/fa/ - Fashion

>>17815884
With Casio, you just can't lose

>>17806130
I don't own any fakes!

>>17545490
>but seems a bit nicer than a Seiko 5 finish-wise
I'd bet a donut its identical to a Seiko 5 for fit and finish quality.

Yeah Casio seems to be getting away from dressier or non G-shock stuff. Confusing why since the same movements on nicer cases and dials should be profitable. Maybe they just said they weren't selling enough non-sport watches and abandoned the segment?

>>17505597
I agree, seems like in the 90s there was a 'craze' to make watches as thin as possible. I have a quartz that is like 4mm thick. I love it.
>>17505606
Bro it just depends on your wrist and body build. 40mm might look small on a large man with large hands and thick wrist. Then you have /fa/gs where they look like they're 12 years old wearing grandad's watch again because its just hilariously large on them. 40mm looks okay on me, i just don't like them personally on my wrist despite having more than 1.

>>17472326
I mean its not going to be in your <$50 price range, theres a ton of quartz that look good for office casual and casual around town. Just be semi-aware and realize there are some real geriatric boomer watches like the 2 posted that are just ugly and don't look right on anyone other than 90 year olds who can't lift their hand if they put on an automatic watch.

>>17432886
Thats not a bad looking watch, but given a $100 price point for a quartz watch I'd be hesitant. I do like that high beat though. Also, what the fuck is with the 40mm+ watches? ~35mm is perfect. Stop making watches bigger trying to be more conspicuous with your jewelry. Just make it good and make it pretty.

>>12252737
I don't use reddit and my watch isn't plastic.

>>12201326
That does look nice; wish it had a date window, but thats just me.

Casio makes some handsome watches right?

>>12185553
Is this hipster?

>>12097364
Uh, what? A digital casio will work for under $12, mechanical casio will run about $25