OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Smartwatches Methodology v2.0
Smartwatches Methodology v2.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontumo Smartwatches Methodology v2.0: technical specifications plus grades from 3,948 independent expert reviews and 5,024 video reviews, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Smartwatches Methodology v2.0

Mykronoz Zetime Premium Review | 126 Data compared

Avg. price:~£160Screen size:?Battery life:3 daysDisplay type:TFT LCD

Mykronoz Zetime Premium Review: Compare 126 technical specifications and 5 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Smartwatches category and whether it is worth buying.

5.2

Overall score

Score
5.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the smartwatch's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best smartwatches on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components

70%

4.7

Technical score

30%

6.4

Review score ( 4 · 1)

Review score 30% · 6.4 · based on 5 independent reviews
Every model in this category gets the same split: reviews 30%, technical score 70%. This model has enough reviews, so its review score is the weighted average of their grades.
â–¼Worse than 94% of smartwatches
4.7

Technical score

Technical score
4.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the smartwatchx27s technical performance, covering seven key areas: health, fitness, display & design, hardware, battery, smart features and connectivity.
When it matters
When you want to compare smartwatches based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

24%

3.3

Health

21%

5.8

Fitness

16%

5.6

Battery

14%

4.1

Smart features

12%

3.6

Connectivity

9%

6.4

Display & Design

4%

4.5

Hardware

â–¼Worse than 91% of smartwatches
6.4

Review score

Review score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves.
Weighting: Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Share: Reviews are 30% of the overall score for every model in this category; each of the 5 needed reviews that is missing counts as 7/10.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
Grades by review (5)
✓ explicit
2

25%

7.0

tomsguide.com

25%

6.0

techradar.com

≈ estimated
1

20%

5.0

wareable.com

estimated from the review
4 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Share in the overall score: 30%, the same for every model in this category.
Shop star ratings are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 97% of smartwatches
  • mykronoz-zetime-premium
  • mykronoz-zetime-premium
  • mykronoz-zetime-premium
  • mykronoz-zetime-premium
  • mykronoz-zetime-premium
  • mykronoz-zetime-premium
  • mykronoz-zetime-premium
  • mykronoz-zetime-premium
  • mykronoz-zetime-premium
mykronoz-zetime-premium
mykronoz-zetime-premium
mykronoz-zetime-premium
mykronoz-zetime-premium
mykronoz-zetime-premium
mykronoz-zetime-premium
mykronoz-zetime-premium
mykronoz-zetime-premium
mykronoz-zetime-premium

Best prices

*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Best rankings

Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of smartwatch Mykronoz Zetime Premium

Technical score
Technical score
4.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the smartwatchx27s technical performance, covering seven key areas: health, fitness, display & design, hardware, battery, smart features and connectivity.
When it matters
When you want to compare smartwatches based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components:

24%

3.3

Health

21%

5.8

Fitness

16%

5.6

Battery

14%

4.1

Smart features

12%

3.6

Connectivity

9%

6.4

Display & Design

4%

4.5

Hardware

4.7
Review score
Review score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves.
Weighting: Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Share: Reviews are 30% of the overall score for every model in this category; each of the 5 needed reviews that is missing counts as 7/10.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
Grades by review (5)
✓ explicit
2

25%

7.0

tomsguide.com

25%

6.0

techradar.com

≈ estimated
1

20%

5.0

wareable.com

estimated from the review
4 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Share in the overall score: 30%, the same for every model in this category.
Shop star ratings are not part of this score.
6.4
Value for money
Value for money
6.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the smartwatch's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a smartwatch with a good balance between quality and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components:

60%

5.2

Overall score

40%

9.7

Price

6.5
Brand name
Mykronoz
Heart rate monitor
yes
Heart rate monitor
yes
â–² Better than 11% of models
This smartwatch includes a heart rate monitor. 10.5% of smartwatches include a heart rate monitor.
Blood oxygen monitoring
no
Blood oxygen monitoring
no
â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
This smartwatch does not support blood oxygen monitoring. 66.8% of smartwatches support blood oxygen monitoring.
ECG
no
ECG
no
â–¼ Worse than 17% of models
This smartwatch does not support ECG. 16.6% of smartwatches support ECG.
Irregular heart rate warnings
no
Irregular heart rate warnings
no
â–¼ Worse than 48% of models
This smartwatch does not support irregular heart rate warnings. 48.2% of smartwatches support irregular heart rate warnings.
Show more
Accelerometer
yes
Accelerometer
yes
â–² Better than 1% of models
This smartwatch includes an accelerometer. 0.6% of smartwatches include an accelerometer.
Barometer
no
Barometer
no
â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
This smartwatch does not include a barometer. 49.6% of smartwatches include a barometer.
Gyroscope
no
Gyroscope
no
â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
This smartwatch does not include a gyroscope. 70% of smartwatches include a gyroscope.
Cadence sensor
no
Cadence sensor
no
â–¼ Worse than 31% of models
This smartwatch does not include a cadence sensor. 31.2% of smartwatches include a cadence sensor.
Distance tracking
yes
Distance tracking
yes
â–² Better than 4% of models
This smartwatch supports distance tracking. 4.1% of smartwatches support distance tracking.
Show more
Battery life
3 days
Battery life
3 days
â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Market range: <1 days – >16 days
This smartwatch offers a battery life of 3 days which is shorter than that of 74.8% of smartwatches and equal to that of 3.9% of smartwatches.
Up to 30 days in analog mode.
Battery life in training mode
37.5 h
Battery life in training mode
37.5 h
â–² Better than 85% of models
Market range: <5.5 h – >48 h
This smartwatch lasts 37.5 h in training mode which is longer than 84.5% of smartwatches and equal to that of 0.2% of smartwatches.
Battery life with GPS on
N/A
Battery power
200 mAh
Battery power
200 mAh
â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
Market range: <195 mAh – >475 mAh
This smartwatch has a battery capacity of 200 mAh which is smaller than the batteries in 88.3% of smartwatches and equal to those in 1.3% of smartwatches.
Charge time
90 min
Charge time
90 min
â–² Better than 64% of models
Market range: <60 min – >150 min
This smartwatch charges in 90 min which is faster than 63.7% of smartwatches and equal to the charge time of 9.9% of smartwatches.
Show more
What reviewers say
Operating system
Proprietary OS
Operating system
Proprietary OS
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
This smartwatch runs Proprietary OS which is less advanced than the operating system in 53.5% of smartwatches and the same as that in 42.8% of smartwatches.
Software update frequency
?
Third-party app support
no
Third-party app support
no
â–¼ Worse than 48% of models
This smartwatch does not support third-party apps. 47.7% of smartwatches support third-party apps.
Notifications
yes
Notifications
yes
Category Benchmark
This smartwatch supports notifications. 0.3% of smartwatches support notifications.
Voice assistant support
no
Voice assistant support
no
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
This smartwatch does not support voice assistants. 67.8% of smartwatches support voice assistants.
Show more
What reviewers say
Cellular module
no
Cellular module
no
â–¼ Worse than 18% of models
This smartwatch does not include a cellular module. 18% of smartwatches include a cellular module.
SIM cards
0
GPS
no
GPS
no
â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
This smartwatch does not support GPS. 56.2% of smartwatches support GPS.
Galileo support
no
Galileo support
no
â–¼ Worse than 39% of models
This smartwatch does not support Galileo navigation. 38.5% of smartwatches support Galileo navigation.
Compass
no
Compass
no
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
This smartwatch does not include a compass. 52.7% of smartwatches include a compass.
Show more
Screen size
?
Display type
TFT LCD
Display type
TFT LCD
â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
This smartwatch uses a TFT LCD display type which is less advanced than that of 74.1% of smartwatches and the same as that of 15.9% of smartwatches.
Resolution
240x 240
Resolution
240x 240
â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
This smartwatch has a display resolution of 240x240 which is lower than that of 73.9% of smartwatches and equal to that of 15.2% of smartwatches.
Pixel density
?
Display brightness
?
Show more
What reviewers say
CPU speed
?
Processor model
?
RAM
?
Internal storage
0 GB
Internal storage
0 GB
â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
Market range: <0 GB – >32 GB
This smartwatch uses 0 GB for internal storage which is smaller than that of 73.6% of smartwatches and equal to that of 26.4% of smartwatches.
No local user storage for apps/media.
External memory slot
no
External memory slot
no
Category Benchmark
This smartwatch does not include an external memory slot. 0.3% of smartwatches include an external memory slot.
Show more

Mykronoz Zetime Premium vs the average smartwatch

246810TotalHealthFitnessBatteryConnectivityDisplay & DesignSmart featuresHardware
  • Stronger display glass
    Display glass type
    sapphire
    â–² Better than 82% of models
    This smartwatch uses sapphire display glass, while the average smartwatch uses mineral glass.
    sapphire vs mineral glass
  • 18.25 h longer training battery life
    Battery life in training mode
    37.5 h
    â–² Better than 85% of models
    Market range: <5.5 h – >48 h
    This smartwatch lasts longer in training mode than the average smartwatch (37.5 h vs 19.25 h). The average smartwatch lasts 19.25 h.
    37.5 h vs 19.25 h
  • NFC functionality
    NFC
    yes
    â–² Better than 57% of models
    This smartwatch supports NFC, the average smartwatch does not. 43.4% of smartwatches support NFC.
  • 30 min shorter charge time
    Charge time
    90 min
    â–² Better than 64% of models
    Market range: <60 min – >150 min
    This smartwatch charges faster than the average smartwatch (90 min vs 120 min). The average smartwatch charges in 120 min.
    90 min vs 120 min
  • Calorie tracking
    Calorie tracking
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch supports calorie tracking, the average smartwatch does not. 48.6% of smartwatches support calorie tracking.
  • Rugged construction
    Rugged design
    yes
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    This smartwatch has a rugged design, the average smartwatch does not. 37.9% of smartwatches have a rugged design.
  • Better band material
    Band material
    leather, fabric, metal
    â–² Better than 84% of models
    This smartwatch uses leather, fabric, metal for the band material, while the average smartwatch uses silicone.
    leather, fabric, metal vs silicone
  • Hybrid watch design
    Hybrid design
    yes
    ★ Better than 91% of models
    This smartwatch has a hybrid design, the average smartwatch does not. 8.9% of smartwatches have a hybrid design.
  • Calorie tracking
    Calorie tracking
    yes
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    This smartwatch supports calorie tracking, the average smartwatch does not. 48.6% of smartwatches support calorie tracking.
  • 18.25 h longer training battery life
    Battery life in training mode
    37.5 h
    â–² Better than 85% of models
    Market range: <5.5 h – >48 h
    This smartwatch lasts longer in training mode than the average smartwatch (37.5 h vs 19.25 h). The average smartwatch lasts 19.25 h.
    37.5 h vs 19.25 h
  • 30 min shorter charge time
    Charge time
    90 min
    â–² Better than 64% of models
    Market range: <60 min – >150 min
    This smartwatch charges faster than the average smartwatch (90 min vs 120 min). The average smartwatch charges in 120 min.
    90 min vs 120 min
  • NFC functionality
    NFC
    yes
    â–² Better than 57% of models
    This smartwatch supports NFC, the average smartwatch does not. 43.4% of smartwatches support NFC.
  • Stronger display glass
    Display glass type
    sapphire
    â–² Better than 82% of models
    This smartwatch uses sapphire display glass, while the average smartwatch uses mineral glass.
    sapphire vs mineral glass
  • Rugged construction
    Rugged design
    yes
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    This smartwatch has a rugged design, the average smartwatch does not. 37.9% of smartwatches have a rugged design.
  • Better band material
    Band material
    leather, fabric, metal
    â–² Better than 84% of models
    This smartwatch uses leather, fabric, metal for the band material, while the average smartwatch uses silicone.
    leather, fabric, metal vs silicone
  • Hybrid watch design
    Hybrid design
    yes
    ★ Better than 91% of models
    This smartwatch has a hybrid design, the average smartwatch does not. 8.9% of smartwatches have a hybrid design.
  • Better case material
    Case material
    stainless steel
    â–² Better than 58% of models
    This smartwatch uses stainless steel for the case material, while the average smartwatch uses polycarbonate.
    stainless steel vs polycarbonate
  • No blood oxygen monitoring
    Blood oxygen monitoring
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    This smartwatch does not support blood oxygen monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 66.7% of smartwatches support blood oxygen monitoring.
  • No GPS support
    Route support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This smartwatch does not support GPS, the average smartwatch does. 56.1% of smartwatches support GPS.
  • No stress monitoring
    Stress monitoring
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This smartwatch does not support stress monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 65.4% of smartwatches support stress monitoring.
  • No elevation tracking
    Elevation tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
    This smartwatch does not support elevation tracking, the average smartwatch does. 64.3% of smartwatches support elevation tracking.
  • Basic display type
    Display type
    TFT LCD
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    This smartwatch uses TFT LCD display technology, while the average smartwatch features AMOLED.
    TFT LCD vs AMOLED
  • No pace tracking
    Pace tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    This smartwatch does not support pace tracking, the average smartwatch does. 78.6% of smartwatches support pace tracking.
  • No route tracking
    Route support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This smartwatch does not support route tracking, the average smartwatch does. 74.6% of smartwatches support route tracking.
  • No coaching features
    Coaching
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
    This smartwatch does not support coaching, the average smartwatch does. 54.6% of smartwatches support coaching.
  • 15.2% worse value for money
    Mykronoz Zetime Premium has a lower value-for-money score than the average smartwatch (6.52 vs 7.5).
    6.52 vs 7.52
  • No blood oxygen monitoring
    Blood oxygen monitoring
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    This smartwatch does not support blood oxygen monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 66.7% of smartwatches support blood oxygen monitoring.
  • No stress monitoring
    Stress monitoring
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This smartwatch does not support stress monitoring, the average smartwatch does. 65.4% of smartwatches support stress monitoring.
  • No cycle tracking
    Menstrual cycle tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
    This smartwatch does not support menstrual cycle tracking, the average smartwatch does. 64.3% of smartwatches support menstrual cycle tracking.
  • No smart scale support
    Smart scale compatibility
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    This smartwatch does not support smart scale compatibility, the average smartwatch does. 53.7% of smartwatches support smart scale compatibility.
  • No elevation tracking
    Elevation tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
    This smartwatch does not support elevation tracking, the average smartwatch does. 64.3% of smartwatches support elevation tracking.
  • No pace tracking
    Pace tracking
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    This smartwatch does not support pace tracking, the average smartwatch does. 78.6% of smartwatches support pace tracking.
  • No route tracking
    Route support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This smartwatch does not support route tracking, the average smartwatch does. 74.6% of smartwatches support route tracking.
  • No coaching features
    Coaching
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
    This smartwatch does not support coaching, the average smartwatch does. 54.6% of smartwatches support coaching.
  • No auto-pause
    Auto pause
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
    This smartwatch does not support auto pause, the average smartwatch does. 59.3% of smartwatches support auto pause.
  • No gyroscope
    Gyroscope
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a gyroscope, the average smartwatch does. 69.9% of smartwatches include a gyroscope.
  • 79 fewer exercise profiles
    Multi-sport mode
    1
    â–² Better than 32% of models
    This smartwatch supports fewer exercise modes than the average smartwatch (1 vs 80). The average smartwatch supports 80 exercise modes.
    1 vs 80
  • No voice feedback
    Voice feedback
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    This smartwatch does not support voice feedback, the average smartwatch does. 61.9% of smartwatches support voice feedback.
  • 4 days day/s shorter battery life
    Battery life
    3 days
    â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
    Market range: <1 days – >16 days
    This smartwatch offers 3 days of battery life, while the average smartwatch offers 7 days.
    Up to 30 days in analog mode.
    3 days vs 7 days
  • Basic battery type
    Battery type
    Li-ion
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    This smartwatch uses a Li-ion battery, while the average smartwatch uses Li-Po.
    Li-ion vs Li-Po
  • 100 mAh smaller battery capacity
    Battery life
    200 mAh days
    â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
    Market range: <1 days – >16 days
    This smartwatch has a smaller battery capacity than the average smartwatch (200 mAh vs 300 mAh). The average smartwatch battery is 300 mAh.
    Up to 30 days in analog mode.
    200 mAh vs 300 mAh
  • No GPS support
    Route support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 50% of models
    This smartwatch does not support GPS, the average smartwatch does. 56.1% of smartwatches support GPS.
  • No compass
    Compass
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a compass, the average smartwatch does. 52.6% of smartwatches include a compass.
  • Older Bluetooth version
    Bluetooth version
    4.2
    â–¼ Worse than 66% of models
    This smartwatch supports an older Bluetooth version than the average smartwatch (4.2 vs 5). The average smartwatch uses 5.0.
    4.2 vs 5.0
  • Basic display type
    Display type
    TFT LCD
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    This smartwatch uses TFT LCD display technology, while the average smartwatch features AMOLED.
    TFT LCD vs AMOLED
  • No always-on display
    Always-On Display
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This smartwatch does not have an always-on display, the average smartwatch does. 67.6% of smartwatches have an always-on display.
  • 45 g heavier weight
    Weight
    90.0 g
    â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
    Market range: <29 g – >80 g
    This smartwatch is heavier than the average smartwatch (90 g vs 45 g). The average smartwatch weighs 45.0 g.
    90.0 g vs 45.0 g
  • No ambient light sensor
    Ambient light sensor
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This smartwatch does not include an ambient light sensor, the average smartwatch does. 60.7% of smartwatches include an ambient light sensor.
  • 20 m lower water resistance depth
    Waterproof depth rating
    30 m
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    Market range: <1 m – >50 m
    This smartwatch has a shallower waterproof rating than the average smartwatch (30 m vs 50 m). The average smartwatch reaches 50 m.
    30 m vs 50 m
  • Lower resolution
    Display type
    240 x 240
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    This smartwatch has a display resolution of 240x240, while the average smartwatch reaches 352x430.
    240x240 vs 352x430
  • 1.2 mm thicker watch body
    Thickness
    12.80 mm
    â–¼ Worse than 76% of models
    Market range: <9.8 mm – >14.1 mm
    This smartwatch is thicker than the average smartwatch (12.8 mm vs 11.6 mm). The average smartwatch thickness is 11.6 mm.
    12.80 mm vs 11.6 mm
  • No music playback
    Music playback
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    This smartwatch does not support music playback, the average smartwatch does. 54.2% of smartwatches support music playback.
  • No voice assistant
    Voice assistant support
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This smartwatch does not support voice assistants, the average smartwatch does. 67.7% of smartwatches support voice assistants.
  • No call answering
    Call answering
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
    This smartwatch does not support call answering, the average smartwatch does. 58.1% of smartwatches support call answering.
  • No voice command support
    Voice commands
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    This smartwatch does not support voice commands, the average smartwatch does. 67% of smartwatches support voice commands.
  • No passcode
    Passcode
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
    This smartwatch does not include passcode protection, the average smartwatch does. 67.8% of smartwatches include passcode protection.
  • No speaker
    Built-in speaker
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 56% of models
    This smartwatch does not include a built-in speaker, the average smartwatch does. 56.1% of smartwatches include a built-in speaker.
  • 4 year/s older release date
    Release date
    2017
    â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This smartwatch is an older model than the average smartwatch (2017 vs 2021). The average smartwatch was released in 2021.
    September 2017
    2017 vs 2021
  • 4 GB less storage
    Internal storage
    0 GB
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    Market range: <0 GB – >32 GB
    This smartwatch offers less internal storage than the average smartwatch (0 GB vs 4 GB). The average smartwatch provides 4 GB of storage.
    No local user storage for apps/media.
    0 GB vs 4 GB

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
Manumerique
≈ estimated
22/07/2020
Hands-on review · one week of daily use
Verdict
Mykronoz ZeTime Premium left me satisfied and gets a strong recommendation, though app support is limited and it's more gadget than smartwatch.
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet

What reviewers agree on

Based on 5 · 1

Reviewers love the analog hands, long battery life and watch faces, but the companion app and fiddly controls disappoint.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
tomsguide.com
✓ explicit
24/01/2018
Hands-on review · Hybrid smartwatch
Verdict
The MyKronoz ZeTime is a handsome hybrid with real hands and at least 3 days of smartwatch battery, but its European date formats and missing third-party apps hold it back.
5.0
wareable.com
≈ estimated
13/02/2018
Hands-on review · Hybrid smartwatch
Verdict
The MyKronoz ZeTime pairs mechanical hands with strong battery life, but its unresponsive touchscreen and unfinished software make it hard to recommend.
6.0
techradar.com
✓ explicit
20/03/2018
Hands-on review · Hybrid smartwatch
Verdict
The MyKronoz ZeTime looks like a traditional watch with a long-lasting battery, but its pared-down operating system and laggy screen limit what you can do.
6.0
test-aankoop.be
✓ explicit
2024 (dernière mise à jour)
Lab test · Hybrid smartwatch
Verdict
The Mykronoz ZeTime Premium suits people who want a watch that's easy to read in bright sun and resists scratches, but calls are weak and it has no GPS.
6.0
test-aankoop.be
✓ explicit
Undated (Archived)
Lab test · Hybrid smartwatch
Verdict
The Mykronoz ZeTime Premium suits people who want a watch that's easy to read in bright sun and resists scratches, but calls are weak and it has no GPS.

Third-party reviews

Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

What we like about Mykronoz Zetime Premium

  • Unique hybrid design with real mechanical hands over a touchscreen
  • Excellent battery life: up to 3 days in smartwatch mode and 30 days in analog mode
  • Premium build quality featuring stainless steel and sapphire glass
  • Water-resistant up to 5 ATM (50 metres), suitable for swimming
  • Highly customisable watch faces through the companion app
  • Mechanical hands automatically move to a horizontal position to avoid blocking notifications

What we don't like about Mykronoz Zetime Premium

  • Proprietary OS is limited and lacks a third-party app ecosystem
  • TFT display has relatively low resolution with visible pixels
  • Touchscreen and interface can be occasionally sluggish or unresponsive
  • Lacks built-in GPS for standalone activity tracking
  • Initial mechanical hand calibration process can be confusing
  • Bulky design may be too large for those with smaller wrists

Verdict

The MyKronoz ZeTime Premium is a pioneering hybrid smartwatch featuring real mechanical hands layered over a high-resolution 1.22-inch TFT color touchscreen (240x240 px) protected by durable sapphire glass. Housed in a 44mm stainless steel case, it boasts an optical heart rate sensor, a 3-axis accelerometer, and 5 ATM water resistance. Its standout 'Smart Movement' technology allows the analog hands to tell time for up to 30 days on a single charge, while the digital features—including smart notifications, music control, and activity tracking—typically last up to 3 days. Main pros include its elegant Swiss design, an always-on analog display, and the clever ability for hands to move horizontally to avoid obstructing on-screen text. However, notable cons include the lack of built-in GPS, a relatively thick profile, and a proprietary operating system that lacks third-party app support and occasionally faces software glitches.

Compare Mykronoz Zetime Premium with other Smartwatches

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Mykronoz Zetime Premium and other Smartwatches

No results found