infntryco
29
Fifty Fathoms or Fifty Fathoms Chronograph???
I have been trying to figure out what I really want for a while now.
I have worn a navitimer for a long time and loved it, finally put it down in search for a more valuable piece and something I can wear in the water.
I later picked up a ceramic GMT master rolex, but I wasnt too happy with it, its a great piece but something was getting at me, It felt too simple and it looks too generic to me.
I have been eyeing the Fifty Fathoms for quite a while, I even had my local torneau order one for me on a bracelet so i can check it out. It didnt really click when i saw it in person, but since then I have continued to think about it and how it could grow on me if I were to really have gotten it.
my other issue is that I tend to lean towards chronographs I thought that after letting my GMT master go id go with a daytona for it being a chronograph and being a decent less mainstream rolex. however I continue to take a look at the Fifty Fathoms and now I am also considering the FF chronograph.
I think i could be content with the normal FF but I may be much happier with the FF chronograph. But I am really not sure.
I am looking for something to be a daily wear for a long time and I think I will go with one of the two on the bracelet.
what might any of you suggest the more conventional Fifty Fathoms, or do I go straight for the Chrono.
I have never owned a Blancpain before but as you can see I am seriously considering it.
Thanks
George N.
Depends what you like
By: mcklof : January 12th, 2010-13:10
I would think that you'd have to spend some time with both on your wrist. It all comes down to personal preference. If the standard FF on the bracelet didn't immediately appeal to you, well, I'm not one to risk throwing down that much cash hoping that the...
STANDARD FF
By: grigo : January 12th, 2010-13:11
I would suggest the standard FF as opposed to the Chrono. I have the Chrono and I love it, but in the back of my mind I always wonder why I didn't get the standard FF the dial of which in its simplicity is just beautiful. Regards, George
insight
By: infntryco : January 12th, 2010-13:38
I havent done my research, so far only based on looks, and so I did not know the chrono was not inhouse. I like the busier dial of a chronograph, but the simplicity of the non chrono is both appealing and a turn off for me, it looks nice and clean but it ...
Well, George
By: amanico : January 12th, 2010-13:49
Since you were deceived with the Rolex GMT, I would be tempted to tell you to go on the FF Chrono. BUT, personally, I would go on the simpler FF. For its cleaner look. For its superb movement, which is derivated from the magnificient 13 RO. For its sapphi...
chrono
By: infntryco : January 12th, 2010-15:47
I think I am going to check out the Chronograph. I am crossed between the two but I think I am leaning towards the Chrono I like the busier dial I might have to save heritage and simplicity for later.
Chrono was my choice
By: tcollins : January 12th, 2010-19:31
I faced the same dilemma that you are now dealing with two years ago. Since I didn't already have a chrono in my collection I went with the FF Chrono. Love the watch, it is one of my "regulars" and I love playing with the chrono function. If I had went wi...
I also agree....
By: MiniCooper : January 13th, 2010-11:41
with Nicolas, Magnus & Oliver.... I used to own the chrono....but I traded for the simple (black) version.... I think that the simple version has a cleaner look while the chrono was, in the long run, too busy... The SS version has a classic look while the...
both
By: infntryco : January 14th, 2010-00:20
I will probably end up getting both but first the chrono, then I will get the normal FF when I feel ready. I have seen the air command but the dial is a bit too busy, I think the FF chrono is perfect. and I can only go simpler from their.