Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

16x50 first impression and question

  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 10 October 2019 - 10:55 AM

Hi everyone! So, I bit the bullet and ordered a pair of the Nikon AE 16x50. I know I like 12x, but I really wanted to see what 16x is like, especially with such light-polluted skies. Thanks to all who offered their experiences and advice.

 

I went the 16x AE over the 16x Aculon despite the narrower FoV because of the eye relief and weatherproofing. No night sky time yet, but my initial impressions are very favorable. The build quality is quite good and it is very solid. I had a 10x50 pair of the Aculons and I liked them very much, but I like the extra heft of the AE a bit better. The glass and coatings look great and the eye cups twist up nice and stay in place well. 

 

Daytime views so far are good. Great color rendition and I like the extra power. The image does not seem dim compared to my former 10x. I can really see details of trees and animals across the pond out back (maybe 70 yards away?). One thing I do notice and I think this is normal due to the high mag is there is not a lot of depth of field, so I do find myself refocusing a lot more than I did with my 10x. I would guess that once focused on infinity, little to no adjustment would be needed. Is that correct? Oh, and I am using them on a tripod.

 

I will be sure to post some thoughts after I get it out under the stars. 

 

smile.gif

 

 


  • Swedpat, Grimnir, Terra Nova and 1 other like this

#2 Antonio R.G

Antonio R.G

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 107
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2019

Posted 10 October 2019 - 11:30 AM

Great choice. I have the Aculon 16x50 (I do not wear glasses to observe) and it is very, very good ... I think it is the best 16x50 I have ... I have good Tento 16x50 Bak4 and other older Japanese ones and this one easily surpasses them .. on a stable tripod will give you wonderful views. Action 16x50 should be the same, with a different lens or eyepiece to increase the eye relief. I was surprised by this binocular when I bought it, I expected a dark image, without definition and difficult to focus, but it is quite the opposite ... very good with a tripod ... I am not very supportive of large increases but when I find something of quality it is welcome..
  • erin likes this

#3 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 10 October 2019 - 11:41 AM

Hi Antonio, I’m glad you are happy with your Aculons! I was so torn between the two models. The wider FoV is nice in the Aculon. I have been practicing a bit more and am having an easier time focusing. 

 

One thing I notice different from the 10x Aculon is less of the fishbowl effect on the outer 30-40% of the field. I don’t know the technical name for it. It could have been field curvature since focusing made it go away, mostly-except for the very edge.



#4 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 21,980
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: Under the Blue Moon of Kentucky

Posted 10 October 2019 - 03:34 PM

16x50 binoculars make for a useful and interesting alternative for sure. They wouldn’t suffice for me as my general purpose binocular, but I do love the higher power option in a small, light, easily handheld body. Even my old Manon 16x50s produce very bright sharp images. When I got them they were in terrible need of collimation. Probably why I got them for such a good price. But since I collimated them, I have been very happy with their performance. Collimation wound up being quite easy with the Manons. The end-rings over the objectives unscrew and once removed, the individual cells are like cams that are rotated in their counter-cells to bring them into alignment. I simply removed the end-rings, mounted the binocs on a tripod, aimed them at a distant sign and rotated the objectives by trial and error until they snapped into a nice image; then put the end-rings back on. They have remained collimated ever since.  When I got them, they weren’t in a case and that may have accounted for their mis-collimation. I have since found a very nice small aluminum case.they are great for birds and airplanes! Not bad at night either.

Attached Thumbnails

  • 864AB193-6AE0-454A-A0A9-0467B1412C7B.jpeg

Edited by terraclarke, 10 October 2019 - 03:39 PM.

  • hallelujah, Corcaroli78, WALL.E and 3 others like this

#5 j.gardavsky

j.gardavsky

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,165
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2019
  • Loc: Germany

Posted 10 October 2019 - 03:49 PM

Congrats Terra on the binos!

 

I like the inscription: Deluxe Lens

 

Wishing you many amazing views,

JG


  • Terra Nova likes this

#6 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 10 October 2019 - 04:14 PM

16x50 binoculars make for a useful and interesting alternative for sure. They wouldn’t suffice for me as my general purpose binocular, but I do love the higher power option in a small, light, easily handheld body. Even my old Manon 16x50s produce very bright sharp images. When I got them they were in terrible need of collimation. Probably why I got them for such a good price. But since I collimated them, I have been very happy with their performance. Collimation wound up being quite easy with the Manons. The end-rings over the objectives unscrew and once removed, the individual cells are like cams that are rotated in their counter-cells to bring them into alignment. I simply removed the end-rings, mounted the binocs on a tripod, aimed them at a distant sign and rotated the objectives by trial and error until they snapped into a nice image; then put the end-rings back on. They have remained collimated ever since.  When I got them, they weren’t in a case and that may have accounted for their mis-collimation. I have since found a very nice small aluminum case.they are great for birds and airplanes! Not bad at night either.

That's great, Terra! I'm glad you like yours. Yeah, I thought about 15x70s, but that small, light weight package is nice.

 

I have my 8x42 roofs for general use and a little pair of 12x25s for hikes when I feel like more magnification and just carrying them in my pocket. I have officially become and optics junkie! lol.gif


  • Corcaroli78 and Terra Nova like this

#7 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 29 October 2019 - 12:28 PM

I promised some impressions under the stars, so here they are!

 

I got out with the binoculars mounted on an Orion Tritech LT1 tripod a couple nights ago. It was one of those nights where the sky was very transparent and showed more than I expected to see from this red zone. 

 

These 16x did not give anything up to my former 10x in terms of brightness. I know the exit pupil is smallish, but it didn't feel like it. Bright stars focused to a pinpoint in the center of the field and, to my eyes, well out from center also. I only noticed blurring right on the edge. Easier finding focus than with my Aculons (10x). The field felt immersive despite the 3.5deg. FoV. Of course, I did have to use more guide stars to find objects, but it didn't feel like I was looking through a straw.

 

I FINALLY saw, for sure, M36 and M38 in Auriga. I couldn't find them with my 10x, due to the light pollution. I checked with the 8x and they were washed out. With my scope, I wasn't sure which ones I was looking at so now I know. The Pleiades were stunning as always-more stars with these than my 8x for sure. I hope this helps someone trying to make a decision. I really wasn't sure that they would be good because of the narrower FoV than the Aculon and the small exit pupil, but the image quality is better and they are very rugged. Can't wait to take these camping under dark skies!


  • J1M likes this

#8 mooreorless

mooreorless

    Just worried

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,442
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Cornpropst Mills,Huntingdon,Pa

Posted 29 October 2019 - 02:11 PM

Hi Erin, I have both the Nikon 16x50 Extreme and Nikon 16x50 Aculon  and like using the 16x50 Extreme better with the extra ER if I wear glasses. I did do some testing with my 1951 USAF resolution charts and these two were very very close. I also tried to use Eagle Optics 2 1/2 power extender while testing and they were still pretty close.


  • erin likes this

#9 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 29 October 2019 - 03:05 PM

Hi Steve—that’s cool that you tested them. Thank you for sharing that. The 16x Aculons have gotten good reviews here. I wanted the weatherproofing and the eye relief is a nice bonus. Got my 8x42’s for the wide views.



#10 mooreorless

mooreorless

    Just worried

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,442
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Cornpropst Mills,Huntingdon,Pa

Posted 29 October 2019 - 03:29 PM

Erin I bought the 16x50 Aculon first and liked it so much I bought the 16x50 Extreme.  I have quite a view in my back field with Deer, turkeys etc. and used the 16 a little in the night sky, but waiting for later in the Fall etc.DSC04077.JPG


  • erin and Antonio R.G like this

#11 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 29 October 2019 - 03:42 PM

Nice picture! You're in for a treat when you get to turn 'em skyward.


  • mooreorless likes this

#12 hallelujah

hallelujah

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,866
  • Joined: 14 Jul 2006
  • Loc: North Star over Colorado

Posted 29 October 2019 - 03:47 PM

The 16x Aculons have gotten good reviews here.

I wanted the weatherproofing and the eye relief is a nice bonus.

The Nikon Action Extreme ATB 16x50 eye relief is an advertised 17.8mm.

The Nikon Aculon 16x50 eye relief is an advertised 12.6mm.

 

The Nikon Action Extreme is advertised as waterproof & fogproof.

The Nikon Aculon is not advertised as either.

 

https://www.nikonspo...ine_Catalog.pdf

 

Stan



#13 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 29 October 2019 - 04:01 PM

Thanks Stan. I meant that I chose the Extreme over the Aculons for those reasons (eyerelief and weatherproofing).


  • Jon Isaacs likes this

#14 hallelujah

hallelujah

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,866
  • Joined: 14 Jul 2006
  • Loc: North Star over Colorado

Posted 29 October 2019 - 04:04 PM

Thanks for the clarification.



#15 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 29 October 2019 - 04:05 PM

waytogo.gif



#16 mooreorless

mooreorless

    Just worried

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,442
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Cornpropst Mills,Huntingdon,Pa

Posted 29 October 2019 - 04:16 PM

Erin I just had both of the 16x50 out on the back porch looking at a Verizon substation 450+yards away and found that the 16x50  Aculon is very close to the 16x50  Extreme but naked  eye withboth the Extreme is much  nicer to look through and use with its ER.


Edited by mooreorless, 29 October 2019 - 04:18 PM.

  • erin likes this

#17 Riccardo_italy

Riccardo_italy

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 852
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2014
  • Loc: Italy

Posted 30 October 2019 - 09:24 AM

A different price, but the Nikon Monarch 20x56 and the 16x56 seem very interesting. Also Maven has something similar, and with Abbe Konig prisms. Then, of course, you have the alpha producers.


Edited by Riccardo_italy, 30 October 2019 - 09:25 AM.


#18 hallelujah

hallelujah

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,866
  • Joined: 14 Jul 2006
  • Loc: North Star over Colorado

Posted 30 October 2019 - 09:32 AM

Years ago I had the Nikon Action 16x50 & it suffered from too many ghost images when viewing the moon.

I sold it & bought a Pentax 16x60 PCF WP & never regretted it.

 

Stan



#19 mooreorless

mooreorless

    Just worried

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,442
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Cornpropst Mills,Huntingdon,Pa

Posted 30 October 2019 - 03:31 PM

Hi Stan,  I will have to check out this Nikon 16x50 extreme on the Moon, I have looked at a not full Moon and did not notice any ghost images.


Edited by mooreorless, 30 October 2019 - 03:31 PM.


#20 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 30 October 2019 - 04:26 PM

I think Stan is referring to the Nikon Action as in the predecessor to the Aculon, which is different from the Action Extreme. The Aculons have better coatings than the older Actions did.


  • mooreorless and hallelujah like this

#21 mooreorless

mooreorless

    Just worried

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,442
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Cornpropst Mills,Huntingdon,Pa

Posted 30 October 2019 - 06:00 PM

Thanks Erin!  I forgot about the Nikon Action.


  • erin likes this

#22 hallelujah

hallelujah

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,866
  • Joined: 14 Jul 2006
  • Loc: North Star over Colorado

Posted 30 October 2019 - 07:16 PM

The Aculons have better coatings than the older Actions did.

I don't know about the coatings on the Aculons of 2019 but when they first hit the market Nikon told me that there was no difference between the Actions & the Aculons.



#23 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 30 October 2019 - 10:34 PM

Stan-that is interesting. I had read here, by more than one person, that the coatings and the eyecups were the main differences between the Action and the Aculon. hmm.gif Thanks. I wasn’t aware of that.



#24 mooreorless

mooreorless

    Just worried

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,442
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Cornpropst Mills,Huntingdon,Pa

Posted 31 October 2019 - 06:46 AM

I forgot to say that I had bought the  Nikon 16x50  Aculon first and liked it so much that I bought the Nikon 16x50 Extreme for the more ER etc. I have just not tried to sell the  Aculon model.


  • erin likes this

#25 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 31 October 2019 - 06:58 AM

Steve, what do you think of the difference in field of view? I hated having to choose between the wider field of view of the Aculon over the eye relief of the Extreme. 

 

I don’t wear glasses for observing but find that the greater eye relief comfortable, especially when using them with a tripod.




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics