Quote:
Originally Posted by TortugaX5
I'm sorry but I couldn't disagree more with your comment.
|
Same here, after seeing the Seiko, I'm dumbfounded they would even be compared.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neverdone
Clearly the Rolex is more refined, but looking at hem side by side, you can't deny the similar features. My point is, this watch IN MY OPINION, Rolex or not, is not anywhere near as nice IN DESIGN as an Omega PO and makes me think that it's not as lesser quality, but doesn't look up to par with the Omega.
|
Similarities? In the context which you describe the similarities are they are both watches and tell time. As a watch enthusiast who worries about such details and changes in references as the writing on the dial, where the direction of the brushing on the case can change the whole personality of a watch, I am finding it difficult to take this comparison seriously.
These two aren't even in the same context regarding usage, aesthetics, and definitely build quality. There are many Seikos I like, from $200-7k, like the GS Snowflake, this one sorry to say is in the same league as a Casio G-Shock(of which I've owned many btw).
As far as comparison to the PO, of course this is more reasonable but will also be subjective and based on personal preference. Near as nice in design and which is lessor quality depends on needs. There are Omegas which I find superior in this regard to a Rolex, for example the new Seamaster Master Coaxial vs the 114060. It's movement is a generation ahead and aesthetics can be argued to be better, but again that is subjective. But it's a-magnetic movement, ten year service requirement and new swiss METAS standard set it apart from the Rolex.
However, from the choices the op presented the superior watch in my understanding is the Exp ll. The only clear advantage the PO has it that it can dive. As for this Seiko, I humbly must admit I find it humorous that anyone would consider it a competitor to the Exp ll.