referring to fig1 a , there is schematically illustrated a part of a charge particle beam column ( such as an sem ) including an objective lens arrangement , arrangement 10 includes a magnetic lens 14 and an electrostatic lens 16 . further provided in this part of the charged particle beam column is an in - lens detector 22 located above the lens 14 such that an optical axis 0 a of the lens arrangement passes through an opening 22 a ( primary beam hole ) in the detector . the magnetic lens 14 is formed by excitation coils 14 a and two pole pieces 14 b and 14 c . the electrostatic lens 16 is formed by following electrodes : electrode 16 a — the lower end of an anode tube 20 , electrode 16 b — the sample &# 39 ; s surface , and “ cap ” electrodes 16 c and 16 ′ c arranged in a spaced - apart relationship along the optical axis 0 a of the lens arrangement between the electrodes 16 a and 16 b . the electrodes 16 c and 16 c ′ are separately operated by a voltage supply ( not shown ), and are preferably made of mu - meal for better magnetic immunity ( less noise ). in order to affect the charged particle beam trajectory ( deflection ) for example for the fast scan purpose , the electrode 16 c ′ octupole structure . at least the lower electrode 16 c of the double - electrode assembly is preferably conically shaped . this is associated with a need for as small as possible “ effective ” working distance wd ( which is a distance between the plane defined by the lowermost electrode of the lens arrangement and the sample plane measured along the optical axis 0 a ) when operating with a tilted sample . as shown in the figure , when the sample is tilted , is is substantially parallel to the electrode 16 c . in the present example , a 45 °- tilt ( an angle between the optical axis 0 a and the sample &# 39 ; s plane ) is achieved by mechanically tilting the sample with respect to the lens arrangement . it should , however , be understood that the same can be achieved by tilting the lens arrangement ( or the entire column ) with respect to the sample . in the example of fig . 1a , the upper electrode 16 c ′ of the double - electrode assembly is substantially planar ( i . e ., perpendicular to the optical axis 0 a ). as indicated above , both electrodes of the double - electrode configuration may be conically shaped . [ 0031 ] fig1 b illustrates an objective lens arrangement 100 according to another example of the invention . to facilitate understanding , the same reference numbers are used for identifying components that are common for all the examples . thus , in the example of fig . 1b , both upper and lower electrodes 16 c and 16 c ′ are conically shaped , and the lower electrode 16 c is formed with an additional conical part 26 ( shielded electrode ) around the bottom end of the lower polepiece 14 c of the magnetic lens 14 . fig1 c illustrates an objective lens arrangement 200 according to yet another example of the invention , wherein the upper electrode 16 c ′ of the double - cap assembly is formed with an additional conical part 26 ′ around the bottom end of the lower polepiece 14 c of the lens 14 . the provision of this conical part 26 ( or 26 ′) is optional , and serves for providing better balance of the collection of secondary electrons on two outside detectors ( not shown ). this is associated with the following . the radius of the magnetic lens ( with no cap - electrode ) is typically about 15 - 16 mm . the magnetic field created by such a magnetic lens thus propagates out of the magnetic lens towards the sample and twists secondary electrons in the vicinity of the sample . this results in different signals detected by the outside detectors . the extended conical part 26 of the cap - electrode partly shields the magnetic field , thereby magnetic field propagation from the magnetic lens to the sample ) resulting in the uniform signals at both outside detectors . in the examples of fig1 a - 1c , the electrostatic part of the lens arrangement is implemented as a separate double - cap electrode assembly . fig1 d exemplifies a lens arrangement 300 in which the electrostatic part of the lens utilizes the power polepiece of the magnetic lens . more specifically , a double - cap assembly 216 is formed by the lowermost polepiece 14 c of the magnetic lens 14 and an electrode 216 c between the polepieces 14 b and 14 c of the magnetic lens . the advantageous use of a double - cap electrostatic part of the lens arrangement ( either as a separate double - electrode assembly below a two - polepieces magnetic lens , or as an assembly formed by the lower polepiece of the magnetic lens and an electrode between the polepieces ) is associated with the following : let us consider the objective lens arrangement shown in fig2 which is generally similar to that of fig1 a , but has a single cap - electrode 16 c ( no additional electrode 16 c ′). in this example , the electrostatic part of the lens arrangement is an electrostatic lens formed by electrode 16 a ( anode tube ), electrode 16 b ( sample ) and a conical cap - electrode 16 c between the polepiece 14 c and the sample 16 b . the optical force of such an objective lens arrangement is defined by the geometry of the electrodes and the potential difference between the anode 16 a and the cap electrode 16 c . when using a conical cap , the equipotential lines of the electric field are strongly curved , and thus a higher optical force of the lens arrangement is provided . generally , the optical force of the lens arrangement should be such that , at a 45 °- tilt , a field created by the beam electrons onto the tilted sample . it is also important to provide no strong electrostatic field between the cap and the tilted sample . to this end , the cap electrode 16 c is formed with a small opening at the top of the cone ( about 2 mm ), otherwise deflecting and multi - pole field components occur , thus reducing the resolution . the use of a smaller opening impedes the collection of secondary electrons , especially when operating with the in - lens detector , and may also reduce the resolution , since in this case , the electrostatic field in the vicinity of the sample is significantly reduced . the optical force of the lens arrangement is even affected by the thickness of the conical cap wall : the thinner the wall , the higher the optical force . thus , the fixed geometry of the electrodes in such a lens and voltage between the electrodes induce a limitation for improving the resolution because of a too high coefficient of chromatic aberration , and induce limitation for minimizing the primary beam energy that can be effectively focused at the 45 °- tilt of the sample due to the fixed value of the optical force of the lens arrangement . although decreasing the anode voltage reduces the minimal primary beam energy that can be effectively focused , this results in an increase of the coefficient of chromatic aberration , and consequently in the reduction of resolution , and results in the reduction of the effectiveness of the detection of secondary electrons by an in - lens detector . with the lens arrangement of the present invention ( figs . 1a - 1d ), by providing an appropriate voltage supply to the additional electrode 16 c ′, the optical force of the entire lens arrangement can be regulated , the zoom lens mode of the lens arrangement can be provided , and chromatic aberration can be affected ( which is the dominant factor affecting the resolution ). generally , a relative position of the principal plane of a lens arrangement affects the magnification coefficient of the lens arrangement and the numerical aperture ( angel of beam convergence in the image plane , which should be optimal for diffraction effects especially for low energy primary electrons ). when the additional electrode 16 c ′ is supplied with a voltage equal to that of the cap electrode 16 c ( v 16c ′ = v 16c ), the principal plane of the lens arrangement becomes located closer to the anode , resulting in a decrease of the numerical aperture of the lens arrangement and consequently in an increase of the coefficient of magnification . applying the same voltage to the anode 16 a and additional electrode 16 c ′ ( v 16c ′ = v 16a ) results in that the principal plane of the lens arrangement is displaced towards the sample , thus increasing the numerical aperture and decreasing the magnification coefficient . reference is now made to fig3 a - 3c illustrating simulation results obtained with a model of the lens arrangement illustrated at fig1 c , according to the invention with the following common conditions : the primary beam energy e = 600 ev , fa = 15 μm ( final aperture dimension , the final aperture is positioned in proximity ( about 50 mm below ) of the electron tip and defined the angle of the flux at the object plain , vanode = 8 kv . [ 0039 ] fig3 a shows the image blur as a function of voltage applied to the additional electrode 16 c ′ ( graph g 1 − blur = f ( v 16c ′ )) and the chromatic aberration coefficient as a function of voltage applied to the additional electrode 16 c ′ ( graph g 2 − cchr = f ( v 16c ′ )) while operating with a 45 ° mechanical tilt , v 16c = 0 v , and wd = 2 . 5 mm . as shown , appropriately increasing v 16c ′ provides for the reduction however , be understood that while increasing v 16c ′ to a higher potential ( e . g ., about 3 kv ), the electrostatic field in the vicinity of the sample becomes increased which , as indicated above , would impede the collection of secondary electrons . the following table presents the dependency of the entire set of measurable parameters ( including also the lens magnification m , numerical aperture na , and spherical aberration c sph ) on the voltages applied to the electrodes 16 c and 16 c ′: olc ( please clarify ) na csph chr blur * ( ma ) m ( mrad ) ( mm ) ( mm ) ( nm ) v 16c ′ = 700 v 365 0 . 0476 11 . 6 8 . 22 2 . 50 18 . 4 v 16c = 0 v v 16c ′ = 1000 v 443 0 . 0503 11 . 3 6 . 89 2 . 2 15 . 2 v 16c = 0 v v 16c ′ = 1500 v 507 0 . 052 11 . 0 5 . 80 1 . 92 12 . 9 v 16c = 0 v v 16c ′ = 2000 v 538 0 . 0511 11 . 1 5 . 29 1 . 78 11 . 6 v 16c = 0 v v 16c ′ = 2500 v 555 0 . 049 11 . 5 5 . 03 1 . 70 12 v 16c = 0 v v 16c ′ = 3000 v 561 0 . 048 12 4 . 87 1 . 64 12 . 2 v 16c = 0 v using the similar working conditions in the lens arrangement of fig2 ( with no additional electrode 16 c ′) provides the following : na csph chr blur * olc ( ma ) m ( mrad ) ( mm ) ( mm ) ( nm ) 338 0 . 0425 13 . 4 5 . 94 2 . 80 22 . 5 [ 0042 ] fig3 b shows the image blur as a function of voltage applied to the additional electrode 16 c ′ ( graph h 1 − blur = f ( v 16c ′ )) and the chromatic aberration coefficient as a function of voltage applied to the additional electrode 16 c ′ ( graph h 2 − cchr = f ( v 16c ′ )), while operating with the normal incidence of the primary beam onto the sample ( sample perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens arrangement ), v 16c = 0v , and wd = 1 . 5 mm . fig3 c shows the image blur and chromatic aberration as functions of v 16 c ′ , while operating with the normal incidence and har mode ( v 16c = 3 kv ). as shown , increasing v l6c ′ provides for the reduction of the chromatic aberration and the image blur ( increase of resolution ). the following table presents the dependency of the entire set of measurable parameters ( including also the lens magnification m , numerical aperture na , and spherical aberration c sph ) on the voltages applied to the electrodes 16 c and 16 c ′: olc na csph chr blur * ( ma ) m ( mrad ) ( mm ) ( mm ) ( nm ) v 16c ′ = 700 v 501 0 . 0489 11 . 6 5 . 36 1 . 78 12 . 7 v 16c = 0 v v 16c ′ = 700 v 501 0 . 0489 11 . 6 5 . 36 1 . 78 12 . 7 v 16c = 0 v v 16c ′ = 1000 v 552 0 . 0518 11 . 0 4 . 65 1 . 54 10 . 4 v 16c = 0 v v 16c ′ = 2000 v 629 0 . 055 10 . 3 3 . 58 1 . 17 7 . 65 v 16c = 0 v v 16c ′ = 3000 v 659 0 . 054 10 . 5 3 . 03 1 . 01 6 . 85 v 16c = 0 v v 16c ′ = 4000 v 671 0 . 052 11 . 0 2 . 59 0 . 92 6 . 55 v 16c = 0 v v 16c ′ = 3000 v 697 0 . 0678 8 . 38 5 . 66 0 . 78 5 . 36 v 16c = 3000 v v 16c ′ = 4000 v 713 0 . 069 8 . 7 5 . 69 0 . 74 5 . 21 v 16c = 3000 v v 16c ′ = 5000 v 721 00 . 068 8 . 3 2 . 44 0 . 70 5 . 07 v 16c = 3000 v v 16c ′ = 6000 v 725 0 . 067 8 . 46 5 . 02 0 . 67 4 . 96 v 16c = 3000 v v 16c ′ = 7000 v 726 0 . 065 8 . 7 4 . 53 0 . 64 4 . 85 v 16c = 3000 v using the similar working conditions in the lens arrangement of fig2 ( with no additional electrode 16 c ′) provides the following : olc na csph chr blur * ( ma ) m ( mrad ) ( mm ) ( mm ) ( nm ) v 16c = 0 . 494 . 6 0 . 0449 12 . 65 3 . 63 1 . 97 14 . 8 v 16c = 3 kv 707 . 5 0 . 0693 8 . 19 5 . 67 0 . 76 5 . 26 it is evident from the above experimental results that the use of the lens arrangement of the present invention comprising the additional electrode 16 c ′ provides for better system performance as compared to that of the lens arrangement of fig2 . with the lens arrangement of the present invention , the resolution at 600 ev — energy primary beam and 45 °- mechanical tilt is better by 30 - 40 %, than that obtainable with the lens arrangement of fig2 . at normal incidence , the resolution is almost the same with the lens arrangement of the present invention , and that of fig2 . the simulations have shown that the minimal energy of the primary beam that can be focused onto the sample with the lens arrangement of fig2 is 500 ev , while with the lens arrangement of the present invention , this minimal energy is reduced to 230 ev . as for the shift of the primary charged particle beam , while operating with the 45 ° mechanical tilt and the lens arrangement of the present invention , the shift is about 22 μm at v 16c ′ = 2000 v and about 8 μm at v 16c ′ = 2000 v . secondary electrons can be it is noted that further experiments conducted by the inventors led to a resolution of about 3 nanometers at 1 kev beam lending energy and wd ( work distance )= 1 . 2 mm and about 4 nanometers at 600 ev and wd = 2 . 5 mm , thus better results were achieved than previously expected in view of the simulation that provided resolution of 4 nanometers at 1 kev and resolution of 5 . 5 nanometers at 600 ev . those skilled in the art will readily appreciate that various modifications and changes can be applied to the embodiments of the invention as hereinbefore exemplified without departing from its scope defined in and by the appended claims .