ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

JohnFM · 9 March 2013, 07:20 AM

No cyclops. First, I don't need it -- 58 with lousy distance vision. But I can see close-up without glasses. Second, the distortion bugs me and causes me to look at the left side of the watch when I glance down -- weird, I know ;-)

The one time it does come in handy (I own a 16610 and 16600) is when I'm wearing contacts, which correct my vision so that I can see far but not close, like most other 58 year olds. Then the 'clops enlargement makes seeing the date easier. It is a good feature for old eyes, but otherwise unnecessary and distracting -- for me.

John

VADanno · 9 March 2013, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kilyung

I need it to read the date with my blind eyes.

X2!

Rolex can't make the date font larger without enlarging the date wheel. So if you are willing to wear a 46mm watch, you don't need the cyclops. My 36mm Oyster case is the perfect size, and the cyclops makes the date readable when I don't have on my reading glasses. It's a must!

It also makes it easier to identify a Rolex peaking out from a shirt sleeve!

Darlinboy · 9 March 2013, 07:26 AM

I like the magnification, so yes.

vespa75 · 9 March 2013, 07:26 AM

yes to the cyclops

Rolexwatch · 9 March 2013, 07:27 AM

Love the cyclop. Why would I want it not to be on my watch???

Also, I need it to read the date.

topjimmi · 9 March 2013, 07:32 AM

yes to the cyclops

blackout · 9 March 2013, 07:50 AM

Yes! Love it!

Anthony808 · 9 March 2013, 08:05 AM

I've got no problem with it on my GMTII and I like it on all the other models aside from the Submariner. To me the cyclops (and the date) defiles the purity of the origional design - which is why I opted for the Submariner (without date) and the Sea-Dweller.

allen993 · 9 March 2013, 08:11 AM

no to the cyclops..IMO...completely breaks up the symmetry of the face..I also don't care for how it distorts the view of 1:00ish through about 3:30ish area of the face.

montpyt · 9 March 2013, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by james1787

Yup, it's part of what makes a Rolex a Rolex...

Absolutely true....that's what makes a Rolex a Rolex

Les Paul · 9 March 2013, 08:22 AM

A definitive yes

Jason71 · 9 March 2013, 08:26 AM

I have learned to TOLERATE the cyclops on SOME of my Rolex models, but have had it removed from 2 of my 16800s and a 1680. I would rather not have it ESPECIALLY on the sapphire crystal models. I tolerate it better on my top-hat crystals of 2 other 1680s.......

I know.....I'm nuts

AK40DJ50 · 9 March 2013, 08:27 AM

The cyclops is both functional and iconic.

Matt_Regan · 9 March 2013, 08:30 AM

Yes, as I genuinely love the look of the cyclops and then there's also this...

Quote:

Originally Posted by james1787

Yup, it's part of what makes a Rolex a Rolex. Whenever I get a second Rolex it definitely will have the cyclops.

T. Ferguson · 9 March 2013, 08:35 AM

Yes on the cyclops, especially since they put the AR under the lense. Major improvement.

honeybear · 9 March 2013, 08:42 AM

I would opt not to get the cyclops, precisely because it's what the person on the street associates with the Rolex brand. I like the quality and ease of wear of my Rolex, but I don't feel the need to make it known to everyone around that I'm wearing a Rolex.

Thatguy · 9 March 2013, 08:43 AM

6 months ago no cyclops but now that I have it I like it.

Lumberjact · 9 March 2013, 08:56 AM

I appreciate the benefits of it and like many of the watches bearing it, but would prefer not to have it, all things being equal. Reminds me somewhat of bifocal spectacles.

sea-dweller · 9 March 2013, 08:58 AM

I would have them as there currently are: cyclops on all models except the Sea-Dweller and Daytona, of course.

mvmbles · 9 March 2013, 10:25 AM

I love the look of the cyclops even if I don't need it. If I were to purchase a Sea Dweller, I'd probably buy a new sapphire with cyclops for it.

mcorliss · 9 March 2013, 10:27 AM

Wouldn't have it any other way!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maxtor · 9 March 2013, 10:30 AM

Why mess with success?

jackruff · 9 March 2013, 10:37 AM

Yes....

gslaskin · 9 March 2013, 11:38 AM

I can remember that as I little kid I was fascinated by the cyclops on my grandfather's Rolex. For me, the cyclops is an integral part of the Rolex mystique.

polarinda · 9 March 2013, 12:08 PM

Not on the daytona.

Brenngun · 9 March 2013, 12:14 PM

Yes!

WhatTheDeuce · 9 March 2013, 12:15 PM

Yes!

Jsan20 · 9 March 2013, 12:18 PM

It takes a bit to embrace the cyclops but once your hooked you crave it

z32turbo · 9 March 2013, 12:24 PM

I don't need it but I'd opt for it.

LightOnAHill · 9 March 2013, 12:25 PM

I love the Cyclopes. Looks cool and unique and helps me see the date quick

9 March 2013, 07:26 AM	#33
Darlinboy 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Real Name: DB Location: :noitacoL Watch: :hctaW Posts: 6,703	I like the magnification, so yes. __________________ Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.

9 March 2013, 08:26 AM	#42
Jason71 "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: Jason Location: USA Watch: Rolex/Tudor Divers Posts: 7,973	I have learned to TOLERATE the cyclops on SOME of my Rolex models, but have had it removed from 2 of my 16800s and a 1680. I would rather not have it ESPECIALLY on the sapphire crystal models. I tolerate it better on my top-hat crystals of 2 other 1680s....... I know.....I'm nuts __________________ Best Regards, Jason Just Say "NO" to Polishing Card-Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch Curmudgeons LIfe is too short to wear inexpensive watches PLEXI IS SEXY

9 March 2013, 08:27 AM	#43
AK40DJ50 "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Real Name: Tom Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,506	The cyclops is both functional and iconic. __________________ Datejust II 116333 Submariner 116610LN

9 March 2013, 08:35 AM	#45
T. Ferguson "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Left Coast Posts: 7,025	Yes on the cyclops, especially since they put the AR under the lense. Major improvement. __________________ *Some days it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.*

9 March 2013, 08:42 AM	#46
honeybear "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: San Diego, CA Watch: Vacheron Overseas Posts: 297	I would opt not to get the cyclops, precisely because it's what the person on the street associates with the Rolex brand. I like the quality and ease of wear of my Rolex, but I don't feel the need to make it known to everyone around that I'm wearing a Rolex. __________________ Patek Philippe Calatrava 5119J; Vacheron Constantin Overseas; Jaeger-LeCoultre Grande Reverso Duo; Rolex Submariner 114060; Baume and Mercier Hampton Annual Calendar; Tudor Heritage Black Bay.

9 March 2013, 07:20 AM	#31
JohnFM "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: northern CA USA Watch: 114270 Explorer Posts: 479	No cyclops. First, I don't need it -- 58 with lousy distance vision. But I can see close-up without glasses. Second, the distortion bugs me and causes me to look at the left side of the watch when I glance down -- weird, I know ;-) The one time it does come in handy (I own a 16610 and 16600) is when I'm wearing contacts, which correct my vision so that I can see far but not close, like most other 58 year olds. Then the 'clops enlargement makes seeing the date easier. It is a good feature for old eyes, but otherwise unnecessary and distracting -- for me. John

9 March 2013, 07:26 AM	#34
vespa75 Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Real Name: Ignacio Location: Spain Watch: Sub 16610 Posts: 61	yes to the cyclops

9 March 2013, 07:27 AM	#35
Rolexwatch "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Europe somewhere Watch: Ro,Om,Cart,Lon,Sei Posts: 319	Love the cyclop. Why would I want it not to be on my watch??? Also, I need it to read the date.

9 March 2013, 07:32 AM	#36
topjimmi "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Real Name: matt Location: USA Posts: 551	yes to the cyclops

9 March 2013, 07:50 AM	#37
blackout "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Everywhere Watch: SubC LN & LV Posts: 743	Yes! Love it!

9 March 2013, 08:05 AM	#38
Anthony808 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Real Name: Tony Location: Honolulu Watch: Submariner Posts: 172	I've got no problem with it on my GMTII and I like it on all the other models aside from the Submariner. To me the cyclops (and the date) defiles the purity of the origional design - which is why I opted for the Submariner (without date) and the Sea-Dweller.

9 March 2013, 08:11 AM	#39
allen993 "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Alabama Posts: 173	no to the cyclops..IMO...completely breaks up the symmetry of the face..I also don't care for how it distorts the view of 1:00ish through about 3:30ish area of the face.

9 March 2013, 08:22 AM	#41
Les Paul "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: 1738 mi to Vegas Watch: 16613, 116710LN Posts: 234	A definitive yes

9 March 2013, 08:43 AM	#47
Thatguy "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Real Name: Wayne Location: California Watch: Rolex, PAM Posts: 3,302	6 months ago no cyclops but now that I have it I like it.

9 March 2013, 08:56 AM	#48
Lumberjact "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Paris Watch: Explorer Posts: 446	I appreciate the benefits of it and like many of the watches bearing it, but would prefer not to have it, all things being equal. Reminds me somewhat of bifocal spectacles. __________________ "Onto his wrist he slipped his steel Rolex Oyster Perpetual, the 34mm model, the date window its only complication; Bond did not need to know the phases of the moon or the exact moment of high tide at Southampton. And he suspected very few people did."

9 March 2013, 08:58 AM	#49
sea-dweller "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Real Name: Dennis Location: Bay Area - 925 Posts: 40,018	I would have them as there currently are: cyclops on all models except the Sea-Dweller and Daytona, of course.

9 March 2013, 10:25 AM	#50
mvmbles "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2011 Real Name: Nick Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 759	I love the look of the cyclops even if I don't need it. If I were to purchase a Sea Dweller, I'd probably buy a new sapphire with cyclops for it.

9 March 2013, 10:27 AM	#51
mcorliss "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Real Name: M Location: Boston Posts: 1,024	Wouldn't have it any other way! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

9 March 2013, 10:30 AM	#52
Maxtor 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Real Name: Max Location: Toronto Watch: Exp 1, DJ Tuxedo Posts: 2,472	Why mess with success?

9 March 2013, 10:37 AM	#53
jackruff "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Australia Watch: eclectic.. Posts: 191	Yes....

9 March 2013, 11:38 AM	#54
gslaskin Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Minnesota, USA Posts: 429	I can remember that as I little kid I was fascinated by the cyclops on my grandfather's Rolex. For me, the cyclops is an integral part of the Rolex mystique.

9 March 2013, 12:08 PM	#55
polarinda "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Real Name: Trav Location: singapore Watch: it Posts: 2,316	Not on the daytona.

9 March 2013, 12:14 PM	#56
Brenngun 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Real Name: Rick Location: Smokin' Heaven Watch: Rolex & Tudor Posts: 3,866	Yes!

9 March 2013, 12:15 PM	#57
WhatTheDeuce "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Real Name: Kyung Location: Anywhere? Watch: cha want... Posts: 4,488	Yes! __________________ Instagram: @whatthedeuce_

9 March 2013, 12:18 PM	#58
Jsan20 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Real Name: James Location: Michigan Watch: 116613LB Posts: 861	It takes a bit to embrace the cyclops but once your hooked you crave it

9 March 2013, 12:24 PM	#59
z32turbo "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Sea Level Watch: Varies Posts: 6,877	I don't need it but I'd opt for it. __________________ Instagram @z32turbo

9 March 2013, 12:25 PM	#60
LightOnAHill "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Real Name: Bryan Location: Pacific Northwest Watch: YG DD lchdp Posts: 2,963	I love the Cyclopes. Looks cool and unique and helps me see the date quick

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)