I'm a Zemax guy and like Zemax but from what I can see Code V is just as viable an option. There are little tools here and there that are different, but a lot of times you can fill in the gaps by writing your own macros. It's easy to find the analysis tools you need, it's intuitive, and the window management implementation is stellar.įor the most part your skills will be transferable between Oslo, Code V, and Zemax. However, Zemax overhauled their UI a couple years ago, and in my opinion, it's wonderful. Zemax used to be this way with cryptic 3 letter buttons, and many engineers I know cling to this. The learning curve is a little steeper, mostly just to find out where all the tools and features are. Code V is a bit more modern, but still feels considerably out of date. If I recall, a lot of actions are still performed by command line. I've actually encountered mostly Zemax in my career, but I sometimes get the feeling that more 'elite' optical designers use Code V, but I can't back that up with evidence.Īs far as the UI is concerned, Oslo feels like it was programmed in the 90's, and never updated. Fred and TracePro are geared toward non-imaging optics (headlights, projection illumination, street lights, etc, etc).Īs vweltin said, CodeV and Zemax, and Oslo, too, differ mostly in UI.
0 kommentar(er)
