I have not read the original paper, I'm not an expert in optics, but the article clearly makes an argument that seems contradictory:
- Current solution is expensive because it uses aspherical elements.
- New solution promises cost reduction.
- New solution uses aspherical elements as well.
Either there's some hidden detail that the article fails to mention, or it's claims are overstated. If you actually know about optics, I'd be glad to know which is the true or if I'm missing anything here, otherwise I would appreciate to keep your snarkiness to yourself.
