[sharkfinDave]

Hi, I've caught the G-shock bug I think. I've been obsessing on which ones to get. ???
New to this craze, just getting into this game late for the G's.
I'm really digging the 5600 and frogman series.

But the real question is which display do you all recommend? Positive or negative displays?
I've read many threads on other sites, and its a really mixed opinion of which is better.
I'm leaning towards a negative display but read many hated or had trouble viewing and got tired of them so they went to sales forums.
Is it really that bad? They look good in some pics, but never seen in person to make a definite decision.

Need some help guys, maybe some pics and advice is much appreciated.
Don't know how to poll here, but would be cool to see what all you g-shockers would choose in a +/- display poll. (mods please?)

Thanks, Dave.

 

[LUW]

A negative display will always be harder to read, specially out doors. It does look cool, but it isn't practical.

 

[water70proof]

I have no trouble reading the negative display on my G100, but most of the time I'm simply reading the hands.

 

[UpstandingCitizen]

A negative display will always be harder to read, specially out doors. It does look cool, but it isn't practical.

My experience was the exact opposite--reading the negative display outdoors in natural light was a breeze, but it was extremely difficult to read indoors. I think I sold mine within a couple of days for this exact reason.

I guess it goes without saying that I highly recommend going with a positive display.

 

[nhoj]

Try to check some out in person. In my experience there is a wide limit to what people can tolerate and it is unpredictable. I've offered models that I thought had the most visible negative displays and some folks just hated them.

Also Casio has made improvements in the visibility. The newest releases on the solar/atomic models are much better than the negative displays on the "Military Inspired Stealth Series" which are terrible IMHO.

I had a negative display G7800 and I thought it was fine to read. But I would say that I prefer the positive display.

 

[casiojem]

My opinion for what its worth is that negative is just harder to read in most light conditions....however, it could be cooler or have some appeal.
Can you sacrifice the practicality for potential cool-ness?
If you don't think negative is cool then go positive all the way
Regards
Jem

 

[Catalin]

The positive one by a mile - the negative one is nowhere as easy to read

 

[OldHippie1968]

Hi, I've caught the G-shock bug I think. I've been obsessing on which ones to get. ???
New to this craze, just getting into this game late for the G's.
I'm really digging the 5600 and frogman series.

But the real question is which display do you all recommend? Positive or negative displays?
I've read many threads on other sites, and its a really mixed opinion of which is better.
I'm leaning towards a negative display but read many hated or had trouble viewing and got tired of them so they went to sales forums.
Is it really that bad? They look good in some pics, but never seen in person to make a definite decision.

Need some help guys, maybe some pics and advice is much appreciated.
Don't know how to poll here, but would be cool to see what all you g-shockers would choose in a +/- display poll. (mods please?)

Thanks, Dave.

I've had several G's over the years. My personal opinion would be a positive display, especially if this is your first one. Negative displays, while cool looking, are extremely difficult to see at certain angles and lighting. Getting one right off the bat and not liking it may have you condemning the entire line without giving it a chance. My opinion, again, would have to be a DW5600e as a starter. These can be had at a relatively low price, they have that retro look and really can take some punishment.

Cheers!
Mike

 

[OldHippie1968]

I have no trouble reading the negative display on my G100, but most of the time I'm simply reading the hands.

Totally different animal. Full negative displays are tough to view under certain circumstances. The G-100 isn't that tough. I think it could be the fact that the display is smaller.

Cheers!
Mike

 

[Isthmus]

I generally agree than in most watches I have seen, negative displays are just not as well done as positive ones. The sole exception I have seen was a Puma branded watches that used a negative display in which the created the effect by reversing the pixels on the display, instead of using a polarized film to create the effect. the result was a super sharp negative display. every other one I have seen has not been as clear to read as a comparable positive display. negative definitely looks cooler though.

 

[OldHippie1968]

I generally agree than in most watches I have seen, negative displays are just not as well done as positive ones. The sole exception I have seen was a Puma branded watches that used a negative display in which the created the effect by reversing the pixels on the display, instead of using a polarized film to create the effect. the result was a super sharp negative display. every other one I have seen has not been as clear to read as a comparable positive display. negative definitely looks cooler though.

I think it depends on the shape I guess. I know that the negative display on the 5600 is tough to read, yet other models not so.

Cheers!
Mike

 

[Pei Der Han]

Hi, I've caught the G-shock bug I think. I've been obsessing on which ones to get. ???
New to this craze, just getting into this game late for the G's.
I'm really digging the 5600 and frogman series.

But the real question is which display do you all recommend? Positive or negative displays?
I've read many threads on other sites, and its a really mixed opinion of which is better.
I'm leaning towards a negative display but read many hated or had trouble viewing and got tired of them so they went to sales forums.
Is it really that bad? They look good in some pics, but never seen in person to make a definite decision.

Need some help guys, maybe some pics and advice is much appreciated.
Don't know how to poll here, but would be cool to see what all you g-shockers would choose in a +/- display poll. (mods please?)

Thanks, Dave.

Here is a side by side comparison of a pair of F-91Ws...

 

[casiojem]

There is a tutorial on another well known watch site that shows you how to take a positive and just flip the screen and make it a negative display.
I would never do it but it is amazingly simple and quite a shock to find it is just a flip of the screen
Regards
Jem

 

[peahi]

The negative displays are a big thumbs down for me. Great image, but for looking at the time (which is the life-purpose of our watches as tools). I gave my neg DW5600 away.

 

[sharkfinDave]

Thanks for all your opinions guys. Its what I was looking for. First hand ownership experience.
From threads I've read here and other sites. The consensus seems to be favorable to the positive.
Although I was really attracted to the stealth look of the black and negative of lets say gw 5600. But was worried about viewing problems and eventually hating it to the point of flipping.
It is my first so I will take your advices and start positive and try find some real specimens to view.
I've read from those who own negative display watches, that they are not so bad and are good in fact. But this is all subjective and tolerances vary from person to person.
Ok, I've got to see what I can find out there thats right for me.

Thanks a bunch guys.
Dave

 

[JohnWN]

Very useful comparison, thanks!

Here is a side by side comparison of a pair of F-91Ws...



At this angle, they both look relatively equal but shift the angle only a few degrees and the negative display all but disappears.
[/quote]

 

[JohnWN]

So, now, which G's have the LARGEST numbers in the display?

 

[hooter]

My eyes are getting old, so the G-shocks were getting hard to read. Picked up a G-shock cousin, a Casio Pathfinder, and love it. The numbers are larger and the display is much easier to read, imho. The Pathfinders are every bit as tough as the G-shocks.

 

[JohnWN]

I definitely like mine, Hooter!

My eyes are getting old, so the G-shocks were getting hard to read. Picked up a G-shock cousin, a Casio Pathfinder, and love it. The numbers are larger and the display is much easier to read, imho. The Pathfinders are every bit as tough as the G-shocks.

 

[nhoj]

Here is a side by side comparison of a pair of F-91Ws...



At this angle, they both look relatively equal but shift the angle only a few degrees and the negative display all but disappears.


[/quote]

IMHO the postivie displays modifed to the negative have the worst visibility. The negatives that come form Casio tend to have fatter numbers to aid in the visibility. Like I mentioned earlier, Casio has really improved the visibility lately. I don't know what they have done, but the contrast is much better and the numbers are more clear than an amber color. Here is a picture of one of the most recent models (GW7900) which looks this good in person. Even the thin lines of the tide graph in the center of the display are nice and clear.

Pict from ORC

[img]