Beyond a certain price point (and both these watches are well above it), I think it's mostly a fool's errand trying to justify price differences based on objective criteria. You can also get a watch as well finished as the Tudor for half its price.
I think a clear case can be made for claiming the Omega movement is better, but whether that translates into improved real-life performance on the wrist is another matter. Similarly, I think the Omega finishing is a notch above that of the Tudor but, ultimately, you're paying mostly for the brand and only you can know how much that's worth to you.
That said, it sounds as though you're pretty happy with the Tudor so, if I were you, I'd stick with it rather than convince yourself of the need to 'upcost'. It's an excellent watch in its own right.