Fitbit vs Polar

Polar FT7 can be used in the water, tracks cals, heart rate pretty much everything I need. I hear about fitbit but seems it only counts steps and that'd be nice but not for $99. Someone told me you can get one that counts steps/HR that you can use in the pool if you put it in a plastic baggie in your bra/swim top... and hope it doesn't fall out and into the pool. LOL That's apparently running $200. :::shrugs::: That is until it falls out of the baggie and dies...

Seems you have to almost have numerous devices to track everything... I most definitely spend a lot of time in the pool so want something I can use in there (my FT7 chest strap and is water proof and works great for that so probably set on toys)... but would be nice to count step, suppose one of my good ole fashioned pedometers would work for that. I'm not a runner so I don't' need any spectacular regarding GPS etc.

Honestly if I had to pick one to buy now...I'd be posting same as you.

Good luck finding one that fits your needs!

I have a Polar Loop 2 and love it. It's light, easy to clean, tracks activity, fully waterproof and will sync with the Polar H7 Bluetooth HRM chest strap (which is also fully waterproof) and can all be synced to MFP via their apps ( although still issues I believe with android and syncing, I use my iPad mini). No GPS though.

I'd been using the Polar FT-7 (chest strap) for a few years until I lost my watch many months back. Recently I've been really wanting to get something more modern and was feeling a bit torn between the Fitbit charge HR and the Polar A360. I did do my research first and found that for my strength training purposes the polar would be the better fit.
My gf bought me the A360 as a gift and I set it up immediately, however I began noticing little issues. particularly with syncing, and pairing. Both my Phone and the Polar's software were up to date, but I could never get the darn thing to work properly.
My first test run with strength training I got back some very low inaccurate results. About half the calorie expenditure than my weakest average. So I tried it out a second day with and wore it a bit tighter, and still got the same results.
Feeling disappointed with the outcome I ran out to my local Bestbuy were they price matched amazon and I purchased the Polar H7 heart sensor/strap. It's a perk/feature, the ability to bypass the Watches own sensor and connect to the chest strap/H7 via Bluetooth. well it was a pain in the but to pair it, but when it worked there were other issues. However the H7 once paired correctly did work amazingly well, but there were just to many headaches to get it to work each time so I just ended up placing it back in the box ready to be returned.
This was just all less than a week ago, and the last 4 days I spent vacationing in California (Disney) where I ended up losing the Polar H7. I had been running it with my Iphone/polarbeat app. The H7 was the best thing out of everything, and now I have nothing. Although my gf lent me her pink polar ft-4 yesterday

The reviews I have read for the Polar A360, Fitbit charge HR, Fitbit Surge, have reported accuracy issues with the optical HR sensors. I just saw a review about the newest version of the Microsoft activity tracker that reported good accuracy, so that might be worth looking into if you don't want a chest strap.

I don't think one device will excel at everything--you have to decide which area (activity, exercise) you want to be more precise.

I am old school (and old), so I still use a chest strap for workouts. I recently purchased a Polar V800. That is more technology than I'll ever need, but I always overbuy when it comes to my exercise gadgets. After I bought the V800 I found that a lot of the technology I wanted actually came with the H7 chest strap itself + various 3rd party apps.
The V800 has great GPS accuracy, great workout tracking, so-so as an activity tracker. That profile worked for me and I think, in general, that's what you will get with Polar products, whereas with Fitbits you will probably get the opposite, since they have been at the forefront of activity tracker technology.

PS: most conventional HRMs and fitness trackers cannot be used to accurately assess calories burned during strength training. The body's response to strength training is physiologically very different from the response to aerobic training. That and the fact that there are many more variables involved make it difficult, if not impossible, to come up with a common measurement or algorithm that can be applicable in a general way. There are several trackers out there now that are specifically designed for strength training:

https://www.quora.com/How-useful-is-a-fitness-tracker-if-I-am-more-of-a-weight-lifting-person-than-a-cardio-person

However, from what I can tell after a cursory examination is that they are more designed to measure/track strength changes, muscle involvement and other specific training parameters rather than calories burned (even though some offer that feature).

To the best of my knowledge (and technology is always changing so I don't claim to know everything that's out there), there is currently no way to accurately track calories burned during resistance training.