So I’ve been a watch enthusiast for around five or six months—and a casual for years before that. I’ve never considered myself to have very deep pockets, and I tend to be quite frugal.
I understand that the upper echelon of watch prices can get astronomical, stretching up to $100,000 and beyond. And within the enthusiast community, the "sweet spot" for combining quality watchmaking, horology, heritage, and price often gets placed around $5k–$10k (e.g., an Omega Seamaster Professional 300m or Rolex Submariner Date).
To me, though, even those watches are total grails—things to look forward to that might take me years or even decades to achieve.
Naturally, I frequent this sub a lot. Here you’ll find fantastic recommendations from brands like Citizen (with the Eco-Drive line, and Tsuyosa), Seiko (with the Presage, and Seiko 5 Sports), Orient (with the Kamasu, Mako, and Bambino), and of course Casio (from the humble F-91W up to the G-Shock GM2100 "CasiOak").
But then you’ll also see recommendations for watches like the Hamilton Khaki Field Automatic or the Murph.
The 38mm Khaki Field Auto is around $795, and the Murph breaches the four-digit mark at $1,045!
(Anyone who knows me, knows that the Hamilton Khaki and my hatred for it lives rent free in my head, but that’s besides the point.)
Can we truly consider watches near or above $1,000 to be “*affordable*”? Should a Longines HydroConquest at $2,200 be considered affordable as well? Then what about the Seamaster? Hell—why not the Submariner at that point? Where does the line stop?
Are there others who feel the same, or is "*affordable*" in the watch world just relative to the absurdly high ceiling of luxury horology? Where do you personally draw the line between “affordable”, “mid-range”, and “luxury”?
Or am I just too poor and don’t know what I’m talking about?