TMB Supermonocentric 7mm vs Fujiyama ORTHO 7mm

[denis0007dl]

[AlexB67]

Very nice, even the top lens looks big compared to the 5mm BGO I just bought. The 7mm should be a luxury to use if I can get on with a 5mm 

[denis0007dl]

BGO and Fujis orthos have same lens diameters, except Fujis have little better coatings.

TMB SM 7mm lens is very little comparing Fujis 7mm, and I prefeer Fujis more comfort when we talk about these comparation.

Also, Fujis have noticable biger FOV, but in planet details they are very close, while TMB show a touch more details, but just if scope is in perfect collimation and if sky is very clear. (of course scope must be well cooled down)

[John]

I've compared the Fujiyama, Astro Hutech and Baader Genuine Orthos at some length over a number of months. There are some differences in terms of the length of the body which affects the focal plane position but optically their lens sets and coatings look and perform exactly the same to me.

I've also owned a 5mm TMB Supermonocentric and compared that over a period of weeks with a University Optics HD 5mm ortho and found them very similar in performance on most nights but the TMB Supermono just pulled slightly ahead on the nights of best seeing (so about 20% of the time) in terms of controlling light scatter and showing subtle planetary surface features. There was nothing "extra" to be seen with the TMB Supermono but sometimes the features were slightly better defined. These differences were not evident on nights of average seeing conditions though.

With my undriven, alt-azimuth scopes using the TMB Supermonocentric with it's ~30 degree AFoV was noticably more of a chore than the 5mm UO ortho. Neither are exactly comfortable when compared with my Pentax XW though and that gets very close to HD ortho performance and therefore a lot of use from me