Engineer II Classic

[mjake]

I found Ball watches in a magazine and really liked the night readability feature. I have done some research and am ready to make my first purchase. I am new to the "watch" world (I own 1 Tag) and wanted some thoughts on Ball and the Eng II classic. I felt it was a little more dressy than the hydrocarbons and more affordable. Any input would be appreciated.

[chong]

I also prefer the Eng II classic look because it is very minimalist. the only concern I have is the extreme brightness that particular watch has because it is 100millicures compared to the others which are 26 or 25 millicures only. Either way it could be a plus or a minus for you.

Other choices if you want a dressier look would be the new cleveland ball trainmaster which has raised numbers.

However, it all depends on what kind of watch you are looking for and what you want to wear it for.

Good luck!

[mjake]

So this is one of the brightest of the ball collection?

[mjake]

Are the T25 tubes on the Eng II Classic (not the master model) bright enough. Since this would be one of my reasons for getting hte watch.

[obie]

I wear a Hydrocarbon Engineer Chronograph with T25 tubes, and it is bright enough for used on nightwork as a police officer. Also remember that in addition to the milicuries, also consider how wide the tubes are. If you look at the difference between the Classic I and Classic II hydrocarbons, you can see that the wider tubed watches (both 25 milicuries) seem brighter.

I wore a Engineer Master II diver the other night to bed, and the wider tubes than my Hydrocarbon Chronograph seeemed "brighter", but since they both are T25, I think the wider tubes made it easier for me to read. Of course they both are easy to read, but the wider tubes showed up differently.

[lowbee]

You know I only need them to be bright enough for me to read in darkness, I don't need it to be so bright that it attract attention from people standing 10 feet away. So having said that, does T25 do what I need ? or do I need to go get a T100 ?

[roberev]

You know I only need them to be bright enough for me to read in darkness, I don't need it to be so bright that it attract attention from people standing 10 feet away. So having said that, does T25 do what I need ? or do I need to go get a T100 ?

T25 will be perfectly adequate for your stated need. I find that the size of the tritium tube has as much to do with visibility as the T-rating, perhaps more.

Rob

[Anonimo1]

If you are looking for something a little dressier then check out the Conductor GMT. Great lines and simple easy to read dial. Just got mine on Monday and looks even better in person. Eric

http://www.ballwatch.com/uploadpic/2a5b4394-c1d4-43a0-9391-c444dcfca005.jpg

[sukispop]

Like Rob, I too own an Engineer Master II Classic. I love the brightness of the extra long T100 tritium tubes, but I especially love how sharp and defined that brightness is. At night in my bedroom, or in the darkness of a movie theater, I love how utterly legible the time is. :-!

The EMII Classic's "night" shot, which is shown on Ball's website, looks as though the T100 tubes glow so brightly, that the glow radiates like a cloud over the entire watch dial...not so. As I've stated, the brightness is much sharper and more defined...much more "readable". And I wish that I could take a half decent night pic of it so that you could see what I mean.

Brian's already posted it, but here it is again...to show you what I mean--
The Engineer Master II Classic "night shot" from the Ball website

http://photos.imageevent.com/gyuenfamily/geoffswatchpics/BallEngineerMasterIIClassicnightglow.jpg

[roberev]

I've posted this elsewhere, but here's a lume shot of my EMII Classic taken in a pitch-black room. It's bright enough that on a high ISO my digital camera's exposure was less than a second (note that sweep hand (near the 9:00 marker) is frozen in the pic, not blurry), but it isn't overly bright. I agree that the lume is sharp and defined, and perfectly appropriate anywhere (except on a battlefield at night ;-) ). Any blurriness in this pic is because this is a handheld shot. I should've used a tripod.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/roberev/Ball/balllume.jpg

Rob

[scosgt]

Here is the best I could do with the Arabic Chronometer. Of course, the room is not totally dark, since I can not turn off the LCD on this camera. Clearly not as bright, but perfectly visible all night. I will try a time exposure and see if I can get a better shot.

[scosgt]

OK, here is a good nite pic of an Arabic Chronometer. Taken as a 30 second time exposure, Panasonic Digital Camera, taken with a tripod from approx 4 feet with 5.5X zoom. This is how it really looks in the dark! Of course the seconds hand is not visible due to the time exposure, but in real life it is perfectly visible.

[CbusRog]

This is my EMII Classic taken at ISO200, f/2.8, 1 sec. exposure, macro mode from 8". The watch was stopped. I also did a little PhotoShop work to lower the saturation and brightness (yes, a few trips from the computer to the bathroom while adjusting in PhotoShop :-d ). I think it pretty much approximates the typical dark room view.

[sukispop]

Now, those are simply awesome lume shots, guys! :-!

Very clear, sharp, and well defined...and gives folks a good idea as to how these Balls actually perform in the dark. Thanks! :thanks

[imtrbo]

Wow those are nice lume shots people! :-!

Here's one of my EMII Diver, which I feel should be quite accurate as to how it looks at night in real life:

(Notice that my tubes that form the number '12' are not all evenly lit, and the tube that marks the '0' on the rotating bezel is quite dim as well. I guess it's because it's positioned vertically)

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a62/IMTRBO/DiverLume_resize.jpg