or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...) - Page 2464  

post #36946 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Moo View Post

Ok went to AD, done with considering 36mm DJs. Just way too small looking in real life.

ffffuuuu.gif

So whats in the running now aside from the Explorer?
post #36947 of 48312
This guy:

post #36948 of 48312
^ What size is that one, Moo?
post #36949 of 48312

Before you stumble into insanity, might I suggest:

 

- 40mm IWC Ingenieur

 

- 36x47mm Cartier Tank Anglaise

 

Both cross the casual/workwear divide, both are on bracelets, both are as cheap or cheaper than that, and both are substantial enough for your bigger watch need.  And neither risk the opprobrium of TWATdom that a DJII might bring about.  And the romans, on black, really?  

 

Otherwise, do what you want, Moo.  I'm finding this strangely exciting. :)

post #36950 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWraith View Post

^ What size is that one, Moo?

41mm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

Before you stumble into insanity, might I suggest:

- 40mm IWC Ingenieur

- 36x47mm Cartier Tank Anglaise

Both cross the casual/workwear divide, both are on bracelets, both are as cheap or cheaper than that, and both are substantial enough for your bigger watch need.  And neither risk the opprobrium of TWATdom that a DJII might bring about.  And the romans, on black, really?  

Otherwise, do what you want, Moo.  I'm finding this strangely exciting. smile.gif

The romans on slate grey, you no like? It looks really, really good IMO.

Thanks for the suggestions. The IWC is nice - definitely a contender. Not a fan of Cartier on bracelets.
post #36951 of 48312
I prefer dress watches to be under 40mm...even on your wrist, Moo.
post #36952 of 48312
Explore over DJII every time.
post #36953 of 48312
I know I'm in the minority, but I'm a huge fan of the 41mm. smile.gif HUGE
post #36954 of 48312
My wife's reasoning in favor of a cyclops watch: "If you are going to get a Rolex, make sure it looks like a Rolex." Now, among the TWAT brethren that may sound ridiculous, but I completely see what she's saying and where she's coming from.
post #36955 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Moo View Post

My wife's reasoning in favor of a cyclops watch: "If you are going to get a Rolex, make sure it looks like a Rolex." Now, among the TWAT brethren that may sound ridiculous, but I completely see what she's saying and where she's coming from.

 

My wife is the same way.  She doesn't like the SubND which is sad.

post #36956 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Moo View Post

My wife's reasoning in favor of a cyclops watch: "If you are going to get a Rolex, make sure it looks like a Rolex." Now, among the TWAT brethren that may sound ridiculous, but I completely see what she's saying and where she's coming from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jbarwick View Post

My wife is the same way.  She doesn't like the SubND which is sad.

frown.giffacepalm.gif
post #36957 of 48312
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
post #36958 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belligero View Post

Hold on, I'll superimpose them shits...
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 85

It might not appear to be much of a change at first glance (largely because it's a familiar object and your mind tends to process it in the context of knowing it's the same thing), but the difference can be clearly seen when the images are overlaid. And this is only going from a 20 mm to a 35 mm lens, so it's nowhere near as dramatic as it's possible to get with extremes such as 14 vs. 600 mm. However, I think it's a decent representation of the difference in how a watch appears in a typical camera phone shot compared to what you see in person. It's not enough to be super-obvious, but it's definitely enough to mess with your perception of how a watch fits.

I get what you're saying but I just think it is a bad example if you have super-impose the example. :lol I am not disagreeing, just very difficult to see in your example.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wurger View Post

It's the only reason that I don't have a Daytona in my collection. It wears small for a 42 mm, and love the big date, the the overall Maltese cross design motif.

Daytonas are actually advertised as 40mm but actually 38.5mm.


Stolen from TRF for proof (someone put me on this here, credit to him too, forgot who you are though).
nzexow.jpg
post #36959 of 48312
The DJII is a fine watch, I think it'll suit you well Moo. Love the grey dial!
post #36960 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Moo View Post

My wife's reasoning in favor of a cyclops watch: "If you are going to get a Rolex, make sure it looks like a Rolex." Now, among the TWAT brethren that may sound ridiculous, but I completely see what she's saying and where she's coming from.

Why not try on a Daytona while you're at it? It's a bit sportier than a DJ but I think it's equally versatile, and maybe more so than the "II" version.

But yes, ain't nothing wrong with the look or function of that little magnifier.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)