Telescope Reviews: No field stop?

Not trying to hi-jack this thread, but since XTlegend posted a photo of the vignetting he is seeing with his 15mm plossl, I thought I would interject this here. In a recent thread "TV plossls vs the rest", I posted a comment that all of my TV plossls appear to vignette in my f/13 Mak. I have a 15mm, 13mm, and 11mm, and recently sold a 20mm. All of them vignette. Mike Hosea offered this explanation:

(Quote)

I think the following contribute:

1. The lenses on the TV Plossls are slightly under-sized. This is not intended to be a cost-saving thing. Each lens has a double convex lens cemented to a double-concave lens. The double convex lens only has a thin edge as it is, so it can't be made wider without also being made thicker, which would change the design (to one with less eye relief).

2. Given #1, a slow f-ratio makes it more likely that the light for certain point near the edge is lost entirely rather in part. You might not notice it if you only lost half the light for a given point, but with the slow f-ratio it's closer to all-or-nothing for each given point.

3. Your scope has a negatively powered secondary mirror. This probably introduces a little divergence into the light cone, or at least there is less convergence than for an equivalent focal-length refractor. The divergence introduced by the scope changes the angle of the edge-of-field light cones, making it more likely that they will run afoul of the edges of the under-sized lenses.

(Un-quote)

I've been at a quandry as to what to do. The TV plossls are extremely sharp, and offer exceptional glare/anti-reflection control. I have some older Meades (4 and 5 element designs), and I think they are just as sharp as the TVs, but I have problems with these with both internal reflections and with light reflecting off of my eyes when viewing bright objects (Jupiter, the moon, Vega...). Of course the TVs are preferred for planets, but the vignetting is aesthetically displeasing when viewing the moon at high power, or when viewing DSOs or starfields. I actually prefer the Meades for all other viewing besides planets for the consistent sky background with a sharply defined field stop. I have some duplication between my TV set and my Meade set. So my question is, do I keep the TVs to use for planetary work and use the Meades for all other viewing, or do I find a good compromise with something else? I've been considering UO HD's, thinking I may get good glare control with the HD coatings, and possibly have a sharply defined field stop as well. I know the AFOV will be more restricted, but I am actually probably only getting 40-45 degrees with my TVs anyway because of the vignetting. Any suggestions? Some might say get another scope, but to be honest with you I love it. It is only 4" in aperture, but I have put in more hours with it in the first six months that I have had it than in the entire 8 years that I owned my "white elephant", a 10 inch Meade Starfinder dob. The best scope is the one that you will use most!!!

--------------------
Tony T.