pete14

I agree with much of your thoughts on it. I too have TV eye pieces; Pans, Ethos, Radians and love them however, I don't believe it s all that simple when your going into small FL. I mean look at camera lenses, crazy expensive multiple elements. I don't know the answer but I do know this we, or I should say a friend has an old, over 120 year old 75mm lens doublet, if I (recall correctly) Conrady Made by Watson & Sons Brass tube long F15 before coatings, the views looking at the moon were stunning. We routinely took it up to 700x even 800x though at 650x it was excellent ! The telescope was called Century. Now how's this possible ? Granted its not an oil spaced triplet of modern times but I will say this, It must have been a passion of its time for there were no aberrations that we could detect through this lens and perhaps modern day coatings robs the underlying achievement of what it was meant to do on such an old lens. Can they do that today ! I will add that the sweet spot on this old beauty is between 500x - 650x Amazing for something some damn old.

As I understand it, at least compared with the TMB and Fujiyama the TMB mono is a cemented triplet all 3 lenses are cemented together. The Fujiyama too is a triplet where 2 lenses are cemented followed by a non-cemented singlet. From personal experience each of these designs imo appear to bring out unique attributes to the view, the scratch & dig or material composition is something all together different. Of course the higher the polish, the more $$$$$ !

A friend and I have had the opportunity to compare, here in Vancouver, BC a TMB Mono and Fujiyama 7mm eyepieces together exercising a fine refractor. At first look through the TMB was extremely impressive, sharp, contrasty, resolution very high. Comparing and dropping in the Fujiyama was equally impressive with similar results. passing back in forth between the two eyepieces scrutinizing every bit of detail went on for a lengthy time whereby, we both concluded the Fujiyama was equally good and real bang for the buck. The only discerning difference we could ascertain was the TMB had a slight increase in MAG hence producing a slightly larger image and transparency appeared to have an edge,, (light throughput). Which we both found odd yet surprising. IMO I found the Fujiyama to be every bit as good as the TMB Monocentric. Is the TMB worth more ? yes sure it is, a slight gain in performance but, at twice the price. You decide, I'd be very happy with the Fujiyama !