So close to pulling the trigger...
TBH I put plans on ice until I found a new job, but I did (start a week tomorrow) and I’m just deliberating. JLC are top-notch but tbh I would prefer a mint used example to save a few bob. So, just in a holding pattern until I find a used one
Personally I’d go with the Master Ultra Thin Date, it’s so beautifully minimalist. I’m not a fan of moonphase dials. Buts it’s still a beauty and ymmv.
Looking to get a Datejust 41, plain bezel oyster strap, the problem is I cant decide between blue face or silver
I know the feeling. But my brother in law has a perpetual calendar (lovely Patek, nothing but the best for him ) and even he admits unless you are prepared to wear it all the time or faff about keeping it on an autowinder, it’s a pita resetting all the calendar details if you let it run down.If I were a rich man (duba-duba-duba-duba-duba-dum), I'd have this one:
https://www.jaeger-lecoultre.com/ch/en/watches/master/master-ultra-thin-perpetual/130842J.html
Always wanted a perpetual calendar, but they're 'way out of my price bracket.
If I never had the Sub and yes I would go for the BlackBlack
Looking to get a Datejust 41, plain bezel oyster strap, the problem is I cant decide between blue face or silver
I agree, the daft thing is that the art of the watch maker was always aimed at miniaturising the complexity of a mechanical time piece movement,they succeeded brilliantly, so know what you have now is often a huge blingy watch case, with a movement that would obviously fit in one 1/2 the size when you look inside.I passed a couple of jewelry shops earlier today and it looks like the big dial thing is still big business - at least if the amount of large-dial watches in the windows are anything to by. I know some watches are supposed to a bit larger but there were lots and lots of large dial watches that seemed to be on the large side simply because that's the fashion... a fashion, I'm pleased to say, I won't be following anytime soon!
And not just the diameter - the depth of the case is something to consider, too. One of the things attracting me to that JLC (whether I end up with the Ultra Thin Date or the Moon Phase) is that they're very slim cases, ideal for wearing under a shirt cuff. The (non-date) Sub manages this, but I do find that the Milgauss is sometimes a tad too bulky to sit happily under a cuff.I agree, the daft thing is that the art of the watch maker was always aimed at miniaturising the complexity of a mechanical time piece movement,they succeeded brilliantly, so know what you have now is often a huge blingy watch case, with a movement that would obviously fit in one 1/2 the size when you look inside.
I would love a gold version of the ultra thin with black leather strap to wear under a double cuff dress shirt when I wear a dinner jacket, but as that's only 2 or 3 times a year tops nowadays, its definitely not an economic proposition, sadlyAnd not just the diameter - the depth of the case is something to consider, too. One of the things attracting me to that JLC (whether I end up with the Ultra Thin Date or the Moon Phase) is that they're very slim cases, ideal for wearing under a shirt cuff. The (non-date) Sub manages this, but I do find that the Milgauss is sometimes a tad too bulky to sit happily under a cuff.