SIHH 2016

[willy]

(21-01-2016, 04:17 PM)TopClocks Skrev:

(21-01-2016, 03:41 PM)willy Skrev: I can agree that you can find cheaper alternatives to some MB watches,but i think that their designs are better.I do not however agree with what you say about quality,at all! You just cannot compare the finish on a MB to a Patek,and call it a compromise in quality.Its like saying Rolex have compromised on quality in their calibers compared to Lange.Different ways of defining the market you are going after is a better way of describing it, in my opinion.And we should always remember that the days when Patek were the benchmark for high end watches are long long gone  

Det er et smagsspørgsmål, hvorvidt man foretrækker layout på det ene eller andet ur, Willy. Zenith's design er min opfattelse mere praktisk, idet man har en sektion forbeholdt indikation for dato og en anden sektion for dag og måned. En gang i mellem må det æstetiske lide for det praktiske. Desuden er jeg ikke særligt begejstret for indikation af månens faser på Montblanc-uret eftersom det fremstår billigt, at bruge ''pointer-type'' indikation i stedet for en ''disk'', jf. https://monochrome-watches.com/pre-sihh-...ew-price/.

Dog vil jeg gerne understrege, at jeg ikke har sammenlignet Montblanc med Patek, hvilket fremgår tydeligt i mit svar til Krüger. Min sammenligning angår derimod Montblanc og Zenith, idet begge ure tilbyder årskalender og kronograf-funktion. Hertil kommer, at de begge befinder sig inden for en prisvenlig kategori. Det er derfor efter min opfattelse reelt nok at sammenligne dem.

Apropos benchmark, så har Benjamin Clymer for resten brugt samme betegnelse om Patek's ref. 5960, jf. https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/introd...ess-steel. Det skal i øvrigt tilføjes, at Patek indtil midten af 2009 fulgte kriterierne for Poinçon de Genève, inden de introducerede deres kvalitetssegl med skærpede krav. Sidstnævnte foranledigede faktisk en opdatering af kriterierne for Poinçon de Genève, hvilket må siges at være en bedrift, især da Patek før i tiden fulgte dem.

There are several brands that have a better finish than Patek today.The benchmark is usually the best.Patek do have a high standard,no doubt about that.But Lange and LF are better in the eyes of many.JLC have a 1000 hour test on some of their calibers.This is for reliability,and partly finish.Poincon Geneve is a high standard and maybe PP have even improved it.But Lange surpass this,by being the only brand that assemble every caliber,and then test it before taking it apart and assembling it again.Omega have recently also set their own standards for their watches.The COSC certificate that has been used by brands in the past,as a kind of quality mark,is today more a marketing device.It does not mean much because many brands test their calibers to a higher degree than COCS.What Hodinkee say about one particular watch,does not make it a benchmark.There are thousands out there who might not agree with their assessment of this.Lange made the benchmark inhouse chronograph that changed the high end watch market.The Datograph was the first true inhouse chronograph made by any of the top brands.Patek rushed to try to develop their own,after they got over the shock of being beaten by Lange.Usually a benchmark is something that sets the standards on which others are judged,and the Datograph set the standard for Patek-VC-AP etc etc,who up to that point were just reworking calibers made by other brands.In my opinion the idea that Patek will ever set a benchmark for Lange to follow would bring a smile to the people that make them.But you and i can just give our opinions about this.Regarding the looks of any particular watch is always down to personall taste.I like the designs of many MB watches,but find Zenith rather old world design just like PP

http://www.hodinkee.com/articles/with-th...nd-ferrier

ps.Found this interesting link about Investment http://quillandpad.com/2015/12/15/keep-c...ch-market/