Patek Philippe

In addition to the above observations, I've also noted the varied appreciation for the stand-alone annual calendar watches of various references (that were mentioned more than once), namely the ref. 5035, ref. 5056, ref. 5396 and ref. 5205. Only once were the ref. 5125 and ref. 5146 mentioned by Jerome, however I enjoyed reading his response, given that he has taken "the road less traveled" when most had opted for the aforementioned references. This is great, because I can see that there is a wide appreciation for the various AC references that Patek has made over the years. Now, let's move on to the discussion for stand-alone annual calendars (ACs)

My personal experience with the stand-alone ACs started out with the Lange Saxonia, and before I could experience what Patek had to offer I went straight for a perpetual calendar (ref. 3940R) due to the opportunity presented to me back then. It was such a collecting journey that inadvertently made me gloss over Patek's AC offerings. I have to admit i was close to buying the ref. 5035/5056 (and at some point a ref. 5146) but did not pull the trigger ultimately. However, the appreciation and desire to own one was always there. Over the last couple of days I have been helping a close friend hunt for his first annual calendar wrist watch. And throughout our conversations, I found myself leaning more and more towards the Patek ACs rather than the Lange ACs. There are two main reasons obviously, one being historical relevance/heritage (Patek invented the AC) and the other being relative value (Patek ACs are generally cheaper than Lange!). Let's pause for a moment and allow me to say this. Lange enthusiasts, please do not hate me I'm still a big fan of some of their watches and I still own what I've bought! 

So in any case, with my own justification I went out to explore the world of Patek ACs. In the last couple of days I started looking through the various references all over again. Thanks to all of your responses, my assessment has started to become clearer. While I have not found the perfect stand-alone AC reference yet, my appreciation for them have greatly increased over the last 24 hrs (thanks to all of you again!). Because I'm focusing more on the aesthetics of the watch, I'll leave my assessment for movement specs/finishing aside. The references of interest are as follows: 5035/5056, 5146, 5396 and 5205. 

The ref. 5035 and 5056 are great for their overall case size at 37mm and case shape (thickness is 10.8/11mm, lug to lug ~44mm). To my eye this particular style is perhaps the nicest for its curves and slimness, and is definitely the most reminiscent of the vintage era. The roman numeral "IV" is also something I like versus "IIII". The only issue for me is the closeness of the sub dials and/or moon phase indicator. It feels kinda cramp and doesn't offer much dial symmetry. The date window at 6 eats into the minute track and again offers the same aforementioned problem. While this might be a problem, I do feel that given that this was the pioneering reference for all annual calendars, this "quirkiness" could be overlooked or appreciated in time to come. 

With the ref. 5146, I think my argument is that the larger 39mm case is less vintage inspiring (thickness 11.4mm lug to lug 46.8mm). However the overall styling (curves of the case etc) has been retained. In addition, we have a new dial layout with the combo stick and 3-9-12 markers and the date window at 6 now sits on the minute track (an improvement in my opinion). While the subdials/moon phase indcators are still "squashed", i feel there is more dial coherence here. In other words, the overall dial layout works for me. 

Moving on to the ref. 5396. Again this has the issue of a larger case at 39mm and similar thickness/lug to lug profile. I might be wrong, but even though this has a similar case profile to the ref. 5146, its appearance (on photos) does seem to suggest that it is more restrained and looks (deceiving?) slimmer - by a margin - compared to its predecessor. In my humble opinion this is likely due to the vintage inspired ref. 96 Calatrava-like case design, that causes it to have more defined lines around the case, versus the curves of a ref. 5146. I find the dial design coherent, clean and easy to read. I would imagine such a dial design could potentially exist if ACs were made in the vintage era. The issue I have earlier was the date window at 6 eating into the periphery of the moon phase indicator, but I have - over time - learn to accept it as part of the construction of the moon phase indicator. 

Lastly, the ref. 5205. Obviously, this case is even larger at 40mm, and its thickness/lug to lug profile set at 11.6mm/49.6mm. By comparison this is a large watch -- period. However, Patek "compensates" us with a voluptuous/curvaceous case with hollowed lugs and a concave bezel, all coming in together very coherently. The dial design is truly up for debate. Like it or hate it one might, but it is no doubt reminiscent of one of our forum favorite the ref. 5960 in some way -- thanks to the three apertures on the top side of the dial. However, there is no dispute that this is a modern looking dial for an AC. 

Having discussed all of the above stand-alone AC references from Patek, I think I will have to conclude by saying that the ref. 5396 with baton markers is likely to be my favorite out of the lot. While it has lost some of its vintage-ness due to the 39mm case, it has retained a vintage look with the Calatrava inspired case design. The simplicity of the dial layout makes one think of the vintage era, simply by virtue of how easy it is to interpret the information on the dial. I think the modern 21st century watch collector could find it acceptable with a larger case at 39mm while retaining most other design elements that are still vintage inspiring. After all, 39mm falls under the "acceptable range". Not overly big, not overly small. I have passed my judgement basis my observations and by reading the commentaries online, both here on the forum and elsewhere. It would be great to be able to handle them in the metal all at once, and experience these references all together. The ACs are starting to become one of my favorite complications. A once-a-year adjustment is so easy to do and doesn't bug me at all. Yet the amount of information it provides far outweighs that small inconvenience. A click a year saves you tens of thousands versus the ownership of a perpetual calendar too. I know it's not about the money, but the curse of my day-to-day job is having the knowledge of relative valuation, and hence being incapable of ignoring the value these ACs give us, as collectors. 

Thanks for reading.

Best,

Gatsby 

 

More posts: 3940503551465205523553965960calatravacomplicationsgrand complicationsnautilusSaxonia

  login to reply