On Wednesday, May 20, 2015 at 11:59:00 AM UTC-4, palsing wrote:
On Wednesday, May 20, 2015 at 3:51:20 AM UTC-7, wsne... wrote:
On Wednesday, May 20, 2015 at 12:23:52 AM UTC-4, palsing wrote:

Whatever, these guys are terrific planetary eyepieces...

Are you damning them with faint praise?

Not at all, these guys are highly regarded by many folks who like to observe
the planets, planetary nebulae or double stars, especially at high powers,
even though they have a very restricted 32-degree field-of-view when compared
to most modern eyepieces. See this...

http://www.cloudynights.com/documents/tmb.pdf

... and check out the chart on the last 2 pages... and this review...

http://ejamison.net/equipment_reviews3.html

... and there are many others to be found, too.

As was I reading the S&T article I did a quick cost/benefit analysis and concluded that a larger scope with ordinary Plossls would be a better use of funds. YMMV.