Am I the only one that hate cyclops?

[txrob779]

Yes

 

[pygmalion]

totally ruins the design of a watch.

if the date window didnt manage yet to completely kill the symmetry of the design, then the cyclops will make sure to finish the job. i wish there would be a more elegant and clever way to integrate a date display, for those who want it in a watch.

i personally prefer to have no date or any other complication. after all, i normally have my smart phone with me all the time anyways.

 

[ShiroTenshi]

Rather not have, watch face cleaner without it. Plus the area around it literally collect dust/dirt around it.

 

[smokiedabong]

I assume you are referring to Rolex, which IMO has the worst implementation of a cyclops. First thing I did when I got a Rolex homage was to pry the cyclops off, it just doesn't look right. On other watches it can look good, on some it's even the main attraction, look at the Swordfish. I like the on-dial cyclops on ROO, I think it improves the dial, a discrete on-dial cyclops with good AR looks better than a bare cut out. I also like the Pam 243 more than the 305.

 

[sarlan19]

I assume you are referring to Rolex, which IMO has the worst implementation of a cyclops. First thing I did when I got a Rolex homage was to pry the cyclops off, it just doesn't look right. On other watches it can look good, on some it's even the main attraction, look at the Swordfish. I like the on-dial cyclops on ROO, I think it improves the dial, a discrete on-dial cyclops with good AR looks better than a bare cut out. I also like the Pam 243 more than the 305.

I did not know about the swordfish. It does look good. I think it's because it's not numbers but actually dials.

Thanks for your input


Envoyé de mon iPhone à l'aide de Tapatalk

 

[dilodoli]

 

[namsl]

To me it's a signature on the Rolex subs . Growing up Rolex always appealed to me for what it stood for to the wearer and the signature it left in the mind of people who saw you wearing one. The date mag is just part of that signature I believe. It's more of a subliminal thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pygmalion]

What was the guy at Rolex thinking? Oh I might find myself diving and wondering what date it is while I'm 300 ft under... Better make sure I can see these numbers well in case I need to discuss an appointment or whatever
Lol

 

[bradj]

To each his own.. I wouldn't have bought the sub any other way

 

[umaso]

I really dislike them, which has then made me really dislike the Rolex brand until i started looking into it a little bit more.

Most Rolex watches that are worn by people, celebrities etc all have the cyclops. But when shopping for my first Rep i saw the Milgauss and fell in love. The simplicity of the design compared to the other ones i've seen was awesome.

Cyclops just makes it look a bit crap, i agree.

I was in the same boat, but when shopping for a gen. I wanted something a little dressy from Rolex, but really didn't like the cyclops. I liked the size of the DJII but still couldn't get over the cyclops. I ended up choosing between the oyster perpetual, milgauss, and daytona. I was disappointed the OP only came in 36mm. The Daytona was a little out of my price range with no discount, so ended up with a Milgauss, and couldn't be happier.

 

[xyzzy]

Nah, I like the cyclops. Makes the watch look high-end. My Sandoz Pepsi Submariner has a cyclops with the correct Rolex magnification.

That cyclops is, to me, what the velvet bag is to a bottle of Crown Royal - that little extra that completes the package.

 

[Barkerp]

Tell that to Rolex in Geneva !! The 'cyclops' magnifier is a tell tale sign its a ROLEX !! And rightfully so !! ............if it has worked all of this decades, then that's just the way it is !!

Too right sign of a true rolex