AndrewD[HoMe Moderator]
12829
1 for a classic look, but ...
... 3 is more legible. But we still have the issue with the pointer date, so in fact Foversta's Lange example is the best choice!
Andrew
Fun!
By: dr.kol : April 14th, 2011-13:00
In my eyes #1 looks really cool - perhaps partly because of the metal. Such a watch in the size of 33-34 mm would also make a nice watch for the ladies. Best, Kari
I would first dream about some tear drop lugs.
By: amanico : April 14th, 2011-13:28
Then, not the 2, ugly, nor the 3, too Patek. On the base of the first one, I would remove the date from the moonphase indicator, to put it all around the dial, on the outer part of the dial, like on the Vintage one. 38 mm would be a perfect size. Aaah, da...
I like # 3
By: byronium : April 14th, 2011-15:59
To me, it seems the more balanced, and less cluttered of the two. Yes, the hands will ocassionally obscure the month and day windows in a way that makes them difficult to read, but I feel that it's a small price to pay for a cleaner look and to make it ea...
3 for me
By: Damo : April 14th, 2011-22:48
altough I really like the new mut moon. Its not a triple calendar but its superb, except that I don't understand why they have to add 'automatic' below the moon phase....