I own 3 scopes: a 4" Mak, a 4" achromat, and an 8" SCT. The Mak gets used more than the achromat. If I'm going for the best views, that's what the 8" is for. The 4" scopes are there for convenience and the Mak is more convenient than the achromat. It is easier to transport and the ergonomics are better (eyepiece travel). I suppose if portability isn't an issue for you, that could tip things in favor of a refractor.
The forte of a refractor is wide field, but binoculars are the most convenient wide field optic. So the achromat has ended up occupying a niche where I want a wide field view better than a binocular ("deluxe wide field"?) but the object doesn't fit in my big scope or I don't want to bring out the big scope. How often does that happen? Not often. I'm either feeling lazy or I'm not and the object would have to be *very* big to not fit in a narrow FOV. At 1300mm and a 1.25" EP, we're talking bigger than M42, the Double Cluster, the core of M45 etc.
Re: focal ratio, FOV etc. A 4" Synta Mak has a focal length of 1300mm. A Synta Dob is typically 1200mm. So to call the FOV of the Mak "tiny" in comparison to a Dob seems like an exaggeration to me. It helps that the Dob can take 2" EP's but Maks have an ace up their sleeve too: you can put a focal reducer on it. This will help with both FOV and photographic speed.
My choice would be the Mak.