In reply to elliot.baker:
Ayup Elliot,
Some general points:
It will be difficult for wrist based tracking to match the performance of chest straps (for the next 5 years at least), since one is using an optical sensor to gauge hr from peripheral blood flow and the other sticks a sensor basically over your heart. It's really a question of how much inaccuracy you can accept. How much inaccuracy you experience depends on your physiology, where you train / what you're doing etc.
Generally, wrist based monitors aren't very good at picking up sudden changes in heart rate; so tracking interval training is problematic.
That being said, I use an old Vivoactive HR and 90% of the time it's... fine. daily tracking is pretty much bang on and consistent running / cycling is too. You can always use a wrist based monitor and have a chest strap for gym sessions.
Personal opinion: avoid Fitbit. their sensors are significantly worse than Garmin / Suunto and there's no point in an inaccurate tracker.
These days, the running watch / fitness tracker market has converged and is underpinned by a common software package. A mid range watch from suunto will track running / workouts / daily heart rate / sleep and you'll only interact with the watch to record stuff. The phone app just keeps a record. Broadly: a cheap watch will require a phone with you to enable GPS, mid range units will be stand alone, more expensive ones add features (altimeter, advanced metrics... golf course maps).
Walking and climbing wise, in built GPS and altimeter is fun