The intra and extra focal images appear quite different at a glance, but on closer inspection are not that dissimilar. Of course, the most notable feature is the strong loss of contrast outside of focus. Inside focus patterns are clean and high contrast, outside are not. This made evaluating outside patterns a little difficult.
At 4 waves, the contrast difference is not that apparent despite the flaring of the outer ring. In both de-focus locations, the inner most rings are clean, well defined, and high contrast. However, inside focus, the inner most rings are noticeably dimmer than outside focus. The third ring is bright, clean and well defined. There is also a dim halo of two rings, the inside one is not too faint while the outer one is barely seen. Outside, the general pattern of dimmer to brighter still applies like the inside focus pattern.
However, the innermost rings are definitely brighter than the corresponding rings inside focus. They are well contrasted, too. The third ring is a bit dimmer than the same ring inside focus (probably due to the lesser contrast.) This third ring, in particular, contributes nearly all of the flaring seen at this de-focus. Again, the same ring inside focus is very clean and well defined. The difference of this is striking.
Amateur Telescope optics shows 4 waves balanced (at bottom), but they appear only similar in some aspects, possibly between 0.1 and 0.2 PV. Neh?
About 10 waves, the contrast loss outside of focus is very prominent. In fact, it's difficult to detect the ring structure in moderate seeing, so it did require great seeing to get a good look at them. Inside of focus has the same relative brightness patterns consistent with Suiter's representation of 1/8th wave spherical. Again, they are very clean with full contrast.
Interestingly, in the best moments, outside of focus the relative ring structure and relative brightness are strikingly similar to inside focus. Outside the rings are a bit dimmer than inside, but this is due to the light scattered across the outside focus pattern. In less than perfect seeing, the two rings bordering the shadow tend to blend into one fuzzy, tad brighter ring. But, if one looks deep into that fuzzy glow, there are indeed two rings there. The inner most ring on the shadow boundary is actually a little dimmer than the one just outside it, just like inside focus pattern. Both are very thin and hard to see without good contrast. But, having said that, the basic relative pattern still holds pretty well with Suiter's (first edition) 1/8th wave representation.
Inside of focus, the central shadow is also noticeably darker at both levels of de-focus. It also appears a bit larger inside focus, but that's difficult to evaluate because of the flaring and loss of contrast outside of focus. OUtside it's more difficult to see the defined shadow. I did not do the shadow break out tests, the CO is only ~29% and the test looks very difficult to perform accurately. Nor have I applied Aberrator at this point. Maybe some night I will do so.
Lastly, the in-focus image is shown. Of course, the spurious disc (Aldebaran at 383x) is bright and as perfectly round as I could make it out to be. The first ring is pretty bright. That all appears normal for a spherical, obstructed scope with some spherical aberration present. Outside the first ring, there are two much fainter rings. The first of which is fairly faint and the third, outer most ring is very faint. The latter can only be seen during the best moments of seeing (I hope it even shows in the sketch.)
One interesting artifact(?) exists just outside the first bright ring and between that ring an the next. In generally good seeing, a series of extremely thin, not too dim, arcs seem to dance between the major diffraction rings. In very steady seeing, those dancing arcs settle into two very, very thin rings of moderate brightness (the outer ring a tad brighter than the inner.) I am not sure that to make of those rings. Again, they appear to be consistent with Suiter's representation of 1/8th wave in-focus representation.
Anyway, my guess is, despite the loss of contrast, the correction seems pretty good. Surely they are not perfect, and I doubt they are 1/8th corrected. I cannot quantify it except to say it's consistent with Suiter's 1/8th wave, and much less so with 1/4 wave SA. I might wager the correction is near 1/6th P-V, with lower order and higher order contributing (and I suspect balanced to some degree.) Despite the contrast loss outside of focus, Jupiter come to focus rather snappy and shows a great bit of detail.
I am still trying to evaluate the HSA component, but that is very difficult to do. According to Suiter, I really gotta get down to 1 to 3 waves de-focus to see, "mouthpiece of the born pulled back through the caustic."
Anyway, what say you?