How much worse is 5212a vs 5226g

[edyu]

I couldn't find the comment anymore but I recall someone said (paraphrasing) 5212a lugs/case is horrible compared to other Patek watch such as 5226g and he vastly prefers 5226g over 5212a as a result.

Can someone which experience with one or the other or even both comment on this? I've been asking for a 5212a from my AD for awhile so I haven't seen it in person. Would love to hear from owners about this as I do care about case/lug shapes. Thank you.

[vitalsigns]

Seems like dumb hyperbole to me. Many people love both the 5212 and the 5226. Pick whichever one you like.

[bp1000]

Forget what other people think. Watch buying is highly personal and we can all appreciate (most) watches for what they are.

The 5212a is not in super high demand but not many come through because its steel and generally speaking Patek dont really commit to increasing their steel watch supply.

I think the 5212a is actually quite an interesting reference, certainly unique. The 5226g is just a good solid option. Not particularly interesting, just v.nice.

Regarding the lugs, this, like the PC 5320g have stamped out cases. Like some dials on the complications and down range, they are also stamped. Probably Patek trying to increase supply over more references whilst dealing with the lack of skilled watchmakers. There is at least a 12 year lag for foundation Patek standards, so it's a big issue perhaps causing them to move into some machine automation. I dont think that sits well with some people. I like the double and triple step lugs. But the side casing on the 5226 is pretty impressive. The issue I have with many modern Patek's is the size and balance. I dont get why so many new references have to be so big and cavernous. The 5326g on the other hand has much better balance.

[hgg43c]

Originally Posted by bp1000

Forget what other people think. Watch buying is highly personal and we can all appreciate (most) watches for what they are.

The 5212a is not in super high demand but not many come through because its steel and generally speaking Patek dont really commit to increasing their steel watch supply.

I think the 5212a is actually quite an interesting reference, certainly unique. The 5226g is just a good solid option. Not particularly interesting, just v.nice.

Regarding the lugs, this, like the PC 5320g have stamped out cases. Like some dials on the complications and down range, they are also stamped. Probably Patek trying to increase supply over more references whilst dealing with the lack of skilled watchmakers. There is at least a 12 year lag for foundation Patek standards, so it's a big issue perhaps causing them to move into some machine automation. I dont think that sits well with some people. I like the double and triple step lugs. But the side casing on the 5226 is pretty impressive. The issue I have with many modern Patek's is the size and balance. I dont get why so many new references have to be so big and cavernous. The 5326g on the other hand has much better balance.

I happen to like the 5212A a lot, my issue is the weight I prefer a heavier watch that’s the only reason I haven’t picked it up. Buy what you like and filter out the noise


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JR16]

Originally Posted by edyu

I couldn't find the comment anymore but I recall someone said (paraphrasing) 5212a lugs/case is horrible compared to other Patek watch such as 5226g and he vastly prefers 5226g over 5212a as a result.

Can someone which experience with one or the other or even both comment on this? I've been asking for a 5212a from my AD for awhile so I haven't seen it in person. Would love to hear from owners about this as I do care about case/lug shapes. Thank you.

I may have commented on this in the past. Have tried both on and own 5226g- due to L2L length and shape, the 5226g fits a smaller wrist better IMO. I was thinking of adding 5212a but need to try on again (it’s been awhile) to see if it wears well on me. Don’t want to guess on a 40k watch or get it and it be just a touch too long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[edyu]

Thank you for the answers. It's so hard to find a 5212a to try on at the AD (they don't even have an exhibition one).

[edyu]

And regarding L2L, I'm starting to trend to smaller watches now and I'm having problem even with 40mm nowadays but most Patek watches nowadays are 40mm+.

[JR16]

Originally Posted by edyu

And regarding L2L, I'm starting to trend to smaller watches now and I'm having problem even with 40mm nowadays but most Patek watches nowadays are 40mm+.

Same here- not all 40mm watches are created equal! I’ve almost stopped paying attention to dial size when there’s a new watch released and go weight to L2L


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[John Doyle]

Movement wise - 5212 has a quirky, unique complication not replicated within the catalogue.
Dial wise, 5212 is so much nicer with this handwritten font (albeit only the font not the actual text on the dial) on opaline color dial. The 5226 dial looks like gym equipment material to me.
5212 is in steel - not many man watches are in steel in the catalogue, which adds to the exclusivity. I would have preferred 5226 to be in steel if it's supposed to be more of a casual watch.
I also own the 5235, which has the same lugs shape as the 5226 albeit different construction method - so it depends on what other watches you have in the collection.
Love double and triple stepped lugs as well.
All in all i much prefer the 5212, which is also a strap monster.

[Vasco]

Originally Posted by edyu

I couldn't find the comment anymore but I recall someone said (paraphrasing) 5212a lugs/case is horrible compared to other Patek watch such as 5226g and he vastly prefers 5226g over 5212a as a result.

Can someone which experience with one or the other or even both comment on this? I've been asking for a 5212a from my AD for awhile so I haven't seen it in person. Would love to hear from owners about this as I do care about case/lug shapes. Thank you.

That's a nice project. Generally speaking, remember that many opinions "online" are from people who never saw/handled the watch in real so we should be careful about the comments we sometimes read. Nothing replaces the real life experience, especially since it also shapes our observation acuity. Not to mention "look" is a subjective matter.

Not other traditional brand puts as much effort in case design and craftmanship with good to excellent finishing/decoration. Too expensive or too time consuming, I don't know but they don't bother. Patek does, with both historical references or from the 2 last decades. Not just because selling watches have skyrocketed in profitability since the last 15 years or so. You can have a look at profiles in 2019 but there are so many more: https://www.hightime-reviews.com/pat...ofiles-review/

The 5212 has beautiful case and lugs, more difficult to polish correctly (to keep the edges sharp). The same lugs on the 5172 are treated differently (wielded). Others, like the 5975 or 5226/5326's are added another way again. The stamped method isn't really a relevant issue here to obtain such shape. We never wonder for other watches if done the same way, it's a kind of internet peculiarity (like the 5935's dial matter). Nothing better or worse than a wielded element, especially if it's to get a plain and round case (the elephant in the room people don't see when they are splitting hairs).

I've seen the 5212 again 2 nights ago at the 30th Lange event and it looked even more appealing than in my memories. If you like going into details, I would say the 5212's lugs are more intricate and difficult to craft but the 5226's way to add them is visually very appealing. Just a question of personal taste at this point imho.

Please note the 5212 is exceptionally light compared to all you can try at Patek. It's in steel but you could imagine it's in Titanium. I like lightness, some don't, so be aware of that point.

You can ask your AD to order the 5935A's folding clasp if you want as well.

You must see both of them before choosing imho.

[ChetBaker]

I think 20 years down the line the 5212 will be remembered as a special, if not rare, piece. The 5226 does not have much going for it from a horological point of view.

[gm58]

Was quite a bit surprised at the lightness of the 5212, really didnt feel like there was any heft at all. Cool complication but that date window... so unfinished

the 5226g is time and date only but that dial is pretty cool along with a proper date window execution (color matched and also recessed properly).

both are 40mm hard to choose between the two.. one in steel, more interesting complication, the other in white gold with a cool dial (although a lot of people say its derivative) and a thinner profile yet wears bigger?

[4dough]

There's no "worse" when it comes to talking about Patek Philippe

[bob101]

The 5212a would be my choice over the two even tho at times I find it a bit hard to read. I like the charm of the handwritten font and interesting weekly calendar complication. The case design is for me the best thing about it as it reminds me of the old Wenger designed cases and I love a vintage calatrava. It fits great on the wrist and tapers so I have no problems with the lugs at all. They are classic Patek design.

If I could change anything I’d like the movement to be smoother as it requires a lot of winds to even move the time forward 24 hours. Both look great on a variety of straps and both are excellent watches. The leica dial is also growing on me over time.

You really need to see these pieces in person and try them on to see if it’s a good fit for you and tastes differ.

[CV997]

Let the pictures told you



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[edyu]

Originally Posted by CV997

Let the pictures told you



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your wrist size? Thank you for the pictures