Watches look smaller in real life

[Dennisoul]

When I look at the great photos of all the watches on this site they look massive...Im always amazed when I see them in the jewellers window they look really small....I think the biggest surprise I got was how small the Daytona is...maybe it's just me....

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by Dennisoul

When I look at the great photos of all the watches on this site they look massive...Im always amazed when I see them in the jewellers window they look really small....I think the biggest surprise I got was how small the Daytona is...maybe it's just me....

Agreed, but remember that most wrist shots here are extreme close ups. The best way to judge size is to look at the watch on your wrist in a mirror. That's a more realistic idea of how appropriate it appears in the real world.

[JR16]

It's all perspective - many times I feel the opposite - when I try on a watch that looks great in pictures , it is too large / unbalanced on my 6.75 inch wrist


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[AK797]

You're absolutely spot on, which is why you must try on watches before buying, esp if you've never owned that size before. And Tony's right about mirror shots being the most accurate gauge, most wrist pics have the fisheye effect that over exaggerates the watch's size on the wrist.

[aes7.5x55]

I had the same thing. For a long time, I'd only seen Rolexes on here and other websites where all photos were zoomed in. When I went to try some on the first time, I was amazed how they fit all the numerous parts in a case so small (Not as amazing as, say a JLC ultrathin, but still pretty amazing). They looked about half the size I was expecting.

[lhawli]

Dial / bezel ratio can play a big role in watch size perception. A thinner the bezel can give a 38mm watch the illusion that it's a 40mm but once on the wrist it can become more clear.

One aspect that I realized is quite influential is the case thickness. I realized this with my Omega PO. I have the 42mm previous generation with the 2500D movement. When I wore it next to the new generation 42mm 8500 movement, which is considerably thicker, it gave the illusion the the new generation 8500 was smaller in diameter.

Case thickness is often neglected on websites and not as discussed as case diameter!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[yxc145]

Originally Posted by Dennisoul

When I look at the great photos of all the watches on this site they look massive...Im always amazed when I see them in the jewellers window they look really small....I think the biggest surprise I got was how small the Daytona is...maybe it's just me....

I also thought Daytona looks pretty small in person.

[shafran]

I think thats been the main criticism of daytonas, that they would be great in a 42mm size.

[SpeakWithMichael]

Originally Posted by shafran

I think thats been the main criticism of daytonas, that they would be great in a 42mm size.

Indeed, and even at 42mm I would want them to redesign the bezel for me to lust after it. I'm going to hide now for what I have just said is likely a sin to the church of Rolex.

[BiH115]

Definitely important to try a watch on prior to purchase. Helps to walk around with it a bit too. On my 7'ish inch wrist, the Supercase looks like it fits just right, but if you focus on just the bezel and ignore the other parts of the case (lugs, the bracelet attached to it, etc.), it's actually smallish looking. All these details add up though. I've seen Submariners/GMT's look odd on people with wrists barely bigger/smaller than mine, they don't work for everyone.

[MCO1]

The Daytona is small perception is very real! I wonder if in some cases it has to do with that other very famous chronograph...Omega Speedmaster. From a cost and availability perspective it is easier to see and own. It may be the one many own first and then the perspective of Daytona really gets skewed when it goes on the must have list. Just my thoughts....I owned two Speedmaster Pros before my Daytona and own both now.

[QueueCumber]

Some people have large wrists and some people have small wrists...

[WAK4]

The Daytona is definitely one that catches me off guard from time to time, particularly the preceramic models.

[BubbleDate]

I agree. I was just thinking how much bigger a new Datejust 36 with a fluted bezel looked compared to the same watch with a smooth bezel.

[oldsalt]

Originally Posted by SpeakWithMichael

Indeed, and even at 42mm I would want them to redesign the bezel for me to lust after it. I'm going to hide now for what I have just said is likely a sin to the church of Rolex.

I've just traded my Daytona C for a couple of larger watches... it was too small
and I found the dial too busy - didn't pass the basic test for a watch, that is.... to tell the time at a glance... so it's gone to a new owner, hope he or she enjoys it more than I did.

cheers

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Tony64

Agreed, but remember that most wrist shots here are extreme close ups. The best way to judge size is to look at the watch on your wrist in a mirror. That's a more realistic idea of how appropriate it appears in the real world.

[SDRider]

My wrist is 7.5" and I too think the Daytona is too small. I wear a Submariner date daily and it wears larger than it is IMO. I love the size of it. It is at the farthest setting of the adjustable bracelet (it can be adjusted so it is larger but not smaller) and I didn't need to have any links removed from it when I bought it new.

[WhiskeyKoffee]

I researched online for months before I actually visited my AD. When I first approached the Rolex counter I was absolutely shocked at how small everything appeared. I was completely blown away and thought everything looked like a miniature Rolex.

[Dirt]

Originally Posted by ak797

you're absolutely spot on, which is why you must try on watches before buying, esp if you've never owned that size before. And tony's right about mirror shots being the most accurate gauge, most wrist pics have the fisheye effect that over exaggerates the watch's size on the wrist.

+1.

[CYKBC]

Originally Posted by Dennisoul

When I look at the great photos of all the watches on this site they look massive...Im always amazed when I see them in the jewellers window they look really small....I think the biggest surprise I got was how small the Daytona is...maybe it's just me....

Not only smaller, but after reading about perfection, build quality and other plaudits, the steel rolexes feel... kinda lightweight in an underwhelming way.

i've just come to realize that end of day it's just a watch.

[Etschell]

I thought i would like the dd 36. Thank goodness i tried it on, too small for my liking.

[ras47]

Originally Posted by SpeakWithMichael

Indeed, and even at 42mm I would want them to redesign the bezel for me to lust after it. I'm going to hide now for what I have just said is likely a sin to the church of Rolex.

Oh, I'm a big fan of Rolex bumping up case sizes a couple millimeters. But then I have 7 3/4" wrists. I'm not looking for the same wrist presence as when I was wearing Seamasters every day, but my GMT2 Pepsi at 40mm is just barely big enough for my tastes. I would seriously consider a Daytona if it was 42mm or 43mm, with a corresponding increase in dial size.

[breitlings]

16710 is almost identical to a daytona. 16710 and other five digit 40s may be smaller if you include pushers. i went from 16710 to 16518. it's just not as big as 6 digit maxi cases or like 43-44mm watxhes. i took some pictures to illustrate i will upload 16518 vs 38mm colt vs 39.5 mm chronomat 43 mm gmt avenger and 44mm blackbird. the daytona is clearly bigger than breitling 38mm colt and 39.5mm chronomat.

[sutats]

The Cosmograph Daytona appears smaller on the wrist than the GMT Master-II even though they are both 40mm case size watches as marketed by Rolex.

[Hairdude1]

I feel the same, this is why I won't purchase until I see a watch on my wrist

[Al1969]

Originally Posted by breitlings

16710 is almost identical to a daytona. 16710 and other five digit 40s may be smaller if you include pushers. i went from 16710 to 16518. it's just not as big as 6 digit maxi cases or like 43-44mm watxhes. i took some pictures to illustrate i will upload 16518 vs 38mm colt vs 39.5 mm chronomat 43 mm gmt avenger and 44mm blackbird. the daytona is clearly bigger than breitling 38mm colt and 39.5mm chronomat.

Are you going to post the pics? It'll be interesting to see the differences.

[watchwatcher]

Originally Posted by AK797

You're absolutely spot on, which is why you must try on watches before buying, esp if you've never owned that size before. And Tony's right about mirror shots being the most accurate gauge, most wrist pics have the fisheye effect that over exaggerates the watch's size on the wrist.

Spot on, Neil.

[sco]

Totally agree. I saw a Platona in an AD and it looked tiny. The close up shots online can really throw you for a loop. Try before you buy.

[Uppersouth]

Originally Posted by brandrea

Exactly right. I was dead set on a Panerai 422 until I looked at myself in the mirror. It looked uncomfortably huge. Eyes to wrist looked large but tolerable. Still love that 47mm beauty though.

[Monsta]

Yes I was crushed when I tried on a sub and a sd4k way too small. Then I saw the DSSD and it was the one.