The figures I gave in post #71 were calculated/taken from the software i gave link to.
http://www.winlens.de/index.php?id=70
This software was written by Dr Geoff Adams and Rodenstock used to provide the software free at their website. I have no idea what his connection to Rodenstock was/is but he or his company still seems to have some dealings with Linos. He now seems to do work for QIOPTIQ and the software used to be downloadable from there. It is now downlaodable from above link and an older version from
http://www.opticalsoftware.net/index.php/how_to/lens_design_software/predesigner/
If you have a problem with his calculations and/or the formula he uses, then I suggest you contact him direct.
Furthermore, if you choose to use a less stringent target for your work towards the limit of borderline acceptable quality, then you leave no margin for error. That's your choice. Personally I prefer to target the absolute finest detail obtainable (even if I can't see it) becasue I know there will be errors in my setup but in the knowledge there will be some margin for error even if it is very small.
I'm not going to go into the formula used in your example becasue I trust the formula in the software. But I know the standard DoF software is not accurate for macro work where the formula required become more complex.
Note that further in topic I have explained that with macro work the effective aperture is much smaller. In your example the effective aperture would be F28 and this would give an approx result of 5mm which we all know is wrong. I'm afraid that all you have done is to illustrate your lack of understanding of optics and optics formula. You must research formula for use in macro work if you want to get anything approaching correct result. There was some stuff on web about it yeras ago but I have no link to it. I'm just going to assume Dr Geoff Adams knows what he's doing in his software.
And bear in mind that these are all theoretical values which take no account of errors or specific lens performance.
