ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
3 September 2012, 07:58 AM | #21 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Dallas
Watch: 12800ft = 3900m
Posts: 11,172
|
Thanks so much for the review, instead of day dreaming and wondering....I have this awesome review. Instead of running into a smug salesman who seems annoyed that I'd like to see these seemingly different watches together, I have this review.
Exxxcellent fotos. I think this was by far one of the best reviews I've seen on a subject of interest here. I'm not even considering these watches but loved the comparison and down to earth narrative. Enjoy those bad boys in health. The only photos missing would be of normal wrist shots with depth. Can be difficult on ones own wrist though. This perspective is often lacking in most reviews but included it gives the perspective of what the watch can look like on the wrist(sort of the way one really sees the watch), versus the 3D macro shot(which may be necessary for angles highlighting case thickness, or particular details). Not a complain by any means, just a consideration for watch reviewers. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.