Patek Philippe

So what do you think of the "upside down" moonphase on the 5204? Not sure I am a fan of that. But OTOH, I won't have to worry about it either... This message has been edited by w220 on 2012-03-09 08:51:14...  

The whole watch is an embarrassment to design. Looks like a combination of a Rolex Milgauss hour markers, Chopard hands and Seiko layout... the upside down moon phase merely confirms the entirely dysfunctional design elements

Kari

...which one looks better?...  

But for me the "upside-down" looks better. Best regards Georg

I think the upside down moonphase is ok. It makes the dial layout more balanced, to avoid overcrowding, as all the indications are more to the lower part of the dial with the am/pm and leap year indications. But I am disappointed with the choice of hands ... 

I think there are alot of other choices. It does not do it for me. I'll take the Celestial first. For each, their dreams! Best, Joe

.... older version , the moon phase moves from right to left ( anti-clockwise ). Now that the moon is upside down, does it still move in that direction or clockwise ?? Frankly speaking, somehow, this moon phase is more like a mustache to me than anything ... 

the fortunate few who procures one of these will not notice or be bothered by the so called 'design flaws' that some of us dwell on. I certainly wouldn't kick it out of bed if the price for admission is within my grasp. Perfection is hard to determine and... 

The moon is always overhead and virtually all moon phases by other watchmakers and PP have always had them upright. Why would PP change that now. It is disorienting to see the moon upside down! Is there some sort of mechanical reason that forced them to p... 

That we find it strange?? If for example the norm for a moonphase position was as in the new piece. And they than changed it to "On Top" would we not than be saying the same thing?? It is what we have become accustomed to and to break away from tradition ...