/fa/ - Fashion

>>13675247
Here are a few.

1) The Pro is the link to the moonwatch, anything else is in name only. If you care about NASA/heritage/space, then go pro. If you don't care about any of that, then this segment is moot.

2) As far as I know, the current co-axial in this iteration is fine, and doesn't give problems. Furthermore, there is an argument to be made that the chronograph minute/hour dial is far easier to read quickly than the original layout.

Bottom line? The two watches couldn't be any more different from each other. Completely different movements, completely different aesthetics, and completely different purposes. There are other automatic winding plus date chronograph watches available that might look better aesthetically than the coaxial in your pic. Are you thinking of getting the coaxial Anon?

My pic is one of the earlier coaxial versions...it's slightly larger than the original pro, which is why the proportions of the subdials is off....

>>13665214
Compare with pic in>>13664006

The co-axial proportions are off. The case is definitely larger (as they specify), but they didn't upscale everything to compensate, so things look odd (if you're used to what I and others would consider aesthetic perfection in this watch category).

>>13665218
Good morning office guy with gigantic collection! How goes it?