Help is this Omega Constellation 2852 a redial or untouched?

Posts
3
Likes
0
Looking for advice on this timepiece. Do you think it is a redial or untouched original. It is a calibre 505 dated at 1957. I see the use of Chronometer vs Chronometre which I have read somewhere is not accurate for this model.
 
Posts
20,046
Likes
46,665
These satellite photos are not very helpful. Please post larger photos, in focus, in good lighting. 馃憤
Edited:
 
Posts
824
Likes
1,444
Photos are so bad it is like they wish to hide something or several somethings.
 
Posts
2,468
Likes
6,467
Photos are bad, but even with those I鈥檓 at 90% redial (tick marks at the 5-minute markers are too long).
 
Posts
3
Likes
0
The seller gave me additional photos. Albeit not much better than the prior ones.

Thoughts anyone?
 
Posts
3,181
Likes
12,504
Photos are bad, but even with those I鈥檓 at 90% redial (tick marks at the 5-minute markers are too long).

Exactly. Also, a seller who can produce this style of studio pic but fails to provide anywhere near a decent resolution? I鈥檓 not buying it. Figuratively, as well as literally.
 
Posts
6,586
Likes
11,259
Here's my rule of thumb - 90% of black dial vintage constellations out there are redials. Of the 10% that are original about 90% of them will not be in great shape.
 
Posts
7,635
Likes
26,454
And my rule of thumb: it is a red flag when a seller is unable or unwilling to send LARGE, high-quality images.

I have got that one and I am sure that dial is ori, cal 505:

Yes, but we are discussing black dial versions.
 
Posts
824
Likes
1,444
Through the fog it looks like the i in constellation is not dotted. Chronometere should be "re". The minute marks are inconsistent. Case looks soft.
 
Posts
3
Likes
0
Thanks for the responses. There were some things that my gut didn't feel right about it. I guess I was hoping to hear otherwise to relieve my doubt.
 
Posts
7,827
Likes
56,871
If sellers can't take some nice, focused, hi-rez pix, one is just gambling, especially this ref in black.
 
Posts
337
Likes
355
Black dials are hard to tell but a lot of the ones I've seen are redials when they are too glossy. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but the original ones are usually more matte and have signs of wear
 
Posts
6,586
Likes
11,259
Black dials are hard to tell but a lot of the ones I've seen are redials when they are too glossy. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but the original ones are usually more matte and have signs of wear

Original black dials can certainly be both glossy and in great shape. Like this one:

8400086300_2f9263e20d_b.jpg
 
Posts
337
Likes
355
Original black dials can certainly be both glossy and in great shape. Like this one:

8400086300_2f9263e20d_b.jpg
Ah, ok thanks!
 
Posts
8,999
Likes
46,202
Black dials are hard to tell but a lot of the ones I've seen are redials when they are too glossy. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but the original ones are usually more matte and have signs of wear
Often true, but not always as MSNWatch notes in his post.
 
Posts
1,192
Likes
5,202
And, in the OP's reference, glossy and no signs of wear can be found

Jaw dropping 馃グ