$2.5 million? Must be the Walmart economy model.

The Patek Grandmaster Chime is $31 million, but even that is eclipsed by a Graff Diamonds watch at $55 million, although the latter is more diamonds than watch.

Absolutely 100% perfect reason for wearing, enjoying, such a timepiece. Like a great family photo, it's a heartwarming memory, something dearly personal only to you, not merely mechanical art.

I just don't understand the fake watch thing. You're not buying the technology, not the history, just 'impressing' (gullible) people with a the idea that you can afford something.

And gullible not because you 'fool' them, but gullible because they're impressed by something as silly as a watch.

I own more than one Rolex because I like them, not because i care one way or the other about what anyone else thinks. You like my watch? Great! You don't? Fine too. But best is when you don't even notice at all.

And we're on a site where many people have paid multi-thousands of dollars for camera gear to produce results they could have got with an old Kodak Brownie or a cheap cell phone.

It's their money, and they choose what to spend it on, and should be able to do so without criticism from others. $15k on a watch? Go for it. $15k on camera gear? Stamp collections? $15k Bottles of wine? Have at it. But buying luxury goods which you can't afford is a moron's game.

Personally I think people who buy Hummers (and many other things) must be idiots, but it's their money, their business, and who am I to criticise their choices?

Many people - myself included - enjoy watches for the technology and craftsmanship involved. Also the history.

Although Rolex has become - to my intense disappointment - a "look at me" fashion item, their history is wonderful, having created many specialist features, including for example, the first true waterproof watch. Truly, tool watches.

Also, one of the very few many watch brands which was started in my home country, England, although production moved to Switzerland in early days.

They were also very supportive of returning troops from WW2, selling watches at an extremely discounted rate. My father bought one, which he had for nearly 50 years.

My first Rolex was bought for under $100, direct from the Rolex factory. Stupidly, I know longer have it, although I have others.

While incredibly durable, Rolex is close to the bottom of the bottom of the ladder in terms of wildly expensive luxury watches, and while prices are higher than most people want to pay for a watch, are a tiny fraction of a percent of VERY seriously expensive watches.

A Hublot worn by Rafal Nadal while playing at Wimbledon one year had a retail price of over $400,000 for example. Many Pateks and others are a multiple of that. Paul Newman's Rolex Daytona sold for $17 million a few years ago.

Sure - why would you need a camera and an elaborate lighting setup and everything else that goes with photography, when - relatively soon but not now - you'll be able to verbally tell the computer and or roughly sketch what you want, to produce the same image as you might have done with the camera gear.

Think of it as PS on steroids. We're halfway there now with sky replacement, face-shaping etc.

A camera is merely incidental in the path from what the camera captured to what final image is desired.

It's less and less about - to my mind - "real photography" and more about computer jockeying.

Lets face it, neither Ansel Adams nor Cartier Bresson would recognize photography 2024- style. Less about the critical moment, more about software updates.

Of course, this is my opinion, nothing else, and YMMV.

That would imply intent on my behalf.

The reality is that I was walking past the storeroom window on my way to do something thrilling like mow the grass and a sweeping tail caught my eye - and of course my phone was in my pocket.

How did the lizard feel about that?? ;)

...killing off "single purpose" cameras?

Another threat to photography at an entirely different level - link in the next post.

Seems reasonable ..

(Download)

Obviously didn't read the memo about cellphones not being cameras!

Great image.

I use Skype on my PC but not on my Pixel 8 as Skype never turns off, even after you 'close' the app.

The only way to kill it is to go into settings and specifically stop that app.

Clearly the 2nd Amendment shouldn't apply to morons like this clown.

Unforgivable.

+1

Excellent info, thanks for pointing it out. Had NO idea anything like that existed.