{"id":2449,"date":"2014-08-22T21:09:18","date_gmt":"2014-08-22T12:09:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/2014-08-22\/2449"},"modified":"2014-08-22T21:09:18","modified_gmt":"2014-08-22T12:09:18","slug":"testing-a-couple-of-watches-stuhrling-and-citizen","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/regex.info\/blog\/2014-08-22\/2449","title":{"rendered":"Testing a Couple of Watches: St\u00fchrling and Citizen"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
<\/a>\nNikon D4 + Voigtl\u00e4nder 125mm f\/2.5 — 1<\/sup>\/<\/big>500 sec, f<\/span>\/8, ISO 1250 —\nimage data<\/a><\/span>\nA Watch<\/span><\/span>\na cheap watch, but serviceable\n\n\n\n\n<\/div>\n\n

As I mentioned in the comments on last month's post about horrid watch-marketing\ncopy<\/a>, I've been looking for a nice<\/span> watch with a combination<\/span> of features\nand simplicity and size that no one seems to make. So after<\/span> years of\nkeeping my eye out, I finally<\/span> decided that “<\/span>perfect is the enemy of good\nenough”<\/span> and went ahead and bought some cheap watches just to try.<\/p>\n\n

I'm glad I did because I found out some new ways in which what you see in advertisements is not necessarily what you get,\nand I also<\/span> found that what I though<\/span> was important in theory wasn't always important in practice.<\/p>\n\n

The first watch I tried:<\/p>\n\n

<\/a>\nFossil Men's Chronograph Townsman Navy\n$110 at Amazon.com\n<\/div>\n\n

This was a huge compromise from what I wanted<\/span> in that it's casual and has stopwatch fluff, but I liked<\/span> the deep blue face,\nand with the bright hands it seems to be eminently readable<\/i>. So many watches<\/span> these days, whether cheap crap or an $85,000 Patek Philippe,\ndon't seem to have basic look-at-a-glance legibility<\/i>. If you can<\/span>'t read it, what's the point? (I guess<\/span> the point of wearing\nan $85,000 Patek Philippe that you can't read is to advertise that you can afford to wear\nan $85,000 Patek Philippe that you can't read.)<\/p>\n\n

Unfortunately, this Fossil Townsman was horrible.<\/p>\n\n

The hands, which look bright in the photo, are actually dark metal with\na mirror<\/span> finish. If they reflect<\/span> something bright then you see them as\nbright. Otherwise, they disappear into the black of the face (which indeed\nlooked black, even in direct sun, and not the dark navy blue described by\nAmazon's prose and photos). So I couldn<\/span>'t read the time on the thing except\nin good circumstances. It was frustrating<\/span>, so I returned<\/span> it.<\/p>\n\n

I did the same with the $125 light-cream colored version of the same watch<\/a> that I'd bought\nat the same time, for the same reasons.<\/p>\n\n

Running out of time to enjoy Amazon-US prices and selection before returning to Kyoto, I tried<\/span> two more watches, and ended up keeping them.<\/p>\n\n

The first is a $165 St\u00fchrling Original Symphony Eternity GMT<\/a>...<\/p>\n\n

<\/a>\nNikon D4 + Voigtl\u00e4nder 125mm f\/2.5 — 1<\/sup>\/<\/big>500 sec, f<\/span>\/8, ISO 4500 —\nimage data<\/a><\/span>\nSt\u00fchrling Original Symphony Eternity GMT<\/span>\n\n\n\n\n<\/div>\n\n

This too is a great compromise over what I sort<\/span> of think I want<\/span> in a watch,<\/span> but for $165 I can<\/span> give it a try.<\/span><\/p>\n\n

The good:<\/p>\n