This Article  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Francis A. L'Esperance, Jr., M.D.
243 Charles St. Boston 14

Arch Ophthalmol. 1960;64(1):161-162.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor:

—I should like to thank Dr. Dekking for his interest in the binocular modification of the Schepens-AO indirect ophthalmoscope. I was particularly impressed with his elaborate and accurate discussion of the pupillary aperture problem, which confronted me also several years ago. I must agree with Dr. Dekking that—with the binocular attachment that he has described—very little can be seen and his conclusions are absolutely correct.

Unfortunately, Dr. Dekking did not employ the same binocular in his experiments that I described in my article. The distance between the center of the objectives on my miniature prism binocular (Selsi Company, Inc., 29 E. 22d St., New York, 7x18 mm., ind. focus) is 29 mm. at a maximum separation (for a 74 mm. P.D.) as contrasted with 44 mm. in Dr. Dekking's model. Therefore, Dr. Dekking has run headlong into the same problem that is confronted with all larger . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?