Nate, for me, the luxury of the 16x70 MS ED's long ER and flat field in combination are worthwhile. I replaced my Fuji 16x70 FMTs with the APMs mainly for the longer ER, which for my face, is way more comfortable viewing at high angles than the shorter ER eyepieces like the FMTs and the Ultra-type binos. I can rock the binos upward from my browbones to gain altitude without bending my neck as much due to that longer ER. Both the FMTs and APMs have flatter fields than the 70mm competition, while the Ultras lose some sharpness towards the edges of the field, as the Nikon 18x70s are reported to do as well, FWIW.
Every time I read about the 16x70 MS ED's long ER and flat field, I feel like I should have this instrument in my collection. I need to wear eyeglasses for observation due to a moderate level of astigmatism in both eyes and so eye relief is an important factor for me. I have the Nikon 18x70 and am able to see its full FOV after removing the plastic eyecups and putting on some O-rings, a trick I learned from SMark in one of his many posts. However, there's always that nagging feeling that when looking at objects high up in the sky the eye relief is a bit tight, especially when I put the Nikon 18x70 on a tripod. On the subject of edge-to-edge sharpness, the Nikon 18x70 isn't quite there but so far its lack of edge sharpness hasn't bothered me much and here it's quite similar to the Nikon EII 8x30. Perhaps it's the super wide field (70 deg) that makes me forget about the lack of edge sharpness, or that I just tend to focus on the central region which is stunningly sharp in both Nikon instruments.
Is the true FOV of the 16x70 MS ED 4.1 deg, making the AFOV 16*4.1 = 65.6 deg? If you have the Fujinon FMT-SX 10x50, which instrument has the bigger AFOV ? Thank you.