# Steinhart Ocean 1 Vintage Red Dissapointingling Bad Lume



## scarabei (Dec 25, 2010)

I just received my first Steinhart watch - the Oean 1 Vintage Red. I got the watch because of the domed sapphire crystal, lack of a cyclops and the legendary C3 lume. Well, the watch indeed is spectacular. Looks amazing. However, the lume is absolutely AWFUL!!!!

Did I get a bad watch? Look at the pictures and tell me your thoughts. It looks like the watch hands are lumed correctly, but the hour markers are barely visible. In person, Vintage Red performs worse than my $100 Orient Mako and comparable to my cheap Marina Militare Chinese PAM homage. I don't have my Tag 500M for comparison. It's being repaired under warranty. However, the Tag 500M would glow bright all over and I was expecting something similar from the acclaimed C3 lume. What's going on here? What are your experiences? I am seriously considering returning the watch. It really bothers me that I cannot see the hour markers too well in the dark. How much worse is the classic Ocean 1 Black?


----------



## scarabei (Dec 25, 2010)

Apparently I am not the only one disappointed with the Vintage Red C3 lume. Here is another (albeit closed) thread:
https://www.watchuseek.com/f275/new-steinhart-owner-ocean-vintage-red-601784.html


----------



## romeo-1 (May 31, 2006)

I think that is indicative of most Steinharts...unfortunately. My Ocean 44 is also quite poor in the lume department but it's not the worst I've had.


----------



## scarabei (Dec 25, 2010)

Here is a pic of Steinhart Ocean 1 Vintage Red after one hour of being charged under a high output lamp. I wore the watch inside a lamp-lit room, so it's not like the watch was sitting in complete dark. So much for C3 superluminova lume... I honestly think the marketing material of Steinhart are misrepresentative of the product. I would hazard a guess that it is difficult to make high quality watches for under $400 in EU. Labor costs are not what they are in China. Hence, corners have to be cut somewhere.

This lume issue is driving me mad. The Ocean One Vintage is a beatiful watch is every other way. Excellent bracelet, rugged bezel with nice 120 click action, sexy domed crystal. Come on Steinhart! This could have been one of your flagship masterpieces!

On a tangential note, does anyone have experiences with lume on Debaufre Ocean 1 watches?


----------



## kdsarch (May 21, 2008)

I have a Debaufre Magnum. It's lume was poor with C1. I had it modded and relumed with C3. Huge improvement.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk


----------



## Uwe W. (Jan 7, 2009)

scarabei said:


> Here is a pic of Steinhart Ocean 1 Vintage Red after one hour of being charged under a high output lamp.


Photos are misleading. The result is completely dependent on shutter speeds and aperture openings. I can take a watch with barely any lume and make it look like a lighthouse or take a watch with great lume and make it look pathetic. Alright, we get that you're unhappy with your lume, so just send it back; Steinhart will refund your money.



scarabei said:


> I honestly think the marketing material of Steinhart are misrepresentative of the product. I would hazard a guess that it is difficult to make high quality watches for under $400 in EU. Labor costs are not what they are in China. Hence, corners have to be cut somewhere.


Come on. Really? Which marketing material for the Ocean Red are you referring to in particular that apparently misrepresents the watch?

Here's what is says on Steinhart's website:

"The sporty exclusiveness of the „OCEAN 1 VINTAGE red" makes it stand out from other diver watches. Its solid design guarantees highest resiliance as well as an outstanding quality. Within the large genre of sports diver watches the "OCEAN 1 VINTAGE red" is one of the few examples in its price range which demonstrates such an excellent cost-performance ratio."

"Indices: Superluminova C3, green"

I don't see anything in that description that promises blinding lume. And I hardly think it's fair to accuse Steinhart of cutting corners.


----------



## ctilly (Aug 12, 2011)

@Uwe - It's true that you can manipulate perceived lume (or any light) with camera settings but the side by side comparison is pretty straight forward. Ok, not ENTIRELY straight forward since a camera and the human eye probably have slight differences in wavelength sensitivity but for the most part it is a good visual aid. 

It's also true that Steinhart does not make any claims about the quality or brightness of their lume, simply the brand and color used. It is, however, very disappointing to hear that on an otherwise outstanding watch there is this obvious shortcoming. It makes me wonder what costs are associated with getting great lume (additional layers?). Major bummer for a lume loonie like myself. Perhaps Steinhart has it in the plans for the next gen divers to improve this... (fingers crossed!!)


----------



## Tumbles (Sep 7, 2011)

Keep the watch, contact Steinhart to see whether they'll still cover you under warranty if you strip the lume and re-do it yourself?

Or go to a watch repairer and get it done professionally and not care about the warranty?

I mean, if that is your only concern, why not spend the money and perfect it? Good watches are hard to find.


----------



## ctilly (Aug 12, 2011)

Tumbles said:


> strip the lume and re-do it yourself ... if that is your only concern, why not spend the money and perfect it? Good watches are hard to find.


Agreed. I think a relume is about $100. The 2824 Steinharts are around $500 so for a total of $600 you've got a very solid watch. Just wish they took care of it the first time around.


----------



## strongergodzilla (Dec 23, 2010)

I had two oceans, and I still have my Apollon and agree the lume on the ocean series is its one let down. Very weak, but really to me the only thing I could complain about with these watches.

The Apollon has bg w9 (I think?) Blue Lume which glows brighter than any of my oceans did, but I'd still call it "average."

Not knocking steinhart, I've loved all my watches from them, but their lume applications could use a boost.

Sent from my Nexus One using Tapatalk


----------



## Riker (Mar 31, 2007)

Maybe Steinhart should go about making sure that everyone is happy with every part of the watch, huge lume included..... Seriously, if those of you that are lume loonies or profess to be excited by super lume are so inclined to want it then either look at a brand that makes the big claims of super lume in their advertising material or take your watch to someone that is able to give you the super lume you desire. For comment to be passed saying Steinhart is using misrepresentative marketing for their lume as a blanket statement is nuts...

The lume in Steinhart watches is what it is & the fact that this isn't something that is brought up every other day suggests that maybe Steinhart are not doing too bad a job.......


----------



## vokotin (Jun 2, 2011)

I own a Vintage Red so, i want to express my opinion in this regard as well.
In all honesty, i think that the C3 lume is not absolutely awful as described, from my personal experience is pretty decent.
It's true, the hour markers are less brighter but i don't think that the lume is unevenly applied and never had problems to see the time in the dark.
Of course my O1VR is not brighter as the Seiko Monster for example but this "issue" doesn't bother me too much.
Having said that, everyone is free to be satisfied or not because variety is the spice of life.


----------



## romeo-1 (May 31, 2006)

The problem with the lume isn't the type of lume being used but the application. C3 glows brighter the more layers applied. This may in fact be a learning process with Steinhart. They obviously want to have good (bright) lume on their dive watch line otherwise they would not be using C3 and the like. It's just a matter of adding a couple more layers in the manufacturing process.

BTW...I don't think it is particularly contentious for a person purchasing a dive watch to expect good lume...


----------



## Meddle (May 10, 2011)

I dont know about oceans but I have triton 100 atm and nav b-uhr and they both have incredibly strong and cool looking lume. That level of brightness doesnt last long but even after 7-8 hours of the watch being in dark I can read the time without any problem.


----------



## scarabei (Dec 25, 2010)

Just for reference let's bring out the Luminova relative brightness chart that's been floating around the forums for some time:








Now let's think of the people that buy dive watches from Steinhart. It is mostly WIS community people who would split hairs over watch specs, including lume type. Whenever a casual debate among the watch crowd comes up on C1 vs C3 vs Seiko vs whatever, there is some intuitive understanding of what to expect from one type of lume as compared to another (i.e., see chart above). Now, when you get a dive watch that is advertised to have C3 lume and you can barely discern the hour markers, we have a problem. I am not a lume freak by any means. I just want to be able to see the hour markers in the dark. Is that too much to ask from a dive watch?

Don't get me wrong, the Vintage Red is stunning in every other way. The case tolerances are tight, the bracelet is an excellent contemporary take on the classic oyster, the bezel has just enough ruggedness, the crystal..... SEXY WATCH DELUXE WITHOUT A DOUBT! But then after all of that you put a thin layer of lume and call it a day? To me it feels like running a marathon only to give up and quit within 100 meters of the finish line.

On a tangential note, wore the watch out last night downtown DC. Hit up a classy $$$ restaurant for dinner and then bounced around the clubs in DuPont. I got two compliments on the watch in the restaurant and a couple inquiries from the bartenders. Of course, women could care less about the watch as long as it is congruent with the rest of your look. So take heed...


----------



## Nolander (Feb 11, 2006)

The lume seems fine on my OVR. it glows well and I can read the time in the dark 5 it 6 hours later. It is no OS 300 or monster, but the lume is as good or better than most watches with the size hands and indices they have. Unless you have extremely large hands and indices it can only glow so bright. If you change the size of those then you change the style of the watch.


----------



## scarabei (Dec 25, 2010)

Also, does anyone have relume recommendations. Running a search I came up with these two places that were recommended:

IWW Reluminizing

Everest Watchworks Superluminova

I don't think I'll get a relume from Gunther Steinhart, but I do think I may check out some of his pilot watches.


----------



## scarabei (Dec 25, 2010)

Nolander said:


> The lume seems fine on my OVR. it glows well and I can read the time in the dark 5 it 6 hours later. It is no OS 300 or monster, but the lume is as good or better than most watches with the size hands and indices they have. Unless you have extremely large hands and indices it can only glow so bright. If you change the size of those then you change the style of the watch.


There are manufacturing variations. I may have got the ebb of the production, lume-wise.


----------



## stryker58 (Dec 5, 2010)

I'd be disappointed too. Looks like C3 was used on the hands and C1 on the markers. I'd email Steinhart and ask them if this is normal. If not then I'm sure they'd offer an exchange.


----------



## mal9 (Sep 20, 2006)

I have Steinhart and Debaufre Ocean 1's. The lume is good, not great. There are other watches that I have that the lume isn't great. If I work at night, I wear a watch with tubes, a Seiko monster or a Laco type A. The OVR is too good looking of a watch to wear when it's dark.


----------



## Pakz (Aug 16, 2011)

I own two Steinharts, one Nav-B Uhr (with C1) and the Ocean Vintage GMT with C3. Both are rather average in the lume department. The C3 is brighter but doesn't last very long... The C1 is quite dim but lasts a fairly decent amount of time.

Neither are torches like the Seiko Monster or some other similar divers... Yet, both are quite legible all night long. Usually when I make up I can still read the time for these (albeit barely).

Sure, Steinhart could improve a lot in the lume department. As stated before, it's really a mater of how many layers are applied, and what base paint was used (on very bright white you get better results than anything else... If the lume is applied directly on a black dial, it stands to reason that it won't be very effective)... But that's not really a key point for most people...


----------



## scarabei (Dec 25, 2010)

Here is a wrist shot of the Steinhart Ocean 1 Vintage Red. I can't stop staring at it. Something about the slightly domed crystal and the red lettering. I think if Steinhart were to add a couple more layers of lume, this watch would be perfect. It would also make the watch face have more vintage-like look, with little globules of lume on the hour markers instead of flat spots.


----------



## FlyingDutchman (Oct 18, 2011)

Maybe it is some sollace to hear my RedSea (lumtec lume) is also very dim for some reason. My Lüm M6 on the other hand is just a tad below my SKX007 and Sumo (still the lume king in my collection). I'll check out your links for reluming.


----------



## ctilly (Aug 12, 2011)

That is one great looking watch scarabei. |>


----------



## Scouse_Mouse (Nov 1, 2011)

I have to agree, received my o1vr a few days ago and have to say it is a damn beautiful watch but the lume is very weak. However I will not likely wear it in the dark as I wont be able to show it off. If it is still bugging me a few yrs down the line I'll get it re-lumed when I get it serviced


----------



## ArticMan (Feb 12, 2010)

Uwe W. said:


> Photos are misleading. The result is completely dependent on shutter speeds and aperture openings. I can take a watch with barely any lume and make it look like a lighthouse or take a watch with great lume and make it look pathetic. Alright, we get that you're unhappy with your lume, so just send it back; Steinhart will refund your money.
> 
> Come on. Really? *Which marketing material for the Ocean Red are you referring to in particular that apparently misrepresents the watch?
> *
> ...


I guess it's this:










Picture from their site. Lume is equally bright in hands and dial. If the reality is like in OP's pictures then it IS missleading. (and this got nothing to do with shutter time or lightning conditions)

Isn't it?


----------



## FlyingDutchman (Oct 18, 2011)

Charging with UV does help a lot, I see many lume shots where people have just held a UV up to the watch and the lume looks like flashlights. But with normal daylight use some of the lumes don't appear to charge very well or retain the lume very long after they start out in the dark.


----------



## Eric L. (Sep 29, 2006)

My Ocean Vintage Red was delivered today. Initial impressions of lume is that its decent C3 on the hands and bezel dot, but the dial is noticeably less luminescent. But that's not a surprise as the pictures above show it clearly. The pictures that show the dial at full glow were obviously taken seconds after hitting it with a UV flashlight. However, the lume on the OVR is certainly readable in the dark, especially with dark adapted eyes.


----------



## graymadder (Jul 19, 2010)

My O1VR lume pip and hands are brighter than the dial. I noticed this when I first got it. I figured it was the different material causing this. I also noticed the same thing on the Benarus Remora and Halios Laguna. Both have C3 lume as well. They are all equally bright and have similar longevity. The Remora looks brighter because the hands have more surface area and dial has thicker lume applied to it. The Laguna appears brighter than the others because of the lumed bezel. I have since sold the Laguna and I forget if the bezel matched the dial or the hands.

The Seiko OM hands, pip, and dial have equal brightness. This could be attributed to mass production and/or different lume material used. This is all speculation on my part.


----------



## Eric L. (Sep 29, 2006)

graymadder said:


> My O1VR lume pip and hands are brighter than the dial. I noticed this when I first got it. I figured it was the different material causing this. I also noticed the same thing on the Benarus Remora and Halios Laguna. Both have C3 lume as well. They are all equally bright and have similar longevity. The Remora looks brighter because the hands have more surface area and dial has thicker lume applied to it. The Laguna appears brighter than the others because of the lumed bezel. I have since sold the Laguna and I forget if the bezel matched the dial or the hands.
> 
> The Seiko OM hands, pip, and dial have equal brightness. This could be attributed to mass production and/or different lume material used. This is all speculation on my part.


I have a Halios Laguna as well and the dial is ever so slightly more dim than the hands. But just a little bit. Same goes for my Benarus Megalodon 2, hands ever so slightly brighter than the dial. On the Steinhart OVR, the dial is noticeably more dim than the hands (the above picture captures it well). Would I prefer them to be closer? Sure. But the dial is still quite readable in the dark.


----------



## spain72 (Oct 27, 2010)

scarabei said:


> I just received my first Steinhart watch - the Oean 1 Vintage Red. I got the watch because of the domed sapphire crystal, lack of a cyclops and the legendary C3 lume. Well, the watch indeed is spectacular. Looks amazing. However, the lume is absolutely AWFUL!!!!


Hi. I think the "problem" can be easily explained.
Markers on the dial are "painted" with C3. Hands are "filled" with C3 and it means that the quantity of Superluminova on the hands is bigger than the quantity used for the markers.
Same thing is for "applied" geometric indexes (on other watches) that must be filled with the C3: the quantity of C3 needed to fill the indexes is bigger than the one used on the "painted" indexes.

Anyway, I think is not Steinhart's fault because I am quite sure Steinhart DO NOT produce the dials used on his watches.

We also should say that Supeluminova is not made to CREATE LIGHT, but to "catch" the light and release it for some time.

In fact, this kind of lumes have been created properly NOT to glow in the total darkness but especially to amplify the existing lightning conditions (in a cockpit or in a tank or on a battlefield is very difficult to find the total darkness) and to replace the RADIOACTIVE material once used for the markers on the military watches which is dangerous for the health. That's why other kind of lume solutions have been developed recently thanks to modern technologies (gas, leds, etc.) for watches used for those "special purposes" that requires a PERFECT legibility of the dial.

We also must consider that as bigger is the quantity of S.L. applied to create a painted index, as bigger is the chance for this substance to detach from the dial.

These are just few informations to give you a logic explanation about the "problem" you found on your watch. Hope you can find them useful in some way.


----------



## Eric L. (Sep 29, 2006)

spain72 said:


> scarabei said:
> 
> 
> > I just received my first Steinhart watch - the Oean 1 Vintage Red. I got the watch because of the domed sapphire crystal, lack of a cyclops and the legendary C3 lume. Well, the watch indeed is spectacular. Looks amazing. However, the lume is absolutely AWFUL!!!!
> ...


----------



## spain72 (Oct 27, 2010)

I totally agree: I think it depends on the specifics asked to the dial producers. Since I could not consider the Ocean a "SUBMERSIBLE" it can be enough. I don't know the other brands you named very well, but I think they are well known as specific diver's watches (huge depth)...
About my experience, the lume on my Vintage B-Uhr is almost perfect...


----------



## ArticMan (Feb 12, 2010)

spain72 said:


> scarabei said:
> 
> 
> > I just received my first Steinhart watch - the Oean 1 Vintage Red. I got the watch because of the domed sapphire crystal, lack of a cyclops and the legendary C3 lume. Well, the watch indeed is spectacular. Looks amazing. However, the lume is absolutely AWFUL!!!!
> ...


Oh man, you're so lost here....



spain72 said:


> *Anyway, I think is not Steinhart's fault because I am quite sure Steinhart DO NOT produce the dials used on his watches.*


And here!!! I guess you wrote that on your MAC....Sounds exactly like fanboy-talk. BTW Who's fault is that those dials are placed in Steinhart watches and sold to customers?


----------



## Nolander (Feb 11, 2006)

I am beginning to think ArticMan is hanging around this forum mainly to be contradictory. No offense, but if I didn't like a particular brand of watch I wouldn't go to the forum just to post negative comments.


----------



## Uwe W. (Jan 7, 2009)

ArticMan said:


> I guess it's this picture from their site. Lume is equally bright in hands and dial. If the reality is like in OP's pictures then it IS missleading. (and this got nothing to do with shutter time or lightning conditions) Isn't it?


I'll bet you the value of an Ocean that if the OP were to send me his watch that I could recreate Steinhart's promotional photo with it.

Do you really require an explanation of what constitutes the differences between a photo demonstrating where lume has been applied to a watch and one that was intended to mislead buyers? Or are you just maliciously spurring on this debate? Every watch manufacturer that has made an effort of providing customers a lume shot of their products will show you a similarly impressive photo, so I assume then that you've raised your point of it being misleading in other forums as well?

Maybe if you're a first time watch buyer you might be surprised to find out that your watch won't glow like the one in Steinhart's photo all night long. However, anyone who has been around the watch buyer's block should know better. I have many watches that exhibit an obvious discrepancy between the luminescent nature of its hands and its dial indicies. Those differences are not immediately apparent when the lights are first turned off AND the watch has been sufficiently 'charged', but give it a little time and they become obvious.

There are a staggering number of variables when it comes luminescent performance. Overlay that with the subjectivity of an individual's perceptions and you have two of the reasons why I have a real disdain for these pointless arguments. When I turned off the lights last night and looked at my wrist, I couldn't see a thing - there wasn't even the slightest hint that I was even wearing a watch - but five minutes later when I opened my eyes, I could easily read the time. Lume hounds will say my watch has terrible lume; I think it's perfectly useful. So who's right in this debate? The only opinion of consequence when looking at a watch that you've purchased is your own. And if you're unhappy with it, return it for a refund, which is what I suggested in my initial reply to the OP. The alternative, which is to complain at length about it, is nothing but a pointless exercise.


----------



## Mikeman (Mar 13, 2009)

Meddle said:


> I dont know about oceans but I have triton 100 atm and nav b-uhr and they both have incredibly strong and cool looking lume. That level of brightness doesnt last long but even after 7-8 hours of the watch being in dark I can read the time without any problem.[/Qsome UOTE]
> 
> ..Yes i agree, my Navb has surprisingly nice lume. I wanted to give Steinhart some credit in this area because it is that good.


----------



## Mikeman (Mar 13, 2009)

..Yes i agree, my Navb has surprisingly nice lume. I wanted to give Steinhart some credit in this area because it is that good.


----------



## Eric L. (Sep 29, 2006)

I could reproduce the "matching lume" photo, by hitting the watch with a UV flashlight and taking a picture immediately afterwards. However, if I were to wait ten seconds, it would show the second picture, that of the dial not matching the hands. In the end, it is unfortunately up to the buyer to do their own research and find out from other owners whether the lume on watches are matching between hands and dial. A little discrepancy is no big deal but a big difference is an understandable deal killer for the lume nuts.

As I have nothing to gain or lose since I actually own the watch, I think ArticMan's photos are accurate. That said, I think posting photos to point it out a few times is fine. It is certainly more helpful than other comments in previous threads saying the OVR has "blazing lume" or to that effect. Mentioning it over and over (which I have not seen in this post) is probably reaching the point where your marginal returns outweigh the effort taken to continue ranting.



Uwe W. said:


> I'll bet you the value of an Ocean that if the OP were to send me his watch that I could recreate Steinhart's promotional photo with it.
> 
> Do you really require an explanation of what constitutes the differences between a photo demonstrating where lume has been applied to a watch and one that was intended to mislead buyers? Or are you just maliciously spurring on this debate? Every watch manufacturer that has made an effort of providing customers a lume shot of their products will show you a similarly impressive photo, so I assume then that you've raised your point of it being misleading in other forums as well?
> 
> ...


----------



## Watchyman (Mar 4, 2010)

Dive watch, original design, great lume, high quality = Seiko Prospex
IMHO they are the "go to" brand for dive watches.


----------



## Chromejob (Jun 18, 2010)

scarabei said:


> ... However, the lume is absolutely AWFUL!!!!


I don't see the problem in your pic. I think the issue is with your expectations.

The lume on my OBDLC was thicker on the hands, hence a bit stronger glow. I can compare my year-old OBDLC with years-old, second hand Ollech & Wajs divers with (I believe) Superluminova C3 and C1,[1] and they exhibit about the same disparity ... there's simply less lume on the dial than in the hands, and for good reason. I surely don't want some ugly, amateurish globs of lume on the dial! For practicality, I do not need indices burning bright until dawn as my Seiko Silver Knight does ... I just need it legible with night vision syndrome kicked in (20 or more minutes in complete darkness or red-only light as in a darkroom). I see this on my Orient ER1S as well.[2]

These are not professional pics, taken with a black light ... they're my own, using a good charge, then lights out, and time-elapsed photography with minimal background lighting.



















I've since put Omega hands on the watch, and the lume is comparable with the Omega hands. A bit dimmer after a few hours, but still there.










Looks quite fine compared with my Orient ER1S, though the Superluminova is longer lasting.










BTW, the last two pics were taken in the same conditions, a gentle charge, then lights out, long (3+ secs) with only a dim PDA a few feet away for contrast lighting.

[1] O&W 5513 repro for WestCoastTime










Note the hands are clearly glowing while the hour indices are not.










[2] Orient ER1S with a full charge, then lights out


----------



## spain72 (Oct 27, 2010)

...u went completely wrong. I don't have a Mac but an Asus 10 in. And I dont't talk like a fan. I merely meant thet the dials producer give his items to Steinhart and to other companies for sure, with the same quality. you also should know that to be considered "SWISS MADE", a watch must respect some particular standards and especially the diver's watches have some standards about dial's legibility... 
SO: if the Swiss dial's producer is allowed to purchase his products on the Swiss market, it means that those standards are respected.

If you have other opinions or you know something more, you're invited to explain them. Is not kind to say just YOU'RE WRONG. Opinions are made to be compared.

About your personal considerations about me, I think you cannot judge people you don't know in person... and that's all.


----------



## Eric L. (Sep 29, 2006)

Where watch parts are sourced from (whether they are from a tiny workshop built by Swiss elves in a snowy valley in the Alps, or Antarctica, or the Moon), has nothing to do with the Swiss Made designation. Legal definition of Swiss Made: Swiss Made - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is no standard that a divers watch (or its parts) has to meet unless it is ISO diver certified, and very very few watches are.



spain72 said:


> ...u went completely wrong. I don't have a Mac but an Asus 10 in. And I dont't talk like a fan. I merely meant thet the dials producer give his items to Steinhart and to other companies for sure, with the same quality. you also should know that to be considered "SWISS MADE", a watch must respect some particular standards and especially the diver's watches have some standards about dial's legibility...
> SO: if the Swiss dial's producer is allowed to purchase his products on the Swiss market, it means that those standards are respected.
> 
> If you have other opinions or you know something more, you're invited to explain them. Is not kind to say just YOU'RE WRONG. Opinions are made to be compared.
> ...


----------



## ArticMan (Feb 12, 2010)

Here are few pictures from nearest match I have (Ocean I GMT). And this is how I expect lume to beheave when I see commercial picture like one in Steinharts web site.

Pictures are taken within 20 minutes, first one right after the charging, and under the same lightning conditions with same settings (15 sec. shutter time) in camera. Nothing done to them afterwards.





































Conclusion: Lume is useful (in total darkness time can be read still after few hours) but not very good though. Lume is equal in hands and dial until it fades away. I've only seen lume in dial fading faster than lume in hands in some Chinese watches I've owned (Parnis Flieger, MQJ sub). But that is something that I would not expect to see in "Swiss made" watches.


----------



## Olegis (Oct 17, 2010)

As I stated in the other thread, the lume on my OVR seems quite weak to me, especially if compared to Seiko Monster or Spork (the reason probably being the quantity of the lume material on dial elements, especially on the indices).
It's Ok to charge the watch lume with UV lights to show off, but it's very far from actual reality.


----------



## Nolander (Feb 11, 2006)

ArticMan said:


> Here are few pictures from nearest match I have (Ocean I GMT). And this is how I expect lume to beheave when I see commercial picture like one in Steinharts web site.
> 
> Pictures are taken within 20 minutes, first one right after the charging, and under the same lightning conditions with same settings (15 sec. shutter time) in camera. Nothing done to them afterwards.
> 
> ...


Yes Steinharts suck, their lume is terrible, they are made in China, the movements are not in house, they are misrepresented on the website, they are replicas, the overall quality is cheap, and they are overpriced.

After reading your posts you have convinced us all. I think I am going to go home and throw mine in the trash later today since it is such a piece of garbage.

(I do not actually believe this in case my sarcasm is not apparent in this post).


----------



## vokotin (Jun 2, 2011)

Pretty obvious now that we're living the strong lume era and this thing is very, very depressing!
As told time ago, everyone is free to be satisfied or not but what i don't understand is why to debate the same thing over and over again.
If you've decided that your Steinhart's lume is not up to snuff and you had big expectations about it, simply return it or relume it by yourself.
Personally, i really enjoy my OVR not for the brightness but for the timeless design, the overall quality and of course, for the little price i paid if compared to the others "homages" out there.
Never had the urge to dive myself into the ocean's abyss but if i have to, i will surely use an high-tech digital watch with plenty of features.


----------



## spain72 (Oct 27, 2010)

Eric L. said:


> Where watch parts are sourced from (whether they are from a tiny workshop built by Swiss elves in a snowy valley in the Alps, or Antarctica, or the Moon), has nothing to do with the Swiss Made designation. Legal definition of Swiss Made: Swiss Made - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> There is no standard that a divers watch (or its parts) has to meet unless it is ISO diver certified, and very very few watches are.


*
International Standard ISO 3157 = NIHS 97-11 = SN ISO 4168 = SN 289 710**Radioluminescence for time measurement instruments - Specifications.*
*International Standard ISO 4168*
*Time measurement instrument - Conditions for carring out checks on radioluminescent deposits.*

*ISO / DIS 17514*
*Time-measuring instruments - Photoluminescent deposit - Test methods and requirements.*

*DIN 67510*
*Long-afterglow pigments and products measurement and marking.
*
*ISO 6425 (about DIVERS)
**
What I know about diver's watch legibility is that information must be readable for 1 hour in total darkness from a distance of 25 cms.

*
*







*


----------



## Eric L. (Sep 29, 2006)

spain72 said:


> *
> International Standard ISO 3157 = NIHS 97-11 = SN ISO 4168 = SN 289 710**Radioluminescence for time measurement instruments - Specifications.*
> *International Standard ISO 4168*
> *Time measurement instrument - Conditions for carring out checks on radioluminescent deposits.*
> ...


And what makes you think Steinhart (or any watch which does not claim ISO certification) meets any of these standards?

Yes there are ISO standards, and not too many watches claim to meet them.


----------



## spain72 (Oct 27, 2010)

...don't know...I just give informations learned in over 10 years of watchmaking study. On books and review. ... ...


----------



## scarabei (Dec 25, 2010)

vokotin said:


> Pretty obvious now that we're living the strong lume era and this thing is very, very depressing!
> As told time ago, everyone is free to be satisfied or not but what i don't understand is why to debate the same thing over and over again.
> If you've decided that your Steinhart's lume is not up to snuff and you had big expectations about it, simply return it or relume it by yourself.
> Personally, i really enjoy my OVR not for the brightness but for the timeless design, the overall quality and of course, for the little price i paid if compared to the others "homages" out there.
> Never had the urge to dive myself into the ocean's abyss but if i have to, i will surely use an high-tech digital watch with plenty of features.


Even though I am the culprit who started this flame thread, I must agree with the overall sentiment that for $400 the Steinhart watches are pretty amazing, bad lume or not. In terms of pure design (ignoring the price), I would take the OVR over any Rolex Submariner (except maybe the Sea Dweller). The size is just right at 42 mm, the slightly domed crustal, the notching on the bezel, the bracelet (still not clear why Rolex has such terrible bracelets) - it's all there. The OVR also helps me brave traffic. I just stare at the thing in awe to help the time pass


----------



## vokotin (Jun 2, 2011)

That's what i like to hear from you scarabei! enjoy your OVR like you're doing.
By the way, if you've serious problems reading the time in the dark, carry in your pants pocket a lighter and then...


----------



## scarabei (Dec 25, 2010)

Here is a "behind the wheel" shot. Notice how the lume glows white at sunset. It's subtle, but really cool to look at during early evening drives.


----------



## bigbondjing (Jul 17, 2009)

My one and only Debaufre has horrible lume. 

I almost bought the Steinhart Ocean 1 as well, but the lume...eek

My Seiko BM blows it away.


----------



## pcanezo (Jan 18, 2012)

I love my Steinhart O1VR and I think that the lume is more than acceptable for my requirements with the watch. I have taken it diving (< 100m) and in that use, it works without complaint. As long as I am able to see the markers in the dark after a decent charge, then there is no issue for me. I would think that is also the case for the majority of buyers for the Steinhart brand as well. They don't advertise their watches for their lume and if lume is that important, there are other watch companies who focuses a lot on that.


----------



## Remeny (May 25, 2011)

vokotin said:


> Never had the urge to dive myself into the ocean's abyss but if i have to, i will surely use an high-tech digital watch with plenty of features.


So true. When I do any kind of diving I don't take my Rolex Sub or any nice SS watch!


----------



## Falcon15e (Jun 11, 2009)

Yes, I have expierence with a Debaufre. The lume is sufficient. Its not as bright or "even" as my Omega's BUT my Omega's were $3000 dollar pieces (each). So, I don't expect it to be a flashlight. 

While initially bright, the Debaufre slowly fades 5 minutes after its been "charged" and then after that fade, it remains at that constant rate for a few hours before tapering off to very, very dim. 

I like lume as much as the next guy. I find it helpful too since I find myself in situations where its dark and I need to see what time it is. Aformentioned, not as good and strong as my Omega, but gets the job done.


----------



## Munch520 (Aug 4, 2013)

As an update to the topic, I received a Sept-made O1VR and wanted to compare my photos to the OP. The lume looks great to me, and also has a bit different color tone to it (more blue than green).

Almost a full charge:


After a day of sitting in the drawer:


----------



## mahkie (Aug 17, 2013)

I traded my Seiko Sumo for my OVM. The Seiko has borderline radioactive lume, whereas the OVM is very weak and understated. That being said, I can always see the time in the dark.


----------



## MrDagon007 (Sep 24, 2012)

mahkie said:


> I traded my Seiko Sumo for my OVM.


Really? It is a trade-in I would not do myself.


----------



## Everdying (May 4, 2012)

i'm going the other way.
i just got a sumo, looking to sell off my OVM.


----------



## WiZARD7 (Apr 4, 2012)

I've got Sumo, and thinking on trading in for an OVM.
But I think I'll keep the Sumo and buy an OVM


----------



## mahkie (Aug 17, 2013)

I mean trade as in "sell on ebay and buy an OVM". I just couldn't stand the 20mm lugs.


----------



## MrDagon007 (Sep 24, 2012)

mahkie said:


> I mean trade as in "sell on ebay and buy an OVM". I just couldn't stand the 20mm lugs.


I know that some WIS have an issue with the lugs being 20mm only. I don't have a real issue as the bracelet is very comfortable.

Anyway, as Rolex homages go, the OVM is one of the nicer ones. In the end what you find attractive is typically more important than other factors.


----------



## Kingsley83 (Apr 3, 2013)

Munch520 said:


> As an update to the topic, I received a Sept-made O1VR and wanted to compare my photos to the OP. The lume looks great to me, and also has a bit different color tone to it (more blue than green).
> 
> Almost a full charge:
> 
> ...


Munch, I also just received a OVR and my lume is as green as the OP. Are your photos representative of what you are seeing?


----------



## Munch520 (Aug 4, 2013)

I sent you a PM, but the pictures are pretty indicative of real world. Maybe a bit on the bluer side, but my lume is nowhere near as green as the OPs.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free


----------



## mahkie (Aug 17, 2013)

MrDagon007 said:


> I know that some WIS have an issue with the lugs being 20mm only. I don't have a real issue as the bracelet is very comfortable.
> 
> Anyway, as Rolex homages go, the OVM is one of the nicer ones. In the end what you find attractive is typically more important than other factors.


Yeah, 20mm straps just feel weird to me. I even tried on a colleague's Submariner and the taper/20mm lugs are just not for me with my current tastes.


----------

