A STABILIZED-IMAGE OPTICAL INSTRUMENT

Abstract: A stabilized-image optical instrument, such as telescopes and cameras, having an objective (1) and first (2) and second (6) optical reflecting elements following in the path of rays after the objective and, wherever applicable, an ocular (9) arranged after said elements, is characterized by the fact that the whole objective, or one or more parts of the latter, depending on the purpose and the optics used, together with the first optical element (2) forms a stabilized unit which is freely revolving, in relation to the casing (7) and the second optical element (6) fixed thereto and, wherever applicable, the ocular (9), about two pivot axes which usually intersect. The suspension point (A, B, C) then substantially lies on the imaginary extension (L) of the optical axis of the objective after the first optical element, if the second optical element would not have been in the path of the optical axis.

Description: A stabilized—image optical instrument The present invention refers to a stabilized-image optical in¬ strument, such as telescopes and cameras. It is generally known that telescopes with a high magnifica- tion cannot be held by hand without difficulty because the ob¬ served image is too unsteady to be capable of being tracked accurately. This is due to the fact that the unavoidable turn¬ ing movements of the telescope around all axes orthogonal to an original visual line cause corresponding but greater move- ents of the image. This problem increases with increasing magnification. A method of handling this is to isolate the te¬ lescope as a whole from such movements (inertia stabilization) for example by servo mechanisms, gyro devices or the like. Com¬ mon features of these solutions are that they are complicated, increase the weight and require a considerable operating pow¬ er. Therefore, a great many solutions have been presented where only a part of the optics is stabilized and where the casing of the telescope and at least the ocular remain unstab- ilized. The optics is dimensioned so that the stabilized ele- ment functions as a "reference element", i.e. the telescope image follows the turning movements of said element. If this element is stabilized, the image also appears stabilized. When studying existing solutions it is seen that image stabi- lization according to the abovementioned method can take place substantially in three different ways with regard to the po¬ sition of the stabilized elements. 1) Stabilization takes place before the objective, outside the > telescope. This can take place by variable prisms or by mirr¬ ors. The complexity will here be great, since these "extra" optical elements are not needdd in ordinary telescopes. Also, these elements must be made large and with great precision. 2) The objective is stabilized with the pivot point situated in or near the focal plane. This solution has up to now been unpractical owing to the fact that in practice such an in- strument will be very large. Image reversal by mirrors or prisms is also unsuitable here. 3) The objective is unstabilized and the stabilizing elements are within the telescope. Most existing solutions belong to this group. A considerable disadvantage is common to them all, namely that high demands are made on the off-axis exactitude of the objective, if aberrations are to be avoided when the telescope is turned in relation to the visual line. Most in- struments of this group also require complicated optics. Moreover, many solutions of stabilized monocular instruments have been presented, even if few if any of them can be made simple and at the same time with good data. Nevertheless there are few solutions of stabilized binoculars described, and these are as a rule very complicated. This has to do with the fact that it is very difficult to find a solution which will give an exactly equal,degree of stabilization for the two parts of the binoculars, so that doubling of the images or blur does not arise. Generally, all monocular solutions can be converted in¬ to binocular ones, if the two stabilized optical elements of the left and right parts of the binoculars are connected by mechanical bridging means. This is made according to the U.S. patent No. 2 829 557 which requires very great precision in a purely mechanical respect, and this, together with the general mechanical complexity with many pivot axes, makes this type of solution unpractical. Consequently, there is a need of a solu¬ tion where a single part stabilizes the image in both parts of the binoculars. Such solutions are known, but up to now they have been very complicated in a purely optical respect. In the U.S. patent No. 3 460 881 such a solution is shown, where a plurality of mirrors are provided but where the image reversal finally takes place with lenses. Another similar solution is shown in the U.S. patent No. 3 915 550, where besides some no- tes are set forth quite generally about stabilizing binocular instruments and about problems in connection therewith. Solu¬ tions have also been presented where beam splitting take . lace after the stabilized element. This arran ement ertain- ly allows using both eyes, but the light intensity necessar¬ ily becomes reduced and no stereoscopic vision is obtained. From the above it is seen that no simple and at the same time well functioning solution has been known up to the present time, neither for monocular nor for binocular instruments. The purpose of the present invention is, among other things, to realize monocular and binocular instruments with image sta- bilization without any of the disadvantages mentioned above. This is possible by the invention having the characteristics defined in the claims. An advantage of the invention- is that the objective is stabil¬ ized which has as a result that the introduction of image sta¬ bilization makes no further demand on the objective, compared to an unstabilized instrument; accordingly, standard objectives may be used with advantage. Among other advantages the .following are noted: The optics may be varied in a great many different ways. Only the four reflecting surfaces needed for image reversal are necessary in the simplest construction of telescopes. The stabilized part has a high moment of inertia in relation to the length of the instrument. The pivot point can be placed both within and outside the beam of rays from the objective, which results in the greatest freedom in the choice of bearing being obtained. A simple type of stabilized binoculars is made possible with¬ out the disadvantages from which other structures of similar types have suffered up to now. Other advantages and characteristics of this invention will be seen from the following specification. Although the latter emphasizes the stabilization of the telescope image, it is ob¬ vious that optics constructed according to the invention maj be used without any hindrance in all connections where a foc¬ used image is to be stabilized around at least one axis. An¬ other conceivable sphere of utilization is the stabilization bf laser light. For the best possible understanding of the invention some con¬ cepts frequently occurring later should be explained more closely here. - The angle which the telescope casing is turned at a certain moment in relation to the stabilized part is here referred to as angular deflection , when the angular deflectionequals zero, the stabilized part is in its central position. By the "opti¬ cal axis" is henceforth meant the line which is defined by the optical axis of the objective lens system when the angular de¬ flectionequals zero. Finally, the difference between dimen¬ sioning for telescope stabilization and camera stabilization must be elucidated. In the case of image stabilization of a ca mera the focused rays from the lens are to be stable in rela- tion to the film plane, irrespective of the movements of the camera. In the case of image stabilization of a telescope the image is to be seen stable in relation to the environment, which requires a small modification of the degree of stabiliza tion, compared to dimensioning for 100% camera stabilization. How this is achieved for various embodiments of this invention will be shown later, but generally optics dimensioned for came ra stabilization may be converted into telescope stabilization by modifying the degree of stabilization with a factor (1-1/F) , where F is the magnification of the telescope and where the minus sign applies to instruments in which the image is seen turned upright. In order that a stabilized-image telescope may be usable se¬ veral requirements in respect of the mechanics must be satis- fied. The centre of gravity of the stabilized part must be situated at the pivot point, a weak spring force must tend to drive the stabilized part into a central position, and a vis¬ cous damping must be provided so that resonance oscillations-. are damped. This method of stabilization, being well known pre¬ viously, will not be described further in detail here. Yet, it may be pointed out that stabilization can take place also by means of a. gyro. This offers very good stabilization qualities but requires more complicated mechanics at the same time as the demand for operating power is a disadvantage. Since the stabilized part of optics constructed according to this invention has a high moment of inertia in relation to the length of the instrument, the firstmentioned simpler method of stabilization without a gyro is very suitable here. Generally, the description of mechanics in the following spe¬ cification is very summary, partly because it is non-essential to the invention how the mechanics is designed in detail, part¬ ly by the circumstance that the design of such mechanics in connection with image stabilization ie well-known. v βt, it should be noted - at since the stabilized part in certain em¬ bodiments of this invention has an irregular βhape, ar icul r attention must be devoted to minimizing the inertia product around all axes orthogonal to the visual line. The invention will be described more in detail in the follow¬ ing in the form of examples with reference to the drawing in which Figures 1 to 3 show the principle of the invention app¬ lied to a telescope. Figure 4 diagrammatically shows the use of a certain type of optical elements in a telescope. Figure 5 shows an element included therein. Figure 6 diagrammatically shows the use of a second type of optical elements and Figure 7 another type of optical elements in connection with the in¬ vention, and Figures 8 and 9 diagrammatically show the inven¬ tion applied to a pair of binoculars, Figure 10 shows an al¬ ternative to the latter, and Figure 11 shows another alterna¬ tive to the application of the invention in the case of a pair of binoculars. The general principle of the present invention is explained in connection with Figures 1, 2 and 3 diagrammat¬ ically showing the invention in connection with a telescope. The stabilized part consists of the objective lens 1 together with the optical element 2 which may consist of any conceiv¬ able combination of lenses, prisms, mirrors and the like, but a requirement is that the element contains at least one re¬ flecting surface. It should be noted that this stabilized part is the most important one for the invention. Its form can be varied in a great many different ways and other opti¬ cal elements may be added, but this part is found in some form or other in all variants. The objective 1 and the optical element 2 are rigidly fixed to each other by an arm or bridging member 3 to which two suitab¬ ly dimensioned counterweights 4 and 5 may advantageously be fixed. A second optical element 6 is, like the ocular 9, ri- gidly fixed to the casing 7 of the telescope and is according¬ ly unstabilized. Light rays from an observed object first pass es the protective plane window 8 and then the objective 1, thereupon passes the elements 2 and 6 and finally the ocular 9 The stabilized p * art is rotatably mounted, substantially with- out friction, at a pivot point 30 (not shown in Figure 1) , the exact position of which will be discussed later. In the case of stabilizing a telescope image, freedom of rotation exists about all axes at right angles to the visual line but not around the latter. The function in general is best understood if Figure 2 is considered which shows the same telescope as Figure 1 but an angular deflectionor has now taken place; thus the casing 7 has been turned the angle o: unintentionally around the pivot point 30. The position of the stabilized part remains the same as is shown in Figure 1. From this it follows that the position of the light rays after reflection in elemen 2 is independent of the position of the unstabilized optics. If the pivot point is correctly positioned, the unstabilized element 6 directs the light towards the ocular 9 in such a way that a stable image is obtained, irrespective of the angular defleetion. Provided that the light from the observed remote object at first only passes fully stabilized optics and then only pass.es unstabilized optics, the following may be shown: If the pivot point is situated exactly where the focus A of the objective (Figure 1) would have been located if the unstabilized element 6 would not have been there, dimensioning for camera stabili- zation is always obtained irrespective of how the optical ele¬ ments 2 and 6 are constructed. Accordingly, these may be con¬ structed as porro prisms, plane mirrors, cube corner elements or the like, and they may also, as long as at least one re¬ flecting surface is also included, contain lenses. The above- mentioned rule, with the condition mentioned above, is of uni¬ versal validity. The telescope shown in Figures 1, 2 and 3 does not entirely satisfy the above requirements; the covering disc 8 is obvious- ly unstabilized, but the optical effect of this window may be neglected if its surfaces are plane and parallel. In the case of dimensioning for telescope stabilization the pivot point must*be displaced a little from the point which affords camera stabilization (point A) along the line defined by the optical axis, where this would have been situated if. the unstabilized element 6 is supposed removed. To obtain a maximum of clearness of the presentation this line will henceforth be called line L and is shown dashed in all figures. How far and in which direction the pivot point is to be dis¬ placed from point A along line L depends on the focal length f , of the ocular and how the unstabilized optical element is constructed, provided that this element does not contain any lenses. It may be noted that if the unstabilized element 6 con- tains one or more lenses the length f , has to be replaced by the length D, where D equals the focal length of the objective divided by the magnification of the instrument. If there are no lenses between objective and ocular, then obviously D = f , . Some special cases are described below where for simplicity no lenses are included between objective and ocular. In Figure 4 the essential parts of a telescope are shown, where a threefold reflecting prism 10 is included, shown more in de¬ tail in Figure 5. This element has the property of reflecting the light non-rotated about the optical axis 11 like a plane mirror but translated the length E, provided that the reflect- ing planes 12, 13 and 14 are oriented such that each of them contains a line which is parallel to a line in the other planes. For a more detailed description the U.S. patent No. 3 475 073 is referred to in which other alternative elements with equivalent optical properties are also shown. Furthermore, in this telescope a plane mirror 15 and a roof prism 16 are included which are oriented so that the three reflecting sur¬ faces thereof are at right angles to each other. These sur¬ faces essentially form a cube corner, and henceforth the plane mirror 15 and the roof prism 16 will, accordingly, to- gether be regarded as a cube corner element 17. Light from the observed object passes the window 18 and the objective 1, is then reflected in the cube corner element 17 stabilized together with the objective before passing the ocu¬ lar 9 after threefold reflection in the unstabilized prism 10. As will be seen, the telescope shown in Figure 4 has exactly the same fundamental construction as the one described in connection with Figures 1 and 2; the threefold reflecting ele- ment 10 in Figure 4 thus corresponds to the element 6 in Fi¬ gure 1, and the cube corner element 17 in Figure 4 corresponds to the element 2 in Figure 1. Consequently, in the case of di¬ mensioning for camera stabilization the pivot point is to be placed where the focus of the objective would have been in the absence of the unstabilized prism 10, point A. In the case of dimensioning for telescope stabilization the optical properties of the unstabilized element 10 require that the pivot point is here placed at point C; the pivot point is thus displaced from point A along the line L the length f , towards the ob- server. It should be noted that image reversal is also obtained if the two elements 10 and 17 change places; thus still another variant is possible which includes these elements which can be image stabilized according to the invention and which at the same time will give image reversal, naturally the one in which the cube corner element 17 is unstabilized and the prism according to Figure 5 is stabilized together with the objective. All essential properties characteristic of the te¬ lescope shown in Figure 4 are found also in this new variant, except the placing of the pivot point in the case of dimen¬ sioning for telescope stabilization. In this case the pivot point has to be displaced the length f , along the line L from the point A but from the observer, so that in this variant it is situated at point B. This point B is found, like points A and C, also in Figures 1 and 6. If the optical elements described above are used, the light is reflected six times between objective and ocular. This may seem to be an unnecessary complexity compared, for example, to a porro system where only four reflections occur. However, such a system may also be used with advantage in connection with image stabilization according to this invention, which is described in connection with Figure 6. Here the essential parts of a telescope are shown, containing four mirrors arranged in a well-known way for image reversal. The two mirrors 21 and 22 at right angles to each other are rigidly connected to the objective 1, said combination being stabilized. The mirrors 24 and 25 at right angles to each other are fixed to the casing (not shown) and are thus unstabilized. As will be seen, the fundamental construction is exactly the same as in Figure 1, and consequently the pivot point for camera stabilization has to be where the focus of the objective would have been located if the unstabilized mirrors 24 and 25 are supposed removed, point A. In the case of dimensioning for telescope stabiliza¬ tion the pivot point must in this case be divided into two ax¬ es 26 and 27 at right angles to each other and spaced apart, but still the requirement is valid that these axes are to in- tersect the line L. It must be noted that here balance must exist about both axes, separately. The stabilized part alone must thus be balanced around->an_^xis j V -Λ — . I. and the stabilized part, together with the part of the bearing which is stabilized around only one axis, corresponding to the "middle part" of a cardan ring, must be balanced about the other axis. The pivot axis 26, which is parallel to the in- tersecting line 28 of the unstabilized mirrors, is to be placed so that the axis 26 goes through point B, and the pivot axis 27, which is parallel to the intersecting line 29 of the sta¬ bilized mirrors, is to be placed at point C. The two pivot axes 26 and 27 are thus to be placed at the distance f . -from the focus A of the objective 1, where this focus would have been located without the unstabilized mirrors 24 and 25, but on either side of this point. Consequently, the distance bet¬ ween the two pivot axes will here be equal to 2 f ok , which may cause some complication at the balancing. Therefore, it will probably in practice be a good alternative in this case to di¬ mension for camera stabilization and accept the small deteri¬ oration which results and which manifests itself such that the image is seen to be stable in relation to the field stop and not in relation to the environment. In practice this is of im- portance only when the casing makes extremely rapid movements, such as may be the case, for example, when the instrument is fixed to a Vibrating support. If for this reason dimensioning for camera stabilization is not suitable, other methods may be used where the disadvant¬ age of separate pivot axes is avoided. Dimensioning for tele¬ scope stabilization need not be brought about here by moving the pivot point or both pivot axes from the point realizing dimensioning for camera stabilization but, for example, by placing a lens (or several lenses) such that the requirement that light from an observed object first is to pass only ful¬ ly stabilized optics and then is to pass only unstabilized optics is not satisfied (the flat covering disc in front of the objective is neglected) . Accordingly, for example, a ne- gative lens stabilized about one or two axes can be placed so that the light passes this lens before it passes the ocular, or the flat covering disc in front of the objective may be re- placed by a positive lens which, if desired, may form part of' the objective lens system. It should be noted that if the meth* ods exemplified above are used, the pivot point generally can¬ not be placed exactly on line L. These small modifications which preferably influence the degree of stabilization to on¬ ly a relatively slight extent are intended to be included in the invention, but the gain will probably in most cases be small compared to the increase of complexity. The "extra" len¬ ses may also introduce aberrations. Still another method of realizing dimensioning for telescope stabilization in structures where the pivot point is placed for camera stabilization should be mentioned. This method is aimed at getting the stabilized part, by servo mechanisms or other means, to move with a certain fraction of the turning move¬ ments of the casing so as in this way to modify the degree of stabilization with a certain factor. It was mentioned above that this factor is to be equal to (1 i 1/F) , where F is the. magnification of* the telescope and where the minus sign app- lies to instruments in which the image is seen turned upright.. If this is the case, then the following relation must be true: 0 = , where α is the angle turned by the casing and 0 is the proportional movement of the stabilized part in the same direction. Below a construction is described in connection with Figure 7, which permits a very great angular deflection at the same time as the mirrors present remain relatively small depending on the extremely small distance between the pivot axes and the un- stabilized mirror. The telescope is here assumed to be held horizontally and the angular deflection equals zero. The opti¬ cal axis is then situated wholly in the horizontal plane. The mirror35 is unstabilized and the stabilized part accordingly consists of the objective 1 together with a pair of roof mirr- ors 37 and a mirror 38. The pair of roof mirrors 37, which may be replaced by a corresponding prism, consists of two mirrors 39 and 40 at right angles to each other, the intersecting line 41 of which is in the horizontal plane. _.——=—--- This kind of optics is described in detail in O. S . patent No. 3 298 770. For camera stabilization the pivot point, according to the general rule previously described, has to be at point A, where the focus of the objective would have been located if 5 the mirror 35 would not have existed. In the case of dimen¬ sioning for telescope stabilization the pivot point must here be divided into two axes 42 and 43 at right angles to each oth¬ er, where the axis 43 affords freedom of rotation in the hori¬ zontal plane and the axis 42 in the vertical plane. As is seen 10 in Figure 7 the pivot axis 43 is displaced from point A the length f , towards mirror 35 along the line L and the pivot ax¬ is 42 is likewise displaced the length f , from point A, but in this case parallel with the visual line along the line L. The .relations set forth above are true irrespective of the angl 15. β (see Figure 7). If the use of different pivot axes according to the above is not desired, there is of course the possibility of placing the pivot point for camera stabilization and introduce proportional 20 influence as described before. Another possibility is to place the pivot point where axis 43 and line L have their intersec¬ tion. As the pivot axis 43 then is placed for telescope stabi¬ lization in the horizontal plane, only very little proportional influence is needed in the vertical plane only, to give exact 25 telescope stabilization also in this plane. It would carry us too far here to describe every conceivable construction of optics with stabilization according to this in¬ vention, since an almost unlimited number of variations is con- 30 ceivable. If the examples of dimensioning described above can¬ not be used directly, analysis of the properties possessed by the optics has- to take place in every particular case when di¬ mensioning for telescope stabilization. In the case of camera stabilization the pivot point as a rule has to be where the fo- 35 cus of the objective would have been located if the unstabi¬ lized optical element would not have existed, provided that light from the observed object first passes only fully stabi¬ lized o tics and then only passes unstabilized optics. Th-ST in- stabilized flat covering disc in front of the objective can be disregarded here. An example of a pair of simple binoculars with image stabili- zation. according to the present invention is described below in connection with Figures 8 and 9, where the binoculars are supposed to be held horizontally and the angular deflection equals zero. The optics for image reversal in the two parts of the binoculars is here essentially of the porro type. Rays from an observed object passes, in the left part of the bino¬ culars, first the objective 1*, is then reflected in -the mir¬ rors 52 and 53 stabilized together with the objective, before they reach the ocular 9* after reflection in the unstabilized mirrors 55 and 56 at right angles to each other. A correspond- ing path of rays exists in the right part of the binoculars. Thus, the stabilized part consists of the two objectives 1', I 11 and the mirrors 46, 47, 52 and 53. This unit has a cardan mounting at the pivot point A which is placed for exact camera stabilization of» the two parts of the binoculars; consequently, the focal points of the two objectives, where they would have been without the mirrors 48, 49, 55 and ' 56, meet at the same point where the pivot point A is situated. As will be seen in Figure 9, the optical axes are here wholly in the same plane, the horizontal plane, before reflection occurs in the unstabi- lized mirrors. If dimensioning for exact telescope stabilization is necessa¬ ry, proportional influencing of the stabilized part may be used with advantage, as this method for natural reasons cannot give rise to possible aberrations or doubling of the images. In order that the construction described above may be usable in practice, there is, like in any other binoculars, required a mechanism to make a variable ocular distance possible. An example of a simple form of such mechanism is described be¬ low which has the advantage that no further optical elements are introduced and that only one movable part is used. This part consists of an ocular together with corresponding unsta¬ bilized pairs of mirrors, and this combination is rotatable a- round a vertical axis placed for telescope stabilization. If the right ocular 9'- is chosen to be adjustable, this ocular and the mirrors 48 and 49 thus have to be rotatable as a unit a small angle around the vertical axis 58 (Figure 8) which in¬ tersects line L and the distance of which to the pivot point A has to be as large as the focal length f , of the ocular. Although the binoculars described above are advantageous by their simplicity, they have a disadvantage which may be troub¬ lesome in certain cases; Angular deflection in the vertical plane results in rotation of the image in different direc- tions in the two parts of the binoculars, said rotation be¬ ing dependent on the angular deflection and the angle * ^ , see Figure 8. A method of handling this problem is to minimize this angle, which may be achieved if an unstabilized rhombic prism 59 according to Figure 10 is introduced, so that the necessary distance between the oculars 9 * and 9 f ' is main¬ tained. If the angle ^ is minimized in the way described above or otherwise, the rotation will be so small that in most cases it will probably be acceptable. It must be noted that when the angular deflection in the vertical plane is small in relation to the maximum value, which most often is the case, the rota¬ tion is also correspondingly lesser and will be zero when the angular deflection is equal to zero. At the centre of the fiel of image the two images are always in full accordance. There is, however, a method of entirely eliminating the above problem, aiming at controlling the image rotations in such a way that they occur in the same direction and are equally great in the two parts of the binoculars. An example of this is shown in Figure 11 where the optics in principle is the sam as that of the telescope described in connection with Figure 7 The two objectives 1' and l' 1 , the mirrors 64, 65, 66 and the pair of roof mirrors 67 are rigidly fixed to each other and stabilized about the pivot point A which is placed for exact camera stabilization of the two parts of the binoculars. The requirement of an equally great rotation in the same direc¬ tion taking place in both parts of the binoculars is that the angles < and β (see the figure) are equal and that an even/ uneven number of reflections occur in the unstabilized mirror systems 69 and 70 * As will be seen, this requirement is here satisfied; the pair of roof mirrors 69 reflects the light two times, the mirror 70 is entirely plane, consequently the light is reflected here only once. A variable ocular distance can be realized here as has been described above; which part of the binoculars is chosen for this is here unessential, since the plane mirror 70 and the pair of roof mirrors 69 here give exactly the same result at a rotation about a ver¬ tical axis. A possible dimensioning for telescope stabiliza¬ tion may suitably be achieved also for this construction by proportional influencing of the stabilized part. Several advantages are common to solutions of the type de¬ scribed above; if the pivot point is placed at the natural centre of gravity of the stabilized part, the need for a count¬ erweight is eliminated, which means that a practical instru- ment can be constructed about as small and light as the cor¬ responding unstabilized binoculars. As will be seen, the op¬ tical and mechanical complexity is drastically reduced compared to existing stabilized-image binoculars. Contributing to this is the construction of the stabilized part which permits that objectives of a standard type may be chosen without the intro¬ duction of image stabilization deteriorating the image quality. Even if the invention has been described and shown with refe¬ rence to certain embodiments, it is obvious that the inven- tion is not limited to those disclosed in the specification and in the drawings and that many modifications thereof are possible for professional men.

Claims: Claims 1. An image-stabilized optical instrument, such as for example telescopes or cameras, including a casing (7) having, as seen in the path of the rays, an objective (1,1',1'*)/ a first op¬ tical element, including at least one plane reflecting surface (2;17;21,22;37,38;46,47,52,53,-64,65,66,67) and a second opti¬ cal element, including at least one plane reflecting surface (6 10;24,25;35;48,49,55,56,45;69,70), the second optical element being unstabilized and so substantially follows the movements the casing, characterized by the fact that the objective, a pa or parts of the latter is, or are, rigidly connected with the first optical element to form a stabilized unit which is ro¬ tatable in relation to the casing around at least one axis (A; B;C). 2. An instrument according to claim 1, characterized by the fact that the stabilized unit is rotatable around at least two axes (A;B;C)*. 3. An instrument according to claim 2, characterized by the fact that each of the said axes passes essentially through the imaginary extension (L) of the optical axis of the objective after the first element if the second optical element would not have been in the path of the optical axis. 4. An instrument according to claim 2 or 3, characterized by the fact that said axes in all essentials meet at the same poi (A) lying essentially at the focus of the objective on the ima inary extension (L) of the optical axis. 5. An instrument according to any of claims 1 to , character¬ ized by the fact that the first and the second element are eac formed by a pair of reflecting surfaces placed at an angle to each other, for example porro prisms (21,22 and 24,25, respec¬ tively) . 6. An instrument according to claim 1, in the form, for ample, of binoculars or stereo cameras, characterized by the fact that the stabilized unit consists of the objectives (V, 1' * ) or parts of the latter and a first optical element (46, 47,52,53;64,65,66,67) associated with each of the objectives, and that a second optical element (48,49,55,56;69,70) is asso¬ ciated with the respective objective. 7. An instrument according to claim 6, characterized by the fact that the imaginary extensions (L) of the optical axes of the respective objective essentially meet at a point. 8. An instrument according to claim 6 or 7, characterized by the fact that each of the two axes around which the stabilized unit is rotatable both pass substantially through the i agina- ry extensions (L) of the optical axes of the objectives. 9. An instrument according to any of claims 6 to 8, character¬ ized by the fact that the second unstabilized optical element of one of the objectives includes an even number of reflecting surfaces and the second unstabilized optical element of the other objective includes an uneven number of reflecting sur¬ faces. 10. An instrument according to any of claims 1 to 9, character- ized by the fact that the stabilized unit is arranged to ro- tate, within a frequency range of the rotational movement of the casing, around at least one axis with an acceleration sub¬ stantially proportional to but different from the acceleration of the rotational movement of the casing in relation to space.

Inventors: STROEMBERG ROLF, STROEMBERG, ROLF
Applicants: STROEMBERG ROLF, STROEMBERG, ROLF
Application year: 1982
Main classification: G02B27
IPC codes: G02B27, G03B5