Reply With QuoteThose are the same images, that's why.
Hi guys,
I'm going to have a look at the 212.30.44.50.03.001 and the 212.30.42.50.03.001 this evening.
One is advertised as 44mm the other 41.5mm. I've had a previous version of this watch in 41.5mm and loved it. I expect to prefer the 41.5mm, when I see them this evening. But figured I would take a look at both before deciding.
My question is. If they both use the same calibre, would you expect the sub dials/hands to be spaced the same distance apart? But looking at the pictures below, taken from the Omega website, the 44mm version seems to have the sub dials/hands spaced further apart. So proportionally the same, but further apart as the size has increased. Does this then mean the calibre has been modified.
Does that makes sense? Not sure I've worded it correctly!
44mm
41.5mm
Sent from my Nexus 6P using TZ-UK mobile app
Those are the same images, that's why.
The images are taken directly from Omegas website for each watch. If you look the watch is larger in the top image. So I guess my question is have omega simply enlarged the image?Originally Posted by Filterlab
Sent from my Nexus 6P using TZ-UK mobile app
Have a look...
44mm
41.5mm
You can see the sub dials are closer to the chapter ring on the 41.5mm.
Wouldn't be the first time the Omega website got confused between its own images - I remember when they had the same image for both standard and sapphire Speedy Pros
I did a quick overlay with opacity on Photoshop, the images are identical. Looks like an Omega website problem. Web builders make errors too you know. :0)
Brilliant. Thanks for the pictures. That answers the question perfectly. I guess it's just Omega being lazy.Have a look...
44mm
41.5mm
You can see the sub dials are closer to the chapter ring on the 41.5mm.
I let you know which one I come home with.
Thanks again.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using TZ-UK mobile app
Good luck, both beautiful watches in every way! It'd be the 41.5mm for me from the photos alone, but we all know that it doesn't necessarily work like that on the wrist! :0)
____
A quick side by side of the Omega images, 44mm on left, 41.5mm on right.
I think someone has been a bit lazy at Omega's website department. LOL!
Put the two different codes into Chrono24 and you'll get lots of pictures you can compare and spot the little differences, eg on the 42 you can see the date window being lower than the indices on either side, whereas on the 44 it's pretty much level
42:
https://www.chrono24.co.uk/omega/ref-21230425003001.htm
44:
https://www.chrono24.co.uk/omega/ref-21230445003001.htm
It surprises me they don't take a bit more care. The pictures are the same in the catalogue as they are on the website.
Sent from my Nexus 6P using TZ-UK mobile app
Well, they know people will buy regardless, and most would try on at a dealer before purchase.
It does seem odd though not to have someone checking it thoroughly, the website is the main shop door these days.
Good luck, both beautiful watches in every way! It'd be the 41.5mm for me from the photos alone, but we all know that it doesn't necessarily work like that on the wrist! :0)
____
A quick side by side of the Omega images, 44mm on left, 41.5mm on right.
I think someone has been a bit lazy at Omega's website department. LOL!
Thanks for the pictures and links guys. I appreciate it.
So the watch I've been lusting after in the catalogue and on the website is clearly the 41.5mm. 😁
Sent from my Nexus 6P using TZ-UK mobile app
Yep, certainly looks like it. And a fine choice too sir.
Omega have done a good job to make them look remarkably similar (and a bad one to confuse the photos on the website).
It seems to me that the date window on the 41.5 protrudes below the lines between the 5 and 7 indices. Closer to the edge.
On the 44 the date window is largely above those indices, further into the dial.
Even though is it in the same position within the sub-dial.
D
Posting Permissions
