Random meanderings of a casual watch enthusiast

[Farmer X]

You will probably want to read this post while enjoying a meal, as it turned out to be a bit of a long one.

Until very recently, I wouldn't have considered myself a watch enthusiast. One watch was good enough for me for most of my life. I've made mention numerous times of a G-Shock that I wore on WESTPAC 2006 that stayed with me for at least another five years.

Fast forward to 2018. I started working in a warehouse whose management didn't like people using their phones while on the clock, even if just to check the time. (The following year, I was working at another facility, and one of the other workers checking her Apple Watch led to her being dismissed.) So I told Mrs. FX that I wanted a new G-Shock for my birthday. I was somehow hoping she'd get me the DW-5750E-1B, but she chose a DW-5600-E, probably because it was the least expensive one she could find. I wore that watch with pride for a the next five-plus years. I still have it, and though it is almost never worn anymore, I'll never get rid of it. The sentimental value is way too high.

And, of course, I joined MTo in September of 2021 and started seeing all the fine timepieces the fine members have...

Last year, when Mrs. FX would up in the hospital, I took that DW-5600-E off when washing my hands. Some time later, I realized that it wasn't on my wrist or anywhere in her room. I made a beeline to the head and found it was still right on top of the paper towel dispenser. It was then and there that I realized having another watch would be beneficial. I started looking around Shockbase to see what would appeal to me.

Negative displays kept calling out to me, despite some folks having a passionate hatred of them. I decided to find an inexpensive one and see how well I liked it. The answer? A lot. I liked the negative display on that GD-100-1B so much that it's extremely unlikely that I will buy another digital watch with a positive display. I bought myself a GD-4001-1 for Christmas last year, considering it my "off-duty" G-Shock. That one will stay with me until I find a G-Shock that goes one better (more on that shortly).

Earlier this year, I thought I'd defect to Team Analog completely. Now I'm not so sure. While I admire the simplicity of an analog watch, I do find many of the less expensive ones to be a little lacking. The lume on my two inexpensive Casio analogs isn't great. My Timex Expedition Acadia has a nice electroluminescent backlight. I am now of the opinion that if a watch has a battery, there is no reason it shouldn't also have a backlight. I wouldn't want a watch with lume unless it's an automatic or straight manual wind (which I can't afford anyway). And therein lies the flaw with the GD-400-1: it has an LED backlight. I find the even glow of an electroluminescent backlight much more pleasant. Besides, a stopwatch can be handy. All I need to do is fire it off when I start my journey and stop it when I reach my destination. As kirk13 pointed out, multiple alarms can also be handy.

I also acquired a Casio EFR-532D-7AVEF along the way. My thinking was that I could use a nicer watch for those rare occasions that a resin band would have been a little too casual. Yet I rarely wear it, primarily because it has a white dial.

Lessons learned? The more black a watch has, the more I like it. The only other color I would want for the case and band/bracelet is silver. While I like the simplicity of an analog watch, a digital one does seem to work a little bit better for me. Negative displays are one of those rare instances in which I'll take form over function. And ability to read the watch in little or no ambient lighting is a very valuable thing.

While I'd like to have a Seiko Night Monster Black, I can't ever see that happening. But at least I've figured out what I like in a watch. That will prevent me from spending excessive amounts of money on them.

If you made it to this last sentence, I you.

[IMR4198]

   Made it to the end.  Nice story.  Funny how tastes change.  Best wishes.  Gary
 

[Farmer X]

Sure is.

[AzteCypher]

My tastes have run the gamut and come back around.  Never interested in those smart watches though.  I already own plenty of devices that are smarter than me.  I have mostly analog watches but with my eyesight not being what it used it be, I definitely appreciate the large faced digital watches with negative displays.

[kirk13]

That was a good read, thank you

Ive got a Casio AE-1200WHUB Royale on its way to me. It'll be my first proper digital watch i reckon since my teens (way back in a different century). I'll be interested to see how i get on with it, but I'm champing at the bit waiting for it to arrive.

What's been interesting is how the algorithms and cookies have been chucking watch adverts and YouTube videos at me. I'd say I'm still very much an analogue guy, and I do really like something clear and straightforward. Ive seen some nice pieces from Timex and higher end Casios, but I'm looking forward to getting my MRW-200H back in action. It's a beater, but it works, its clear and simple and its got lots of sentimental value.

The Royale is quite cluttered and fussy by comparison, but there's something very appealing about it; some of the other Casios that were recommended might have been better choices, but didn't gel with me. As one reviewer said, the Royale has a 80s vibe going on. It's techy, but also kind of warm. The more modern styles seem either too chunky or too cold.

Oh and smart watches....aside from being a no no at work, I'm not having a watch that's smarter than I am!

[Farmer X]

Never interested in those smart watches though.  I already own plenty of devices that are smarter than me.

Smart phones annoy me enough. No need to exacerbate that!

That was a good read, thank you

and hope you enjoy the Royale!

[Grant Lamontagne]

It is amazing to me that you can be so passionate about being totally and entirely wrong.   

Just kidding!

I assume the line about being passionately against negative displays was aimed squarely at me, so I had to give a little back!   

I also appreciate the benefits of a digital watch over an analogue one, although I also feel that the crafted, classic beauty of an analogue watch, particularly an automatic, can't be denied.  And I'm not just saying that because I am wearing my Orange Monster today!   

I'm also a big fan of my smarsmurfch.  It's not the lates or the greatest, but I do like the ability to switch faces so that its a more utilitarian digital watch when I need that, a fancy (looking) watch when I need that or just spits out the info I want when I want it.  I have faces for it that resemble a G Shock and a classic Seiko dive watch, and I can switch between them in seconds.   And, making use of the various functions is much easier on a smart watch than it is on a digital watch.

Smart watches also have a great feature that is never discussed, and that is security.

My father, an 84 year old man who lives alone in the woods wears an Apple watch that detects if he has a fall or other health concerns and will call for help if he's unable.  He also has one of those "I've fallen and I can't get up" systems, but those are even more expensive than an Apple watch, and only works when he's in the house.  As someone who walks his dog several miles a day and spends a lot of his time puttering around the yard, the Apple watch is much more useful to him.

True that's not a feature we all need, but it is an extremely valuable feature that I think is often overlooked on smart watches.

Def

[kirk13]

Now that's interesting Def, I didn't know smart watches could in effect send an SOS. Something to bear in mind

[Farmer X]

I assume the line about being passionately against negative displays was aimed squarely at me, so I had to give a little back!

It wasn't just you. This blog entry received a lot of comments about negative displays being too hard to read. I maintain that a positive display is easier to read, but by the time that advantage becomes significant, I'll be firing off the backlight anyway. Of the two negative display G-Shocks I've owned, the GD-100-1B had the more legible LCD. But the GD-400-1's orange digits looked a little cooler.

[Grant Lamontagne]

Now that's interesting Def, I didn't know smart watches could in effect send an SOS. Something to bear in mind

Not to detail this thread (because that never happens here!) but the latest generation Apple Airpods are certified for use as hearing aids as well.

While they aren't cheap, they are a heck of a lot more accessible to a lot more people than typical hearing aids.  Like a few hundred dollars versus several thousand.

I am not an Apple guy but I greatly appreciate that they are bringing expensive medical necessities to the masses by integrating them into mass produced items and driving prices down.

Imagine- accessibility for everyone!

It wasn't just you. This blog entry received a lot of comments about negative displays being too hard to read. I maintain that a positive display is easier to read, but by the time that advantage becomes significant, I'll be firing off the backlight anyway. Of the two negative display G-Shocks I've owned, the GD-100-1B had the more legible LCD. But the GD-400-1's orange digits looked a little cooler.

Apology accepted!   

Def

[AzteCypher]

I never knew that about smart watches.  That's good to know.

[Grant Lamontagne]

I never knew that about smart watches.  That's good to know.

It's not a feature on all smart watches, at least not an inbuilt one.  Like anything else, it will probably eventually filter down to all of them, but for now make sure to do your research on any models that you may be interested in, and if any apps are available if there is no native functions.

I know my father sticks with the Apple watch because that function is built right into it, or at least on certain models.

Def