I am considering an upgrade from the FR230 to the Fenix 5 (47mm). Is there any good reason to choose the sapphire version ? What does really bring the wi-fi ?
What's amazing is that Garmin (and apparently Apple ? Haven't been following their watch) have managed to make sapphire a "marketing" argument again when it's been a complete non issue on basic watches for decades! When was the last time any watch company wasted time mentioning they used a sapphire glass ?
I've seen plenty of mainstream watch companies mention that they use sapphire crystal, it is still considered a selling point though it's not marketed the same way that it is with smart watches. I have a Citizen watch I bought 5 or 6 years ago that not only highlighted that fact in the product description it even has the word sapphire on the watch face.
I've seen plenty of mainstream watch companies mention that they use sapphire crystal, it is still considered a selling point though it's not marketed the same way that it is with smart watches. I have a Citizen watch I bought 5 or 6 years ago that not only highlighted that fact in the product description it even has the word sapphire on the watch face.
I've been into fairly expensive watches in the past (Omega, Panerai, IWC, etc) and they all use sapphire. Above $700 they don't shout about it as it's taken as a given that a watch costing that much will have a sapphire crystal (usually with one or more optical coatings) so it's not really a big competitive factor.
Having said that, if you buy a premium mechanical watch you are probably expecting it to last 30+ years and you have an eye on resale or passing it on to your kids.
I've opted for the non-sapphire fenix 5 because the I don't think the life of the watch will be more than 3-5 years, mainly because of the lithium-ion battery that will be losing capacity after three years of charge cycles, but also because the tech moves so fast it may not work with phones and other devices in 3+ years time. Not to mention the fenix 12 will probably be out then and be able to do my runs for me and send back the photos :D
I also think that a few dings and scratches on a "tool watch" gives it a bit of character :cool: But I can understand how a scratch on the face would bug some people, so it's good we have a choice :)
milesgilmour, all good points. Especially regarding technology advances. It should be possible to replace the battery (though not a user-friendly way), but the device will be obsolete in a few years.
Totally agree but, in Terminator Genisys, Arnie says about his character that is obsolete, and still is the 'good guy' and still wins... in a way.
I keep a 1972 Casio fx-102 scientific calculator from my father, it takes 4 AA batteries, still works perfectly, and Ln 52 still is 3,95124371858143, just like in '72.
In my signature you can see I keep a 2004 eTrex Vista and I don't need to tell you which one is more accurate...
My point is that if you take good care of your stuff (good stuff), it will last for the years to come, it won't be state of the art though, as the matter of fact our beloved f3 is now on 2nd to 3rd base...
Yes, but the fenix 5 is not your father's gold Rolex that's been handed down for several generations. It will always look cool, but mostly become a conversation piece at some point in the future. I can accept that a piece of "jewelry" that has an ever-advancing technology as it's primary feature (fenix 5), has a very shortened lifespan, regardless of how well you take care of it.
Yes, but the fenix 5 is not your father's gold Rolex that's been handed down for several generations. It will always look cool, but mostly become a conversation piece at some point in the future. I can accept that a piece of
"jewelry" that has an ever-advancing technology as it's primary feature (fenix 5), has a very shortened lifespan, regardless of how well you take care of it.
I pre-ordered one with Sapphire as I cannot stand any scratches on the watch glass. Besides the $100 prime for the Sapphire glass comes with WiFi and the 2nd set of band. After all, the $100 is worth to spend.
It depends on the user, if it was really that huge of a problem no one would buy the cheaper watches with much softer, even *gasp* plastic display screens like many of the Suunto, Garmin, Polar, etc. fitness watches and devices have and do still have if they were so scratched up they were worthless in a couple months. If you know you are prone to scratching watches badly, then sure sapphire is the way to go. If you need WIFI, it's your only option.
Does anyone have any screenshots of both versions in various light conditions indoors and out? If you start looking into it, scratch resistance seems to be the only benefit to sapphire. If you do some digging on posts about IonX or Gorilla glass vs sapphire the pictures tell a pretty interesting story that the measurements back up. "glass" versions are lighter, have less optical distortion, higher light transmission, less reflections, and greater impact resistance. So in most outdoor light conditions the glass screens are actually significantly more readable mostly due to reduced reflections. The Apple Watch is a great example the non-sapphire version is much easier to see in most lighting conditions and harder to break but of course scratches easier. This may not hold true for the two Garmin screen options, but it would be very interesting to see side by side in various light conditions.
Have to disagree with most of what you said... I see no difference whatsoever with screen readability between the sapphire and non sapphire display. I suppose someone can look at them under certain lighting conditions or under a microscope and find some but in real world use, I see zero!!
My fenix 3HR in very bright desert sunlight (looks very readable to me)
Here is another but this is with my fenix 3 titanium with sapphire. Again, bright desert sunlight and very readable
As to the AW, I have a series 2 SS with sapphire display and it's very readable in direct sunlight.
Sure you can roll the dice and get the non sapphire display but here is a recent photo posted in an Apple forum. This watch is only a few weeks old and is the non sapphire version:
It's a dice roll... You will never have a scratch on the screen until you do have one. Once you have one there is no way to remedy it. Also consider what a scratch(s) on the screen will do to resale? Bye-bye resale value..
Some see scratches, dents and dings as battle scars and they do not bother them. I see them as instant sell at a loss and but a new one. I generally upgrade every year because I want the latest and greatest. A scratch on the screen will ruin resale value..
I personally don't understand why anyone would buy an outdoor fitness watch that does not have a sapphire display but to each their own. These watches are already pretty expensive so why cheap out on the last bit? For an extra $100 you are not only getting the sapphire display, piece of mind, better resale, ect but you are also getting WiFi and an extra band..
That's part of why I wondered if anyone had comparison shots of the two side by side for the garmin in the exact same light conditions at the exact same angles etc., if they are not compared side by side at the same time it's easy to overlook differences, or believe there are none. Also because the results might differ significantly based on what their "standard glass" is. Again if you know you scratch up displays easily/badly then absolutely get the sapphire, or use a screen protector. I've done that for years on softer face sport watches before there were sapphire options and you'd be amazed at how well even the thin plastic ones do, replace it every few months and it's like having a brand new unscratched screen. I'd imagine with the now popular glass screen protectors they are much much better.
The lab measurements for distortion, light transmission, reflections, and breakage force do not lie. Here's a link to a perfect example of a lab comparing various glass specs for the AW, that has nothing to do with selling glass, they design professional software for display evaluations/calibrations. You do bring up a good point though, once the watch face is scratched it certainly makes the display worse than any difference between materials.
