Jump to content


Photo

Fujiyama Orthos or just one TMB SuperMono?

  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Greg77

Greg77

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 02 May 2009
  • Loc: Slovenia, EU

Posted 13 October 2013 - 12:08 PM

Currently I have nice set of XWs (from 5 to 20) for "all around" astronomy observations. But I want something special for planetary work, like Abbe Orthos or Supermonos. Luckily I found a nice 5mm TMB Supermono, but for the price I could have new set of 4, 5 and 6mm Fujiyama Orthos. What would you buy...? My scope is a 5" triplet APO...

CS!

Greg

#2 JustaBoy

JustaBoy

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4356
  • Joined: 19 Jun 2012

Posted 13 October 2013 - 12:17 PM

I dunno... Never tried a TMB, but those three Orthos would 'probably' be the way I would go. - Not many nights that you could tell the difference???
-Chuck

#3 Schaden

Schaden

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 225
  • Joined: 30 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Sonoran Desert

Posted 13 October 2013 - 03:19 PM

Since you want to get specialty planetary eyepieces, I'd go for the TMB supermono. If the conditions are good enough, I believe you could see an improvement. Especially with a nice APO. Based on anecdotal reading of the forum, I'm not convinced a Fujiyama Ortho would be sharper/more contrasty than a Pentax XW. It could be a lateral move. But I don't know, that's just my hunch.

#4 junomike

junomike

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1969
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 13 October 2013 - 04:03 PM

Currently I have nice set of XWs (from 5 to 20) for "all around" astronomy observations. But I want something special for planetary work, like Abbe Orthos or Supermonos.



This is exactly what I have (XW's for General viewing, TMB SMC's for great seeing Planetary/Lunar).
I also have a Bino-set of UO H.D.'s which are comparable to the Fujiyama Orthos and although they are a little better then the XW's, the difference isn't that much. Not enough to warrant having both IMO.

The TMB SuperMono's are in a whole other league and the detail differences are easily noticeable.

I also have a 5" Triplet Apo and I'd recommend using the XW's and slowly accumilating the TMB SMC's.
Be forewarned however they are pricey and not readily available on the used market (but do pop up now and then).

As a substitute to the TMB SuperMono's, I'd recommend the Pentax Or.s, AP-SPL's and CZJ's.
People will recommend Brandon's as well, but I didn't find them to be in the same league as the above eyepieces.....regardless to what JrBarnett says! :grin:

Mike

#5 John Huntley

John Huntley

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 957
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2006
  • Loc: South West England

Posted 13 October 2013 - 04:35 PM

Having owned / used / compared the TMB Supermono, Pentax XW and Baader GO / Astro Hutech (same as Fujiyama) Orthos in the 5mm focal length I found I did not see any significant difference, aside from FoV and viewing comfort, between the Baader and Hutech and the Pentax XW on any occasion that I used them. On the nights of best seeing the TMB Supermono did show subtle details on Jupiter and Mars just a little easier but only on the best nights, for me.

Not really a whole other league thing for me - just subtle improvements under the best conditions :)

#6 Schaden

Schaden

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 225
  • Joined: 30 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Sonoran Desert

Posted 13 October 2013 - 07:13 PM

Not really a whole other league thing for me - just subtle improvements under the best conditions :)


I don't know, but I believe there is a difference with these top tier planetary ep's. I think you just need sufficiently good conditions to allow it to obviously perform better.

The couple of times I've had Antoniadi I steadiness at 360x, it seemed like my C8 telescope had twice as much resolution as I was used to. There were countless tiny new craters visible on the moon, the color in Saturn's belts looked so vibrant compared to my usual expectation.

There is so much detail lost to the seeing on a typical night. I suspect the potential of a Zeiss Ortho or TMB Monocentric is usually limited by the seeing. Without excellent seeing, the improvement with "super premium" glass is probably negligible.

#7 SteveC

SteveC

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3575
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Sunshine State & Ocean State

Posted 13 October 2013 - 07:50 PM

Hi Greg,

Even if you decide that Supermonos aren't for you, whether they are too expensive or only marginally better, I'm sure you won't loose money for your efforts. You ought to be able to recoup your investment.

#8 olivdeso

olivdeso

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 143
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2011
  • Loc: Paris FR

Posted 13 October 2013 - 10:03 PM

what is the focal ratio of your refractor?

However, I would suggest the pentax XO 5

I own the XW, the ZAO2 and the XO and also the nag 3-6. I have owned some BGO as well and compared to other ep.

The BGO did not surpass the XW. a little bit brighter but that's all, even less details seen than in the XW. I am not sure the Fujiyama could do a better job.
Only the ZAOII and the XO could give a sharper image, by a small margin.
The nag 3-6 is not as contrasty as the fixed ep and also a little bit yellow, but still usable for travels and collimating on the Airy disk...

The nag 5T6 can do an excellent job in planetary viewing, especially on Mars, where the yellowish image is not an concern here but could even be an asset.

The Ethos also do a surprizing job when paired together with a powermate. For instance the ethos 13 and the PM x2 gives a better image than the 3-6 nag at 6mm : whiter/better colors in the ethos, more contrast.

Without the powermate, I found the XW better (more contrast, excelent color rendition)

#9 Greg77

Greg77

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 02 May 2009
  • Loc: Slovenia, EU

Posted 14 October 2013 - 07:13 AM

what is the focal ratio of your refractor?


It's a f/7,5 scope. 5XW gives me a nice 190X magnification and sometimes (excellent seeing) I think it could "take" more mag or simply better views with like SuperMono or Zeiss Abbe. Should I just forget 5mm range and buy something in 3,5mm range...?

Many thanks for your thoughts...

Greg

#10 BillP

BillP

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11883
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Vienna, VA

Posted 14 October 2013 - 08:09 AM

Currently I have nice set of XWs (from 5 to 20) for "all around" astronomy observations. But I want something special for planetary work, like Abbe Orthos or Supermonos. Luckily I found a nice 5mm TMB Supermono, but for the price I could have new set of 4, 5 and 6mm Fujiyama Orthos. What would you buy...? My scope is a 5" triplet APO...

CS!

Greg


I have found that not only the atmosphere, but also the scope makes a difference in teasing out the extra that these premium planetaries can offer. So many times I find my obstructed systems have a harder time capitalizing on all that these can offer. Given that you are using a 5"apo, I would say that the TMB Supermono would be the better choice over the standard Orthos. You will be quite surprised at the extra level of contrast they will produce. Things like ejecta wisps through and around craters will take on a whole new life, polar caps and polar haze on Mars will show whiter and more prominently, the mottled structure of M42 will show more structured, and glob cores will sparkle with more defined very faint stars than before as examples of what I see using them. And in the end if you feel that the small 30 degree afov is just not for you, then as SteveC pointed out you will have zero problem recouping your investment on these as they are highly sought after.

#11 SteveC

SteveC

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3575
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Sunshine State & Ocean State

Posted 14 October 2013 - 11:57 AM


However, I would suggest the pentax XO 5


An excellent suggestion. The 5mm XO is usually in my TEC turret for high mag viewing. The only problem is that it's just as expensive as the 5mm Supermono, perhaps more.

#12 Scott99

Scott99

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2924
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: New England

Posted 14 October 2013 - 12:40 PM

If the question was three of the Japanese HD orthos vs. one of any of the "premium" orthos I would take the 3 HD orthos all the way. You get 200% more eyepieces with probably about 1% difference in the view.

Keep in mind that many people "imagine" seeing a better view in the more expensive eyepiece. In fact I suspect that happens most of the time. We're all guilty of it. There is absolutely no way you can remove the memory of paying 500 or 600 bucks for one tiny eypiece from your mind! :money: :money:


#13 desertlens

desertlens

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 845
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2010
  • Loc: 36°N 105°W

Posted 14 October 2013 - 01:41 PM

... with probably about 1% difference in the view.



+1 on this... if that much. Also the Fujiyamas will soon be available at Agena. This could save some import hassle. Manish already carries the Astro-Hutechs. There appears to be some difference in barrel length but I suspect that they are the same optically.

#14 BillP

BillP

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11883
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Vienna, VA

Posted 14 October 2013 - 04:08 PM

Keep in mind that many people "imagine" seeing a better view in the more expensive eyepiece. In fact I suspect that happens most of the time.


I would agree that this is definitely a possibility. However, I say that it is an equal possibility that the reason the observer could see a difference might also be: 1) the observer has better pysiology/acuity, 2) the observer has better skill and experience, 3) the observer was lucky enough to receive a higher quality unit off the production line than you tried (or you were unlucky enough to get a poorer unit), 4) the observer has a better optical chain than yours that can capitalize on the differences.

ps - forgot 5) the eyepiece tested was actually better :grin:

#15 Tin_Can_Man

Tin_Can_Man

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: 20 Jan 2012

Posted 14 October 2013 - 04:21 PM

If the question was three of the Japanese HD orthos vs. one of any of the "premium" orthos I would take the 3 HD orthos all the way. You get 200% more eyepieces with probably about 1% difference in the view.

Keep in mind that many people "imagine" seeing a better view in the more expensive eyepiece. In fact I suspect that happens most of the time. We're all guilty of it. There is absolutely no way you can remove the memory of paying 500 or 600 bucks for one tiny eypiece from your mind! :money: :money:


I agree whole heartedly with this.. I recently purchased an XW5 thinking it would be so much better than my ES4.7, only to find that in the areas that concern me more.. sharpness and contrast, my ES was the better performer. The XW did control the 'glow' around Saturn a little better, but overall I felt the view was softer..

More on topic, my first three ortho's just arrived this morning!! Fujiyama 7, 9 and 12.5 which will be doing planetary work through my Edge8 this Jupiter season!

Must say the look and feel is very solid for such small eyepieces.. Shipping was a breeze. Ordered Friday, arrived Tuesday morning, Japan to Australia. Impressive!

#16 SteveC

SteveC

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3575
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Sunshine State & Ocean State

Posted 14 October 2013 - 09:33 PM

If the question was three of the Japanese HD orthos vs. one of any of the "premium" orthos I would take the 3 HD orthos all the way. You get 200% more eyepieces with probably about 1% difference in the view.

Keep in mind that many people "imagine" seeing a better view in the more expensive eyepiece. In fact I suspect that happens most of the time. We're all guilty of it. There is absolutely no way you can remove the memory of paying 500 or 600 bucks for one tiny eypiece from your mind! :money: :money:


There might be a bias, but I've owned Supermonos from a time when they were relatively cheap, and I've sold more expensive eyepieces.

#17 Greg77

Greg77

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 02 May 2009
  • Loc: Slovenia, EU

Posted 16 October 2013 - 09:06 AM

Ok...I eventually decided to try how SuperMono performs in my scope. And there is another thought decision: Should I buy 5mm (190X) or 6mm (159X) SuperMono as my first TMB "tiny glass dept." eyepiece?

#18 ManuelJ

ManuelJ

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 778
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005
  • Loc: Madrid, Spain

Posted 16 October 2013 - 09:51 AM

For your 5" I would choose the 6mm. Specially given that Jupiter is the current target.

190X is too much for Jupiter and it's low contrast details.

#19 SteveC

SteveC

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3575
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Sunshine State & Ocean State

Posted 16 October 2013 - 10:29 AM

Ok...I eventually decided to try how SuperMono performs in my scope. An there is another thought decision: Should I buy 5mm (190X) or 6mm (159X) SuperMono as my first TMB "tiny glass dept." eyepiece?


I agree with Manuel, the 6mm SM might be the best way to go. I usually have 4mm, 5mm, 6mm, 10mm, and 16mm EPs in my turret, and I usually linger with the 6mm for longer periods in my TEC140(980mm, f7) on Jupiter. If I'm using my Denk Powerswitch, I pop in the 10mm SM and push in the 1.8 multiplier for high powered views. Depending on what becomes available first, the 7mm SM might also be an option. I had once planned a 7mm shootout, before life got in the way, and the 7mm SM was clearly the best performer in the bunch up until I stopped collecting data.

#20 Svezda

Svezda

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 886
  • Joined: 01 Jun 2007
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 16 October 2013 - 04:42 PM

Keep in mind that many people "imagine" seeing a better view in the more expensive eyepiece. In fact I suspect that happens most of the time.


I would agree that this is definitely a possibility. However, I say that it is an equal possibility that the reason the observer could see a difference might also be: 1) the observer has better pysiology/acuity, 2) the observer has better skill and experience, 3) the observer was lucky enough to receive a higher quality unit off the production line than you tried (or you were unlucky enough to get a poorer unit), 4) the observer has a better optical chain than yours that can capitalize on the differences.

ps - forgot 5) the eyepiece tested was actually better :grin:

I really agree completely and want another 'data point' to count for this point of view. I think amateur astronomers are a lot more analytical than the average person and we are much more capable of being objective, even if we have to admit that a large purchase really wasn't 'worth it' after careful testing. For example, I have the vaunted Pentax 5XO and am not so biased that I can say I can't see much if any difference from my relatively easy to find and not as expensive Pentax 5XW...but I also have a set of ZAOII's and can say that upon first observing planets with them I immediately noticed that they are a step above anything else I've used. It is not my opinion because I paid a lot for them...and I noticed that my much less expensive Pentax SMC Orthos give an /extremely/ close view as far as contrast and sharpness. The sky background on both these sets is velvety black. Like another poster mentioned, my Meade RG orthos also give a comparably excellent view...big differences compared to the ZAOII's noted on nights of VG to EXC seeing only.

People who haven't tried too many really superb (and expensive) oculars may have a prejudice of their own - that these eyepieces are simply for rich aficionados who don't really see a quality difference but just imagine it, or are more interested in 'pride of ownership'...but 'it ain't always so'. :cool:

#21 Scott99

Scott99

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2924
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: New England

Posted 17 October 2013 - 10:54 AM

mmmmm...there is a gorgeous set of Fuji's over on AM. Good thing I don't have an account anymore! restraint is weak :p

#22 Greg77

Greg77

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 02 May 2009
  • Loc: Slovenia, EU

Posted 17 October 2013 - 11:08 AM

Ok...I'll go with the "green" 6mm TMB SuperMono. Based upon Photos....it's in pristine condition and with "Monocentric" lettering. I hope for some clear weather in the next few days or weeks at least. :)

BillP...Thanks for this magnificent report:

http://www.cloudynig...hp?item_id=1935

It was a pleasure to read and helpful to my decision.

Greg






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics