(the “projector”), which turns a disk bearing a white fiducial that is
read against a fixed circular scale (with the white scale lines).

I conjecture that the pointer on the power drum is intended to allow

the first (“sphere”) reading to be captured when the drum is used to
take the second reading (“cylinder”).

The unit seen has a marking attachment (we see its three prongs in
the cylindrical ink box). The lens chuck swings from an overhead
pivot.

In the next generation, the famous Model 70 (seen again in figure 22),
B&L gave their instrument a somewhat more stylish design, and
incorporated several improvements in the user interface.

Figure 22. B&L Model 70 Vertometer

Most prominently, the cylinder axis control, which in the AO

instruments is a handwheel mounted coaxially with the rear instrument
barrel (see for example figure 24), was made a knob on the left side of
the instrument. Many operators considered this a more convenient
The Focimeter Page 33

location, since it needed to be operated with the left hand (the right
hand being on the power drum). We see it in figure 23.

Figure 23. B&L Model 70—Cylinder axis drum

However, during that era, AO bragged in their literature about their

axis control, pointing out that it could, conveniently, be operated with
either hand. That argument, although true, is not of much
consequence, given that in the most common operations with the
instrument the operator must simultaneously manipulate both the axis
control and the power control—which in the AO instrument (as in the
B&L version) was located (only) on the right side of the instrument.

The first commercial AO Lensometer (see figure 12) had separately

movable thin and fat line reticles (as discussed in Appendix B). The
next commercial model (ca. 1938) had a simpler mechanism, with a
single reticle (as we find on essentially all modern focimeters), and
was originally billed as the Lensometer Junior. The “junior” was
eventually dropped, and as the M603 (later, just 603) this model
became the centerpiece of the AO commercial focimeter line. The
more complicated model and its dual reticle design were retired.

Figure 24. American Optical M603 Lensometer

The Focimeter Page 34

Figure 24 shows an AO M603B Lensometer (“B” means with the

optional marking device feature—the marking device has in fact been
raised in this photo).

In figure 25 we see a more recent AO model, the 12603 (ca. 1977).

Figure 25. American Optical 12603 Lensometer

In the promotional literature, the arrangement of the power and axis

controls is described as providing “simple one-hand operation”.

In figure 26, we see a modern B&L Vertometer, the Model 62

(formally, 71-26-62).

Figure 26. B&L “Model 62” Vertometer

We believe this specimen was made in 1965.

The axis control is on the front, and turns a full revolution for the
range from 0°-180°. There is a duplicate power knob on the left side.

It’s pretty uninteresting compared to our Model 70.