In the past year or so, I've noticed a few watches I've owned have been difficult to read the time on. Reflections on the crystal have caused me to adjust my wrist this way and that way in strong light, and then watches like the CK2998 have have hands that just seem to blend into the dial, making it very difficult in any light.
For me, manufacturers really need to develop new coatings that are harder-wearing and cheap to produce. I have a breitling that has an AR coating so good, it makes the crystal disappear in any light, but it smudges of course if you touch it by mistake.
Is this an "issue" for others? Seems to defeat the primary purpose for me, although I've heard of several people now, who wear a watch for appearance, but tend to look at their phone for the time :-s
I would certainly consider legibility and comfort when buying a Watch, having said that, the only two Watches I own have both been criticised for legibility ( SMPc and Speedy Pro ) but I don't have a problem with either!
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
It is everything as far as I concerned - Ive moved on a number of very nice watches due to the fact that I have found them too difficult to read.
Interesting to see the above comments re the Speedmaster Pro being difficult to read, I don't find this with mine and I will miss it when its gone.
Last edited by Velorum; 4th August 2017 at 09:26.
Totally agree with this, illegibility is a young man's game. Once you reach a certain age and need glasses clarity becomes one of the most important factors. The Aquanaut is a superb example of when a manufacturer gets it right and some of the Brietling range are at the other extreme, busier than Oxford Street on a Saturday afternoon.Originally Posted by Velorum
I think that's why I like vintage, the Subs and SDs with black dials and creamy yellow hands and plots just work for me.
Yes it can be a problem. I had to sell my Aqua Terra because of this. It had the dark grey teak effect dial, and the polished stainless hands. In dim light, such as in pubs, restaurants etc, or just early morning /evening twilight I'd have to twist my arm so that the hands reflected the available light.
Decided it had to go when someone asked me the time, I looked at my watch, then had to get my phone out of my pocket to tell them.
Mainly due to the hands being thin on the Speedy, again, only what I've read previously on forums, and I find my Moonwatch very readable!
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
I find black hands over a white dial to be the most legible combination. It is all about the contrast.
Sent from my SM-G920F using TZ-UK mobile app
Legibility is key for me. It's why almost every watch I own has a black dial and white hands.
I have only ever had one white dial watch with silver hands and even my relatively young eyes could not make out the time on occasion, usually in bright sunlight.
I don't see the point in having a watch you can't read.
Yes, it is kind of the point of a watch to be able to tell the time conveniently after all.
Agree with Wally here, its an age thing for sure. I have a couple of watches which I have worn for 15yrs and now find the leibility bad whereas in my early 30's I thought nothing of it. Even reading the date through a Sub date bubble is harder than I ever realised! An IWC 3717 with AR coating suits my ageing eyes these days.
I go with the mainstream in that I do require easytoreadness as key.
However, I am inordinately fond of my Breitling 806 twinjet even though I have to use a loupe to see what the time is by it. Many times I have considered passing it on, but have been dissuaded, usually at the GTGs where I am reminded of the difficulty in finding another.
I find my Speedmaster Pro easy to read by the way.
My wife has recently sustained surgical retinal damage; I bought her a Mondaine which she says is the easiest-to-read watch ever.
I always though the White Dialled Breitling chrono Avenger looked a tough one to read, with not much colour contrast between the Hands and Dial and with having a busy dial doesn't help!
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Until the last few days, I hadn't given it a second thought. That was until I couldn't see a white dialled Aerospace without adjusting myself and squinting.
I wear glasses for reading and on the computer, but not for anything else. The last thing i want when out and about is to have to reach to put my glasses on to check the time.
So it had to go.
It has though prompted me to go and get my eyes re-checked.
I had a Seiko Chronograph with silver hands and markers on a black dial. In photos it was very legible but in reality was terrible and I sold it.
I replaced it with a Speedy Pro and find that very legible.
I don't really see the point in having a watch I can't tell the time on quickly, even if it is just jewelry(I've tried convincing myself it is not jewelry, but can't kid myself any longer!)
Legibility? What's that go to do with watches, then?
My daily grab and go has white gold hands on a platinum dial with white indices set in ... yep, white gold. Even the bezel's platinum The only way you tell the time is by tilting the watch so the light glints on the hands ...
Jocke
And one on my favourite occasionals has windows so small, I never read them ...
Interesting question. I just bought and sold a watch this week (a 1971 Accutron) for this very reason. I have a lovely 1972 Daytona which is a real struggle to read in certain lights. I'm making an exception for that one though - for now.
Maybe I've just been lucky, but I've not had any issues with legibility on any watches that I've owned. My Zenith with a white/silver dial with black/silver hands might be an issue, but it's never been.
Regarding OP's comment on the AR coating, I actually dislike them a lot due to smudge-issues.
Not much point of a watch you can't see
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Definitely an issue. Hands can easily get lost on busy dials, especially if they are the same colour as parts of the dial. Problems with legibility was one of the two reasons that I sold my black dial Daytona last year. I'd think hard about getting any panda or reverse panda in the future.
That said, I find the Speedie Pro very easy to read.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Definitely more of an issue for me thesedays than it ever was in the past. Deteriorating eyesight and diminished patience are key factors, if I can`t tell the time at a glance the watch isn`t doing it's job. I'll make some allowance with certain vintage models I own with gold hands against a gold dial, but I find newer stuff really frustrating. 16234 Datejust is an example, I had a black dial on it for several years and that wasn`t easy to read with the silver hands. I swapped it back to the original white, the watch looks great, but it's not easy to read at a glance in certain light. I`m sure the Rolex would be beter with a slightly curved glass with AR coating on the inside, but it is what it is.
I wear varifocal glasses so being able to focus sharply on the watch isn`t a problem, but for anyone wearing glasses they're introducing another glass surface to look through which cuts down the light and introduces the possibility of glare.
A watch may seem quite legible in the shop, you really have to 'road test' one to see how it really works.
Some of the old 1950s ladies watches, which were tiny, are damned near impossible to read at a glance. Given the fact that the owners are often old it's not a good combination.
Paul
Lots of people complain about 'busy' dials (The Navitimer suffers from this a lot), but a good watch will work such that when you glance at it, the hands are clear, but the detail fades into the background until you need it (The Navitimer works well in this respect, as does the Speedmaster Pro, unless you're in the dark!).
Some watches are just hard to read because the hands don't stand out against the dial.
I'm wearing a 1961(ish) Omega Seamaster 30 and it's readable at a glance - the hands standing out instantly against the pale dial.
I don't wear this watch a lot, it's a little small for my taste and was bought as a 'Birth Year Watch' (I was born in 1962, so figured if it was manufactured in 1961, it could easily have been sold the following year), but when I do, it's an easy watch to use, fulfilling the primary purpose of a watch - Telling me the current time at a glance.
On the other hand, my MOD chrono is often quite hard to read as the hands really don't stand out well against the dial.
I still like it, but I don't wear it as often as I might, for that reason.
M
Only to a point. I'm unlikely to buy a skeleton watch like a Heuer 01 Carrera, otherwise I'm not too fussed. But I don't need glasses so I guess that helps judging by some of the responses!
P.S. I have both a SMP and a Speedy and I find them both highly legible!
Yes - legibility is important and is why I dumped this Cartier ... the white hands got lost in the sub dial and is also the reason I prefer no date if possible.
Readability is almost always key, ive sold a few on that have loved the look of but just cant read the time. I do make exceptions for some, a light grey dialled Monaco being one.
Some designs just dont make allowances for ledgability, when a hand change to a contrasting colour would work a treat.
But then again it is a bit of man jewelery, so which comes first function or form.
I find this a real issue. Too many watches have messy, thoughtless, dials where the hands merge with the background in some conditions. It is possible to do it right..even great firms like Rolex and Patek sometimes fail to produce clear, legible, dials.
That's a pretty basic mistake.
This is why the Tudor snowflake makes a lot of sense - I found the Pelagos, and the Ranger for that matter, about the easiest watches to read that I've ever owned.
It's just a matter of time...
My father has always had white or light dialled watches. Won't consider anything else. Even dislikes my Sinn 656 and 556 and would prefer the reverse dialled version.
I don't mind - as long as I can tell the time quickly, I'm good. I wouldn't have a Citizen Navihawk again though, waaaay too busy for me. Or that Breitling with all the writing all over it.
I'm not normally too bothered but I did swap the hands on my Amphibia 120658 due to poor legibility.
If I really need to be able to read the time at a glance then I'll wear a Sinn 856.
I've never had an issue with legibility, but I do find that on my Explorer II 42mm, when the minute hand is at 15, under the cyclops, it completely obscures the date and it's impossible to read at any angle. I'm one of those people that frequently needs to write the date, but is unable to keep it in mind.
I will be honest and say that it is not top of my list of priorities when buying a watch
For me number one is how it looks, second is comfort
I would also say that if a watch had a long waiting list or was likely to make money on resale people would crawl through fire to buy it no matter how legible it is
It is if you view a watch purely as a tool.
In reality, no-one buys a 5 grand watch to tell the time... They're jewellery, with a twist and a function.
Jewellery's function is to look good.
You might say it doesn't look good to you if you can't read it all the time, but I suspect people like Rolex know there are many more who will buy a design that fails in your view because it 'looks good'
M.
Well, if it doesn't matter, why wind the watch up at all. They do have an important function....telling the time. That's not a sufficient requirement, but it is most certainly a necessary one. A watch you can't read is as useful as a car you can't steer.
People accept cars with dead, non-responsive steering as the norm these days.
Clearly watches that are harder to read pose no problems either
M
I don't see that as a good analogy. A car with lifeless steering still gets the job done, whereas a watch with poor legibility defeats the purpose to a degree.People accept cars with dead, non-responsive steering as the norm these days.
Clearly watches that are harder to read pose no problems either
M
Legibility is one of my most important criteria for a watch - if you can't tell the time at a glance, there's not much point in it.
I once owned a Tag Heuer Carrera which had chromed hands and a silver dial. It didn't last long. At the other end of the scale of legibility was a Breitling Avenger Seawolf, which had white hands against a dark grey dial and really good AR coating.
I dislike watches with cluttered dials and useless (to me) complications such as a moonphase.
A watch that's hard to read, still tells the time.
It's a reasonable analogy, but you seem to value clarity on a watch more than good steering on a car.
Neither actually STOPS the aim being achieved, just reduces the effectiveness.
Anyway, my original point was that I'm sure Rolex et al aren't hemorrhaging sales because some of their models are difficult to read in certain light.
I prefer a watch that's clear, but I don't presume to know Rolex's market better than them.
As I said, no-one buys a 5 grand watch to tell the time...
M.
I would not buy a watch if I could not (easily) tell the time with it. Even a £30K Patek needs to fulfil that purpose.
unedited shot
Last edited by MartynJC (UK); 4th August 2017 at 18:58.
I don't think I have a watch that I can't easily tell the time with. Maybe one or two where I may need to take more than a quick glance from any angle - but I can't think of a situation in which that would be a problem.
Chronographs can sometimes be tricky but this pair are easy to read even with my failing eyesight.
Legibility is critical for me.
My beater used to be a Tag Aquaracer and the legibility of the silver hands against the white dial has got worse as I have progressed through my 40s. My son now wears it.
I find the legibility on the speedmaster pro moonwatch excellent. The contrast of the black dial agsinst the white hands is perfect.
Yes, primary consideration for me. Now I'm the wrong side of 40 I need reading glasses in the evening. A very clear dial negates that need.
As much as I like the Navitimer and the B1, I have to ignore watches like that when they appear on SC as I'd simply not be able to read them in the evening.
Some of the best for legibility I've owned are the Stowa Marine, the Sinn 556, 656, 756 and 857, and the multitude of Seiko divers which are always super clear.
Legibility is a must for me, a bare minimum.
I was a bit aprehensive with my grey dialed 15200 but actually, the applied batons always create some kind of reflection or shadow which means there is pretty much always enough contrast.
Rolex by Robert Seymour, on Flickr
My old Swatch Oscillation is possibly the worst I have seen, I bought it as it 'looked cool' but reality was in anything other than really well lit areas its impossible to read without looking like an idiot!
Swatch Oscillation by Robert Seymour, on Flickr
Very important to me.
In fact I just got the yellow SKX not long ago and love it but the silver hands on the yellow background are a bit tough. Same goes for my C60 with a white wave dial and silver hands. Just couldn't read it well and also could not tell the beauty of the wavy dial in normal light.
I prefer pilot/mil style watches really but even think the popular GSAR is hard to read sometimes. My marine deck watch is easy to read too.
I like the look of indices but numerals are much easier for me.
These are two of my easiest
Last edited by parsig9; 4th August 2017 at 20:00.
Yes and no. After all, I own a Sinn 903 and, frankly, most of the times I have to do a double take...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes,I care about legibility.
Like several posting on this thread,age and declining eyesight seem to creep up unexpectedly;a gradual accretion of a problem.
I've found my Zenith class elite stays in it's box these days.
I prefer:
no date because I really find my eyes straining to read it:
luminous hands and markers to assist in low light situations.
Might have to go back to varifocal lenses this year -we'll see (hopefully!).
Absolutely paramount along with comfort, which in fact is even more important when I think about it. I could live with average legibility if I had to, but I can't live with an uncomfortable watch anymore.
I don't think it matters to people until it becomes an issue.
I never cared whilst my eyesight was good but now it's deteriorating, legibility is more important and my choice of watch picked out of the box has (subconsciously) changed accordingly.
This is my (noticeably) most legible.
Three examples of easy to read dials. And now, less easy to read.
I can no longer tolerate dials which make you squint or strain . It is just bad design. Like a good looking chair which is uncomfortable.
Sent from my iPad using TZ-UK mobile app
I think it's important. I also think aesthetically legible dials look nicer too.
For my daily wearer it has to be 100% legible - meaning just glancing at it and I can tell the time. But I also appreciate watches with complications where I can just lie back and admire the details, workmanship, engineering, finish etc.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
