Question for owners of the DJ Wimbledon dial:

[bruinmd]

What’s the feedback on dial legibility with this watch? I love it and have thought about it for a while, but recall reading something about dial legibility Being an issue for some with the green Roman numerals.

If that’s the case, it would be a pass for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LyingFlat]

I saw a TT DJ41 about a week ago at my AD. Yes, the dial did seem a little hard to read but I'm not sure that if it was the dial itself or the lighting in the store.

It was a very classy dial though and I can see why it is in such high demand.

[jackminny15]

I had the same concern. It is a titch harder to read than, say, the black or white dials, but I have found it perfectly legible.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bruinmd]

Originally Posted by jackminny15

I had the same concern. It is a titch harder to read than, say, the black or white dials, but I have found it perfectly legible.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good to hear. In comparison to a 116500 Daytona black dial, I’m assuming it’s easier to read ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[synrrgy]

Thanks for posting pics. I've been looking for one and am on the waitlist with my AD with the fluted bezel.

[SAlNlDllvllAlNl]

I actually placed my order with my AD today for one. Apparently my AD just started taking orders for certain models today. Seeing that pic up there makes me anxious. The wait begins...

[Mdsmith35]

thumbnail.jpeg

I've had no issues at all.

[Nikrnic]

Originally Posted by jackminny15

I had the same concern. It is a titch harder to read than, say, the black or white dials, but I have found it perfectly legible.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree, same here. In lower light you see the hands reflecting more than the romans. I have no problem telling the time but a black stick dial would be more legible.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

No Regrets....

[bruinmd]

Originally Posted by Nikrnic

I agree, same here. In lower light you see the hands reflecting more than the romans. I have no problem telling the time but a black stick dial would be more legible.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

No Regrets....

Great shot.
Good feedback from you guys. Sounds like it’s not a big issue — even in dim light.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GT23]

Always glad to see it on my wrist!

[sherrill]

I had the 2-tone rose gold version, and it was difficult to see the numerals. I also grew to hate the lone bar at 9 o’clock. Sold it.

[accountank2000]

Originally Posted by jackminny15

I had the same concern. It is a titch harder to read than, say, the black or white dials, but I have found it perfectly legible.

I think this photo demonstrates how (a) the roman numerals in shadow (e.g. bottom left corner) are hardly high-contrast, and (b) the legibility of the hands isn't always great as they can get 'lost' in the sunburst.

As an aside, the photo also shows my problem with the cyclops concept in general - it's designed to make the date easier to read, but of course from this angle it makes it impossible because it literally obscures the date unless you're looking at it head-on. But that's not an issue with Wimbledon dial, just my general opposition to a Rolex signature feature

Originally Posted by Mdsmith35

Attachment 1147778

I've had no issues at all.

This photo again shows the poor contrast of the numerals, as the ones in the bottom left quadrant are pretty well camouflaged against the background.

From looking at one in a dealer it's not quite as bad as you get from some static photos as you can move it around so that the parts you want to see will catch the light. Which is something easily done with something like a (criticised for legibility) Daytona too. But a properly legible watch would let you see it at whatever natural rest position you have it in, without needing to move it to catch a better angle.

This is not to say that all nice watches must be super-legible, as it would make the world a boring place. But if legibility is an important thing to you, this watch is not going to be the best tool for the job.

Originally Posted by sherrill

I also grew to hate the lone bar at 9 o’clock

If you are a Wimbledon tennis superfan, you might like to imagine that the white bar at 9 is a net, separating numbers VIII and X who are squaring off for a game. Or perhaps that the white bar is itself a player, on the other side of the court from the date window.

If you don't have that sort of imagination, you will just think it looks like some clumsy filler attempting to make the dial symmetrical.

Overall I'm not a fan, but it takes all sorts to make the world go round.

[bp1000]

Looks fine to me, my wife wears it.

I assume the steel version with steel against grey is a little more blended

[BillA]

OP
I owned the watch with the white gold bezel, sold it.
It wore small, that’s right small. Calling it a “41” is a lie.
Other forum members have measured the watch and the consensus is that it is 39.5mm.
When I had it on, it just wore small in my eyes.
Before buying, I recommend trying it on and really studying it on your writs to see if you like the size.

[jackminny15]

Originally Posted by accountank2000

I think this photo demonstrates how (a) the roman numerals in shadow (e.g. bottom left corner) are hardly high-contrast, and (b) the legibility of the hands isn't always great as they can get 'lost' in the sunburst.

As an aside, the photo also shows my problem with the cyclops concept in general - it's designed to make the date easier to read, but of course from this angle it makes it impossible because it literally obscures the date unless you're looking at it head-on. But that's not an issue with Wimbledon dial, just my general opposition to a Rolex signature feature



This photo again shows the poor contrast of the numerals, as the ones in the bottom left quadrant are pretty well camouflaged against the background.

From looking at one in a dealer it's not quite as bad as you get from some static photos as you can move it around so that the parts you want to see will catch the light. Which is something easily done with something like a (criticised for legibility) Daytona too. But a properly legible watch would let you see it at whatever natural rest position you have it in, without needing to move it to catch a better angle.

This is not to say that all nice watches must be super-legible, as it would make the world a boring place. But if legibility is an important thing to you, this watch is not going to be the best tool for the job.

If you are a Wimbledon tennis superfan, you might like to imagine that the white bar at 9 is a net, separating numbers VIII and X who are squaring off for a game. Or perhaps that the white bar is itself a player, on the other side of the court from the date window.

If you don't have that sort of imagination, you will just think it looks like some clumsy filler attempting to make the dial symmetrical.

Overall I'm not a fan, but it takes all sorts to make the world go round.

Personally I don't really care how high-contrast the numerals are. I can intuitively tell the time from the hands without the numerals, so for me the legibility concern focuses only on the hands themselves. And while the hands are not quite as legible as a black or white dial DJ, or even the Wimbledon with the gold hands, they are certainly more than legible enough to be able to easily see them and tell the time. At least IMHO.

[Polarexplorerii]

I wanted one but couldn’t get past the 9 0’clock thing!

[bruinmd]

Originally Posted by BillA

OP
I owned the watch with the white gold bezel, sold it.
It wore small, that’s right small. Calling it a “41” is a lie.
Other forum members have measured the watch and the consensus is that it is 39.5mm.
When I had it on, it just wore small in my eyes.
Before buying, I recommend trying it on and really studying it on your writs to see if you like the size.

Thanks. Good to know. That actually may work well for me (wearing a bit smaller) but I’m still not convinced it’s an easy dial to read unless the lighting is just right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nikrnic]

Originally Posted by accountank2000

I think this photo demonstrates how (a) the roman numerals in shadow (e.g. bottom left corner) are hardly high-contrast, and (b) the legibility of the hands isn't always great as they can get 'lost' in the sunburst.



As an aside, the photo also shows my problem with the cyclops concept in general - it's designed to make the date easier to read, but of course from this angle it makes it impossible because it literally obscures the date unless you're looking at it head-on. But that's not an issue with Wimbledon dial, just my general opposition to a Rolex signature feature







This photo again shows the poor contrast of the numerals, as the ones in the bottom left quadrant are pretty well camouflaged against the background.



From looking at one in a dealer it's not quite as bad as you get from some static photos as you can move it around so that the parts you want to see will catch the light. Which is something easily done with something like a (criticised for legibility) Daytona too. But a properly legible watch would let you see it at whatever natural rest position you have it in, without needing to move it to catch a better angle.



This is not to say that all nice watches must be super-legible, as it would make the world a boring place. But if legibility is an important thing to you, this watch is not going to be the best tool for the job.



If you are a Wimbledon tennis superfan, you might like to imagine that the white bar at 9 is a net, separating numbers VIII and X who are squaring off for a game. Or perhaps that the white bar is itself a player, on the other side of the court from the date window.



If you don't have that sort of imagination, you will just think it looks like some clumsy filler attempting to make the dial symmetrical.



Overall I'm not a fan, but it takes all sorts to make the world go round.

I'm a tennis fan though not a Superfan and haven't seen the marker at nine as anything except being a true balance to the date wheel. It does add its own character and I can't picture it any other way. I've always liked it from the start.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[Watch This]

Unplanned but very loved.
Comfortable, legible. Goes with everything.
I don't need to analyze the 9:00 marker.
It all works in harmony and these are getting harder to find.