Why is the cyclops on the outside?

[Krash]

Sometimes when I see a watch without a cyclops, it looks incomplete to me, as if they ran out of money while putting it together.

I think a Rolex without it would look silly (IMHO). Unless, of course, we’re talking about a standard Submariner or a Daytona.

But obviously, some watch brands do date functions really well (e.g., ALS).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rufio0811]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I think Rolex has painted itself into a corner with the Cyclops. It's a 70-year-old magnification aid originally devised for a tiny date-window on a 36mm watch, which only works if you look at it pretty much straight-on. Even at a very slight angle it just obscures the date.

On today’s sports models, Rolex could easily make the date larger and drop the Cyclops (I have had many other watches with larger, clearly legible dates, not requiring my reading glasses) but they seem to keep making the date deliberately small so that the “iconic” Cyclops seems more useful than it really is.

Before I got my 116710BLNR I wore my BB GMT almost daily and I wished it had a cyclops forever. Once I got the blnr and had the cyclops, I realized it's annoying since you have to look at it straight on.

[zengineer]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Technological limitations then and now iconic style identifier. Panerai has done the inverted cyclops perfectly.

It doesn't seem to actually magnify in this picture.

[zengineer]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I think Rolex has painted itself into a corner with the Cyclops. It's a 70-year-old magnification aid originally devised for a tiny date-window on a 36mm watch, which only works if you look at it pretty much straight-on. Even at a very slight angle it just obscures the date.

On today’s sports models, Rolex could easily make the date larger and drop the Cyclops (I have had many other watches with larger, clearly legible dates, not requiring my reading glasses) but they seem to keep making the date deliberately small so that the “iconic” Cyclops seems more useful than it really is.

Exactly, although I don't own a single watch that has a date function, much less a cyclops...so I probably need to recuse myself from this trial.

[davek35]

At one time I had 2 Tissot PR100 watches with inverted cyclops.