Which 16mm

[Hans Tucker]

Have been contemplating a 16mm eyepiece for ages and looking at a Zeiss ZAO I, Masuyama 16mm, Clave' Plossl 16mm for use in an f/7 & f/12 APO refractors .. always wanted to try the ZAO's. Any other brands I should consider?

[Tropo-Bob]

The Brandon 16mm is considered to be one of the best in the Brandon range. However, its field of view is only 43 degrees. Eyerelief is the same as the focal length; that is 16mm. They are parfocal with Tele Vue EPs.

[Wavytone]

The real question you need to ask yourself is what do you mean by “best”.

For example, sharpness on -axis, contrast and lack of ghosts/scatter, colour, off axis lateral colour (and sharpness) to the edge.

Another aspect is how good a match these will be to the curvature of the focal plane of your scopes.

For refractors I’d be going with the Masuyama. Don’t know about the Zeiss.

[N1]

ZAO I will be hard to fault, same goes for the TMB Supermono. I have both in 16mm, and apart from the noticeably narrower AFOV of the TMB, there is not much between them. I use them in refractors almost exclusively. What's more interesting is the ES68°16 they replaced (well, I couldn't justify keeping all 3). The ES is a cracker, and worth every cent of its moderate price. It's not much bigger than the ZAO, so very compact. The chap who bought it off me says it's now his favourite EP. The caveat is that the ES seems to perform best in newtonians. That said, I'd be surprised if FC was that much of an issue in your relaxed 'fracs, especially when you compare it to the others at the same angles off axis. Can't speak from experience though, as I got it for my dobs, and that's where it was used.

[Wilso]

Hi Hans,

I have the newer 16mm Masu and like it a lot but at f7 it won’t be perfect to the edge. Barlowed works very nicely but this defeats the purpose.
The next closest Masu would be the 15mm 52deg which if it preforms like the 20mm should be perfect 👌

[Don Pensack]

Try a 16mm TeleVue Nagler Type 5.
I've gone through over 340 eyepieces in my life, but I bought that one when it came out and still have it many years later.

[HCR32]

I wouldn’t bother with Masuyama they aren’t much different from what you use now with the Takahashi. It’s said that ATM actually acquired the glass for their Masuyama EP’s from Takahashi. If you are going to use your EP for planetary then wider FOV isn’t really going to matter. A tight FOV like the one you will find on TMB’s really help concentrate your vision on the target. A wide FOV can sometime take away from good planetary views making the planets perceived size seem smaller, lost in all that black surround. The ZAO are as good as they say but you will have to pay for it just to squeeze out negligible amounts of detail. Honestly I would try to find a TMB it’s cheaper and on par with the ZAO. Trust me I’ve seen it with my own eyes.

[wavelandscott]

I would say the 16 mm Type 5 Nagler...it is a gem. Tight eye relief but boy I do like looking through it.

[morls]

I agree with Don and Scott, the 16mm Nagler is a ripper.

[bigjoe]

16mm type 5 Nagler.. one of the few EPs I've regretted selling..Soo sharp better than the 13mm Type 6
IMO even!
I need to buy another they're that good.
Not really for eyeglass wearers with tight eyerelief .

Bigjoe.

[N1]

FYI, Burgess are working on a 16mm Mono:
https://www.burgessoptical.com/

[bigjoe]

Hi Mirko.
I have the 10mm Burgess Mono..and it is SENSATIONAL on Axis..was Talking to Bill Paolini about this..forget the edges and small field ..the effect is like looking through no glass at all.
For CRITICAL PLANETARY. And Doubles , when all else fails ..and that includes my Tak Abbes and Delites etc...its small;
Ill post a pic later, next to the Delites etc.
Bigjoe.

[N1]

Hi Joe, yes I have the 10mm too. While I did find some slight caveats vs. the 10mm TMB Supermono, they don't affect on-axis views, and it's a great EP for sure. I haven't had the chance for a proper side-by-side yet though. AFAIK it's the only Mono series currently in production, and well priced too. If I didn't already have a TMB SMC and ZAO in 16mm, I'd be getting my hands on the Burgess 16 as soon as poss.

[bigjoe]

Yes at only 235 posted A BARGAIN compared to my Delites ,Naglers and Tak abbes.. A Bargain!

2 opposing indentations in the field stop ring are odd, though insignificant.
Bigjoe.

[bigjoe]

Here are some pics of the wonderful 10mm Burgess Monocentric...more light gets to your eyeball for FAINT OBJECTS TOO.
Bigjoe.

[N1]

DSOs - that's where my 16's shine

[bigjoe]

Yep ..Im using an 18mm Tak Abbe and 18.2 Delite..but now am thinking about the 16mm Monocentric as it WILL beat the top 16mm Nagler I had in throughput (Mono..3 Elements) on faint Planetaries for when Im in the City...TMB MONOS ..LEGENDARY.. Thomas M Back..Wish he was still with us.

Bigjoe

[GrahamL]

16 mm nagler ,, eye relief is tight , to tight for me over time but its very sharp all over the view and very compact... reminds me of a slightly argumentative pan 24 in that its a gem of a small eyepiece with just that tight eye relief issue making you twice think it .
.


Aside a zeis ortho 6 , 22 t4, and a few orthos I've bought twice, maybe a pentax 14mm one day soon I'm only tracking at 20 Don ,, good to see others problems in perspective :D

[Hans Tucker]

Thanks all for the suggestions but I am now on a quest for the holy grail/s .. me seeks a 10mm and 12mm TMB Supermonocentric. I had an opportunity to look through a TMB 18mm and I am hooked ...somewhat.