Hermès Edition Owners Thread

[Adelphos33]

To Apple Watch Ultra Hermes owners - do you get all of the Hermes watch faces as well as the Ultra specific ones?

I will likely upgrade to Hermes Ultra 3 when it is available. I may buy the light blue band ahead of it...

 

[the future]

To Apple Watch Ultra Hermes owners - do you get all of the Hermes watch faces as well as the Ultra specific ones?

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/hermes-edition-owners-thread.1999198/post-33584323

 

[Annacap]

I don’t know how people get such beautiful pictures of their watches but here’s mine! My first Hermes watch. I love it😍 it looks so much bigger in the pics. This is a 42mm on an 146 wrist

 

[Annacap]

I don’t know how people get such beautiful pictures of their watches but here’s mine! My first Hermes watch. I love it😍 it looks so much bigger in the pics. This is a 42mm on an 146 wristView attachment 2494499View attachment 2494500

Like I have a 46mm in slate titanium as well and in person it fits me like the second picture here. So weird. I wonder why they show up so differently in pictures.

 

[jaybar]

I have a S10 with a Large SS Grand H. My wrist at the bony bump is 180mm. I took out one link and I can now stick my pinky finger underneath. The watch no longer slides. However, there is an imprint of the clasp on the underside of my wrist. The clasp is fairly easy to close. DOES THIS ALL SOUND ABOUT RIGHT?

If I am taking off a link, is there a better side (top or bottom side ) to take it from?

 

[MacDevil7334]

Like I have a 46mm in slate titanium as well and in person it fits me like the second picture here. So weird. I wonder why they show up so differently in pictures.

Recent iPhones have used increasingly wide lenses for the “main” camera. Wider lenses will distort images. Objects that are closer to the camera will appear disproportionately large compared to objects further away. Since the watch face is closer to the camera than the rest of your wrist, it exaggerates the size of the face. This gets compounded a bit by the fact that the S10 is also physically larger (especially wider) compared to previous generations.

One thing you can do to reduce the distortion is hold your phone a bit further away from your wrist and use the 2x lens (if your iPhone has it). This will give you an effective focal length of 48mm instead of the 24mm of the 1x camera. A focal length of 50mm is considered to be close to how your eye sees the world so using the 2x lens should produce a more natural image.

Edit: also, if you hold your phone close to your watch, you may trigger macro mode (again, if your phone has it) because you are now inside the minimum focus distance of the 1x camera. Macro mode uses the ultra-wide 0.5x camera and uses software to try to make it seem like it’s using the main camera. The ultra-wide camera, as its name suggests, is even more prone to distorting the difference between near and far objects and will make your watch look huge. Don’t use the 0.5x lens or the macro mode on the 1x lens when photographing your watch.

 

[athousandbands]

Recent iPhones have used increasingly wide lenses for the “main” camera. Wider lenses will distort images. Objects that are closer to the camera will appear disproportionately large compared to objects further away. Since the watch face is closer to the camera than the rest of your wrist, it exaggerates the size of the face. This gets compounded a bit by the fact that the S10 is also physically larger (especially wider) compared to previous generations.

One thing you can do to reduce the distortion is hold your phone a bit further away from your wrist and use the 2x lens (if your iPhone has it). This will give you an effective focal length of 48mm instead of the 24mm of the 1x camera. A focal length of 50mm is considered to be close to how your eye sees the world so using the 2x lens should produce a more natural image.

Edit: also, if you hold your phone close to your watch, you may trigger macro mode (again, if your phone has it) because you are now inside the minimum focus distance of the 1x camera. Macro mode uses the ultra-wide 0.5x camera and uses software to try to make it seem like it’s using the main camera. The ultra-wide camera, as its name suggests, is even more prone to distorting the difference between near and far objects and will make your watch look huge. Don’t use the 0.5x lens or the macro mode on the 1x lens when photographing your watch.

I use the 2x mode on my 16 Pro and to my eyes it’s just a virtual center crop of the 1x lens with the same lens distortion.

Also don’t find it even possible to focus the 1x lens to create wrist photos like OP to begin with

 

[goldmac2006]

Recent iPhones have used increasingly wide lenses for the “main” camera. Wider lenses will distort images. Objects that are closer to the camera will appear disproportionately large compared to objects further away. Since the watch face is closer to the camera than the rest of your wrist, it exaggerates the size of the face. This gets compounded a bit by the fact that the S10 is also physically larger (especially wider) compared to previous generations.

One thing you can do to reduce the distortion is hold your phone a bit further away from your wrist and use the 2x lens (if your iPhone has it). This will give you an effective focal length of 48mm instead of the 24mm of the 1x camera. A focal length of 50mm is considered to be close to how your eye sees the world so using the 2x lens should produce a more natural image.

Edit: also, if you hold your phone close to your watch, you may trigger macro mode (again, if your phone has it) because you are now inside the minimum focus distance of the 1x camera. Macro mode uses the ultra-wide 0.5x camera and uses software to try to make it seem like it’s using the main camera. The ultra-wide camera, as its name suggests, is even more prone to distorting the difference between near and far objects and will make your watch look huge. Don’t use the 0.5x lens or the macro mode on the 1x lens when photographing your watch.

The 2x lens is applicable to all modern iPhones that ain't the SE. The Macro mode you are referring to is on iPhones that are the Pro models, the flower thing y'all see if you put something up close to the iPhone camera. Link here:

Take macro photos and videos with your iPhone camera

Learn how to take macro photos and videos with the iPhone camera.

support.apple.com

The Ultra Wide camera is used in the iPhone 13 Pro and higher models to produce clearer photos up close of shorter focal lengths. I did hate the macro mode sometimes- it blurs up the quality of certain close up pics.

 

[Annacap]

Recent iPhones have used increasingly wide lenses for the “main” camera. Wider lenses will distort images. Objects that are closer to the camera will appear disproportionately large compared to objects further away. Since the watch face is closer to the camera than the rest of your wrist, it exaggerates the size of the face. This gets compounded a bit by the fact that the S10 is also physically larger (especially wider) compared to previous generations.

One thing you can do to reduce the distortion is hold your phone a bit further away from your wrist and use the 2x lens (if your iPhone has it). This will give you an effective focal length of 48mm instead of the 24mm of the 1x camera. A focal length of 50mm is considered to be close to how your eye sees the world so using the 2x lens should produce a more natural image.

Edit: also, if you hold your phone close to your watch, you may trigger macro mode (again, if your phone has it) because you are now inside the minimum focus distance of the 1x camera. Macro mode uses the ultra-wide 0.5x camera and uses software to try to make it seem like it’s using the main camera. The ultra-wide camera, as its name suggests, is even more prone to distorting the difference between near and far objects and will make your watch look huge. Don’t use the 0.5x lens or the macro mode on the 1x lens when photographing your watch.

Thank you!!

Ok here is my attempt. I think it definitely helped though they still look a bit bigger in the pics.

 

[athousandbands]

Thank you!!

Ok here is my attempt. I think it definitely helped though they still look a bit bigger in the pics.

Great shots! What color bands are we working with here?

 

[Annacap]

Great shots! What color bands are we working with here?

Thanks! The 42mm is beton and the 46mm is the noir black band made for the 44mm space black model of the Hermes watch.

 

[MacDevil7334]

I use the 2x mode on my 16 Pro and to my eyes it’s just a virtual center crop of the 1x lens with the same lens distortion.

Also don’t find it even possible to focus the 1x lens to create wrist photos like OP to begin with

Ah yep, I was sloppy with my explanation. The 2x lens on the 14 Pro, 15s and 16s are indeed just a crop of the 1x lens. I had thought Apple applied some distortion correction in software to more simulate a 48mm lens. But I just tried it on my phone and, sure enough, it's just a crop of the 1x without any noticeable correction to the perspective. So, what I said above only applies to phones with a true 2x lens (X-12 Pro). Taking watch shots with a newer iPhone is still a bit better using the 2x "virtual" lens if for no other reason than it forces you to hold your phone a bit further away from from the watch, which reduces the forced perspective distortion from the wide lens.

The 2x lens is applicable to all modern iPhones that ain't the SE. The Macro mode you are referring to is on iPhones that are the Pro models, the flower thing y'all see if you put something up close to the iPhone camera. Link here:

Take macro photos and videos with your iPhone camera

Learn how to take macro photos and videos with the iPhone camera.

support.apple.com

The Ultra Wide camera is used in the iPhone 13 Pro and higher models to produce clearer photos up close of shorter focal lengths. I did hate the macro mode sometimes- it blurs up the quality of certain close up pics.

The 16 regular also has macro mode but it is the first non-pro phone to get it. I think that the macro mode was a necessary addition with the iPhone 13 Pro. IIRC correctly, that was the first phone where the minimum focus distance of the 1x camera started to get worse because they started using larger sensors without making the physical lens stick out further from the phone. Since the 1x camera couldn't focus as close as on older models, you needed macro mode to make it possible to photograph close up objects. And it turned out to be a good marketing feature too. If the sensors on the main and ultra wide cameras were comparable, this approach would be great. But the quality of the ultra wide sensor is soooo much worse than the 1x camera (especially on the 14-16 series) that it is really jarring when macro mode kicks in anywhere but in bright sunlight.

Bottom line is that photographing a watch with an iPhone in a way that looks natural has gotten progressively harder since the iPhone 12. That was the last iPhone to feature a 1x camera that could focus fairly close (and that 1x had a slightly longer 26mm equivalent lens), and the Pro model still had the 2x rather than the 3x or 5x found on later models. Your best option today is to use the 2x "virtual" lens if your phone has it or take a 1x photo with the phone held back a bit and crop. Neither is as good as what we had a few years ago. But then, this is a rather niche photographic subject...

 

[athousandbands]

Ah yep, I was sloppy with my explanation. The 2x lens on the 14 Pro, 15s and 16s are indeed just a crop of the 1x lens. I had thought Apple applied some distortion correction in software to more simulate a 48mm lens. But I just tried it on my phone and, sure enough, it's just a crop of the 1x without any noticeable correction to the perspective. So, what I said above only applies to phones with a true 2x lens (X-12 Pro). Taking watch shots with a newer iPhone is still a bit better using the 2x "virtual" lens if for no other reason than it forces you to hold your phone a bit further away from from the watch, which reduces the forced perspective distortion from the wide lens.




The 16 regular also has macro mode but it is the first non-pro phone to get it. I think that the macro mode was a necessary addition with the iPhone 13 Pro. IIRC correctly, that was the first phone where the minimum focus distance of the 1x camera started to get worse because they started using larger sensors without making the physical lens stick out further from the phone. Since the 1x camera couldn't focus as close as on older models, you needed macro mode to make it possible to photograph close up objects. And it turned out to be a good marketing feature too. If the sensors on the main and ultra wide cameras were comparable, this approach would be great. But the quality of the ultra wide sensor is soooo much worse than the 1x camera (especially on the 14-16 series) that it is really jarring when macro mode kicks in anywhere but in bright sunlight.

Bottom line is that photographing a watch with an iPhone in a way that looks natural has gotten progressively harder since the iPhone 12. That was the last iPhone to feature a 1x camera that could focus fairly close (and that 1x had a slightly longer 26mm equivalent lens), and the Pro model still had the 2x rather than the 3x or 5x found on later models. Your best option today is to use the 2x "virtual" lens if your phone has it or take a 1x photo with the phone held back a bit and crop. Neither is as good as what we had a few years ago. But then, this is a rather niche photographic subject...

I’m not getting the 48mp telephoto until the 2026 iPhone but it will tempt me to really stretch my arm and try to use it for wrist shots

 

[goldmac2006]

Ah yep, I was sloppy with my explanation. The 2x lens on the 14 Pro, 15s and 16s are indeed just a crop of the 1x lens. I had thought Apple applied some distortion correction in software to more simulate a 48mm lens. But I just tried it on my phone and, sure enough, it's just a crop of the 1x without any noticeable correction to the perspective. So, what I said above only applies to phones with a true 2x lens (X-12 Pro). Taking watch shots with a newer iPhone is still a bit better using the 2x "virtual" lens if for no other reason than it forces you to hold your phone a bit further away from from the watch, which reduces the forced perspective distortion from the wide lens.




The 16 regular also has macro mode but it is the first non-pro phone to get it. I think that the macro mode was a necessary addition with the iPhone 13 Pro. IIRC correctly, that was the first phone where the minimum focus distance of the 1x camera started to get worse because they started using larger sensors without making the physical lens stick out further from the phone. Since the 1x camera couldn't focus as close as on older models, you needed macro mode to make it possible to photograph close up objects. And it turned out to be a good marketing feature too. If the sensors on the main and ultra wide cameras were comparable, this approach would be great. But the quality of the ultra wide sensor is soooo much worse than the 1x camera (especially on the 14-16 series) that it is really jarring when macro mode kicks in anywhere but in bright sunlight.

Bottom line is that photographing a watch with an iPhone in a way that looks natural has gotten progressively harder since the iPhone 12. That was the last iPhone to feature a 1x camera that could focus fairly close (and that 1x had a slightly longer 26mm equivalent lens), and the Pro model still had the 2x rather than the 3x or 5x found on later models. Your best option today is to use the 2x "virtual" lens if your phone has it or take a 1x photo with the phone held back a bit and crop. Neither is as good as what we had a few years ago. But then, this is a rather niche photographic subject...

Here’s a sample close-up of an Apple Watch Series 5 taken using the macro lens on an iPhone 14 Pro Max: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/my-ip14pro-camera-is-crap.2375981/post-31856280

The digital zoom lens is the feature that allows you to zoom in beyond the optical zoom capabilities of your iPhone’s cameras.

In my opinion, the quality of the image decreases when I go beyond the 3x or 5x zoom settings. However, it’s important to note that this is not a universal experience. Some third-party camera apps are not optimised for the three Pro cameras on my iPhone, and even when I clean the camera on my iPhone, the images can still be blurry. This includes apps like Pitu or some third party photo apps that have camera use.

 

[MacDevil7334]

Here’s a sample close-up of an Apple Watch Series 5 taken using the macro lens on an iPhone 14 Pro Max: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/my-ip14pro-camera-is-crap.2375981/post-31856280

The digital zoom lens is the feature that allows you to zoom in beyond the optical zoom capabilities of your iPhone’s cameras.

In my opinion, the quality of the image decreases when I go beyond the 3x or 5x zoom settings. However, it’s important to note that this is not a universal experience. Some third-party camera apps are not optimised for the three Pro cameras on my iPhone, and even when I clean the camera on my iPhone, the images can still be blurry. This includes apps like Pitu or some third party photo apps that have camera use.

Digital zoomed images look worse because they are worse. The phone is taking a crop of the image to "zoom" in on it and then upscaling back to 12 MP. But there isn't magically some extra information being captured by the camera when you do this. It's literally throwing away information by cropping and then using that reduced set of data to generate a 12 MP image. By definition, that will be worse quality than an optical zoom. Also, cropping and enlarging is something that can easily be done in post-processing by almost any image editing software.

My general attitude is that digital zoom is a marketing term and should never be used. You're better off always shooting at the focal length(s) of the physical lens. You can always "digital zoom" later by cropping and enlarging. But at least you have the full set of pixels captured by the sensor if you want them and you aren't having the camera throw them away, never to be recovered.

I will say that above stance has been complicated a bit by the new options available on the 15 Pro and 16 Pro phones. These offer the option to tap on the 1x button in the camera and get 28mm and 35mm "virtual" lenses. These are, to be sure, crops of the main sensor. However, because the main sensor is 48 MP and these crops are fairly small, the iPhone imaging processing pipeline still has enough information to ML a 24 MP final image for you. Similarly, the 2x virtual lens is just a straight center crop of the main sensor. But, that still leaves you with 12 MP of pixels, so the resulting 12 MP image isn't losing quality from upscaling (though you can argue the pixel layout on the sensor reduces quality a bit). I consider the 28mm, 35mm and 48mm (2x) options on the 15 Pro and 16 Pro to be "good enough" to use. But I stand by my blanket refusal to use digital zoom in all other cases. I would never digital zoom the 5x lens because the sensor is only 12 MP. There's just not enough left after you zoom to make a good image there.

Sorry, I seem to have derailed the thread a bit with photography talk.

 

[jaybar]

Has anyone compared the Grabd H 46mm with two links removed (large) to the medium with no links removed? Are they the same size? Are the bands then equivalent lengths? My wrist is about 7 inches.

 

[athousandbands]

Has anyone compared the Grabd H 46mm with two links removed (large) to the medium with no links removed? Are they the same size? Are the bands then equivalent lengths? My wrist is about 7 inches.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/hermes-edition-owners-thread.1999198/post-33805476

 

[Schaden29]

Has anyone compared the Grabd H 46mm with two links removed (large) to the medium with no links removed? Are they the same size? Are the bands then equivalent lengths? My wrist is about 7 inches.

I get a sense that this link saga has been going on for several pages. Have you ever posted a comparison pic of your two options? I know you’re trying to decide between removing one link or two, and also deciding between the different size bands. Which way is more comfortable? That is really the most important question. If the watch is able to take its various health readings plus it’s comfortable then there’s your answer.

 

[jaybar]

I get a sense that this link saga has been going on for several pages. Have you ever posted a comparison pic of your two options? I know you’re trying to decide between removing one link or two, and also deciding between the different size bands. Which way is more comfortable? That is really the most important question. If the watch is able to take its various health readings plus it’s comfortable then there’s your answer.

I get a sense that this link saga has been going on for several pages. Have you ever posted a comparison pic of your two options? I know you’re trying to decide between removing one link or two, and also deciding between the different size bands. Which way is more comfortable? That is really the most important question. If the watch is able to take its various health readings plus it’s comfortable then there’s your answ

 

[jaybar]

This is large with one link removed. Heart rate measures ok. Is there any other indicator I can evaluate? I don’t have O2.

 

[jaybar]

My only concern is that it leaves a clasp mark on the underside of my wrist. Otherwise my large is fairly comfortable with one link removed.

 

[Schaden29]

Does it cause discomfort or feel annoying? For me I usually have room for one finger but it doesn’t slide around too much and the watch itself stays connected to my skin. If it’s too tight then I get irritation and I feel the clasp digging into my sensitive wrist bits (tendons?). An example of a band that’s too big is what my coworker has. She has an ultra 2 and the band is so loose it slides around her wrist like a bracelet. The watch also ends up locking itself because it loses contact with her skin.

 

[jaybar]

Does it cause discomfort or feel annoying? For me I usually have room for one finger but it doesn’t slide around too much and the watch itself stays connected to my skin. If it’s too tight then I get irritation and I feel the clasp digging into my sensitive wrist bits (tendons?). An example of a band that’s too big is what my coworker has. She has an ultra 2 and the band is so loose it slides around her wrist like a bracelet. The watch also ends up locking itself because it loses contact with her skin.

@schaden. Something strange. If I remove 1 link I get clasp marks on my wrist. It is a bit loose but does make contact. If I remove two links (one each side) it just fits and I don’t get the marks.

 

[Schaden29]

@schaden. Something strange. If I remove 1 link I get clasp marks on my wrist. It is a bit loose but does make contact. If I remove two links (one each side) it just fits and I don’t get the marks.

I wonder if it’s because of where the clasp lays on your wrist since the position of the clasp will shift depending on if you’ve removed just one vs two. With two removed, does the watch still seem secure but not tight? Does it move down your arm when you walk around? Or does it stay in place? I’m hoping we can solve this for you so you can feel confident in your band choice. As I said previously, it should be comfortable but also stay mostly in place. Mine moves a bit and especially if I’m outside in the cold but otherwise it stays in the same general area on my wrist above the wrist bone. Hopefully this is helpful.

 

[jaybar]

I wonder if it’s because of where the clasp lays on your wrist since the position of the clasp will shift depending on if you’ve removed just one vs two. With two removed, does the watch still seem secure but not tight? Does it move down your arm when you walk around? Or does it stay in place? I’m hoping we can solve this for you so you can feel confident in your band choice. As I said previously, it should be comfortable but also stay mostly in place. Mine moves a bit and especially if I’m outside in the cold but otherwise it stays in the same general area on my wrist above the wrist bone. Hopefully this is helpful.

@Schaden29 it’s more secure with two links removed. Perhaps b/c the band is balanced (one from each side). With 1 link removed, it moves around a bit,and makes good skin contact, but it really moves when no links are removed. It’s more snug with two removed, but not uncomfortably so. clasp just closes. Thanks so much. EDIT: Two links removed makes it to tight. The most comfortable with minimal wrist marks is no links removed. I can get a finger under the band. .