The Orient Kanno was launched in 2018. Originally spelled "Kano" the company quickly switched to the newer spelling to make sure it was not pronounced "Kay-No" by mistake. Not that it matters much, as official Orient catalogs do not really mention this name anyway, rather referring to the model as one of its "Diver-Style Sport Watches".
Anyway, almost four years down the road, and having reviewed most of Orient's other recent dive (or diver style) watches, it was about time the blog posted a review of the Kanno as well. Luckily we came across Mr. Shahar H., who generously allowed us some time with his Kanno reference RA-AA0915R.
Some technical details to start with: the Kanno is 43.6mm wide without the crown, and 50mm lug to lug – considerably larger than the Kamasu, for example, with its 41.8mm width and 46.8 length. Thickness is similar though at 12.9mm, and lug width is the same 22mm.
The movement inside is Orient's common F6922 automatic, equipped with day and date discs, and providing 40 hours of power reserve and +25/-15 seconds per day accuracy.
The specific watch I got to review has a lovely red sunburst dial; indeed, you can't go wrong with a red sunburst dial! It's a beautiful color that suits a sporty watch like this well.
On the wrist, the watch feels comfortable, not too large, and certainly not too heavy. I wore the Kanno while it was attached to a Barton canvas strap, not the original bracelet. However, the bracelet is relatively light – some would argue it lacks heft – and despite the significant difference in dimensions, the Kanno is only 5g heavier than the Kamasu.
The Kanno owes much of its wearability to the sloping lugs, which lower ends is almost on the same surface as the flat bottom of the case.
I was particularly curious to see how this model compares to the Kamasu (and other inexpensive Orients). The Kanno officially costs about 30 USD less than Kamasu, a difference which would presumably be attributed to having mineral glass as crystal, instead of the little brother's sapphire.
Honestly though, I have to say I also noticed a lower level of finishing of the Kanno's bezel. Its design is simpler than the Kamasu's, having a very squarely shaped profile and plain round insert. Even the font of the printed numerals here seems less elegant, being thicker and taller. Bezel action seemed less refined than in the Kamasu, with more resistance to movement in the right direction – yet, having more backplay.
Also less impressive was the day-date aperture. The dial cut-out on the Kamasu is sharp and nicely framed, while the Kanno's cut-out seems more rough and only has a couple of lines painted above and below it, instead of a proper frame. Likewise, the hour markers on the Kanno are all simple rectangles; the Kamasu marker set consists of rectangles, trapezoids, and a triangle.
The case construction seems to be very similar in shape, finishing and quality to the Kamasu and other Orients at this price bracket. While having a somewhat duller appearance, the crown actually felt better than the Kamasu's, with no apparent wobble and smooth winding action.
All things considered, the Kanno is a decent offering, but in my opinion lacks the extra flair that makes the Kamasu such an exceptional value for money. While some of the differences in quality could be attributed to random fluctuations within a loose manufacturing tolerance, some are obviously intentional.
I should point out that the owner of the watch said he liked it a lot, and also found it to be very accurate. An owner's opinion is definitely important! To me, it just seems Orient can do better even at this low price point – I know they can.