Omega watch newbie here (excuse all mistakes I make below!) Very excited as I just ordered a new 35mm Constellation with black pitted face. I do have a 15 year old seamaster quartz and a similarly old tag heuer (which I will not buy again as some paint markings fell off the dial ) I was looking for a new watch and started to read intensely on the internet to discover the technicalities behind the brands, reasons for differences in price, movements, etc. its quite confusing and involved so perhaps I have picked up only the surface, but I find the difference in watch movements very interesting. I felt like something different and not just another diving type design nor an overflashy watch. To be honest the Constellation has attracted me for sometime but I felt the price was too high for my budget. However I just sold some camera equipment so freed up some capital ...... I wrote off quartz early. The idea of having a precision mechanical device constantly working is very appealing. Obviously this watch is more then just (a) a timekeeper and (b) a piece of jewellery for me. Its also a technical marvell to appreciate on a cold and boring day in the office. I decided I liked the steel only constellation design. Its actually quite a striking watch and I found the editions with bits of gold were just a bit too showy for me, even if I could afford them. If I was a billionaire I would probably get a platinum one I immediately liked the black face and the hands are also easier to see. There is a new one out with a pitted black surface which I went for. Its something a bit different and is quite subtle, as it looks smart and slightly sparkly on your wrist but from a distance looks like a normal black face. The next decision is between the 35mm and the 38mm. There are a number of things associated with this, size, weight, thickness, 2500D or 850x calibre movement and cost - in the UK £3,800 for the 38mm/850x and £2,780 for the 35mm/2500D Firstly I think they both look stunning. I was more attacted to the 35mm as I have a small wrist and I like a light watch. The 38mm is also thicker, due to the 8500 movement, and I really felt the extra in weight. The 38mm does look a bit more macho (in a nice way !!) and also the trend today is for bigger watches, so despite the price difference its actually more popular. In terms of 8500 vs 2500 its more complicated, especially for a watch simpleton like me. Owners of the 8500 and the 2500D seems to be uniformly happy in performance with virtually no reliability issues I have read anywhere. The 8500 is a more exciting movement as it is designed from scratch, albeit, as I have read, in conjunction with ETA engineers and many ETA designed components. The 2500 seems to be designed around the top grade version of the ETA 2892 and I feel comforted that it is based on a tried and tested design. Finally, taking all the above into account, I decided to go with the 35mm (technically the 123.10.35.20.01.002). I did look at the second hand market in a varierty of different places, but its extremely difficult (if not impossible) to find any of the recent range used. On the basis I would keep it for many years it seemed reasonable to buy new and I also managed to get a very good discount. I hope no one will tell me I missed something big! and would also be interesting to hear from any other new Constellation 35mm or 38mm owners!
Nice purchase.......... I really like the waffle/ tapestry dial. Silver markers on black dial is one of my favorite. This is my next modern Omega wish list. I am going for the 38.5 though, it fits me well as dress watch. I've got Cal 8500 black teak dial Aqua Terra at 38.5 mm and it fits me well. Congratulation..... wear in health. ps: Did I mentioned I love the waffle/ tapestry dial? I really did
Thanks. yes 38mm is more popular. It's a lovely watch. It looked a bit too big on my wrist though For this design. the "waffle" face is really unique. Just nice to look at. Looking at the aqua terra, very nice, which dial face is yours ? Interestingly Omega describes the 38.5mm aqua terra as a "mid size" watch. the constellation has more of a bracelet design so it looks ok smaller IMHO. I think the diving watches look better larger. I liked the ocean planet orange, a standout design. But the smallest size was 42mm, I could have gone for that at 38mm. best rgds
I heard the latest Connie double eagle model is not well received among watch enthusiast in Europe. But it's a hit in Asia. For me, it is beautiful. Nice proportion and modern evolution of double claw design.
Firstly, welcome to the forum, you'll find a real wealth of knowledge here! Nice choice on your Constellation - you have to make sure you get the right size for your wrist. The current trend is for larger watches, but you have to wear what you feel comfortable and happy with. The particular dial you have chosen is lovely, and is reminiscent of the Audemars Piguet Grand Tapisserie dials on their Royal Oak range. You have also made some good observations with regards to movements - the cal. 2500D is the latest version of Omega's 1st generation Co-Axial movement. This features the same optimised three level escapement that is found in the cal. 8500 (as opposed to a two level escapement in the A-C variants), and has evolved into a very solid timekeeper, and will be a great workhorse movement for quite some time. In terms of the differences between it and the cal. 8500 there are quite a few: *As you have correctly observed, the cal. 2500 is based on the ETA 2892, and heavily modified by Omega. Some would argue that with ETA being owned by the same parent company as Omega, it is an in-house movement, but I would treat it as a separate entity. The cal. 8500 was built from the ground up around the Co-Axial escapement, so it is fully optimised for it - it gets the most out of the benefits the escapement offers. Although it was designed in conjunction with ETA, it is an Omega exclusive, and will not be used by any other brands inside or outside of the Swatch Group *The cal. 2500 has a slightly lower power reserve - 48hrs vs. 60hrs in the cal. 8500 *The cal. 2500 uses a more traditional single mainspring (which holds the watch's power reserve), whilst the cal. 8500 uses a twin mainspring system. The idea behind this is a more consistent transmission of power, and eliminates timing inconsistencies near the bottom of its power reserve - single mainspring watches have a tendency to speed up when low on power. *The cal. 2500 isn't decorated to the same level as the cal. 8500, although it isn't by any means an ugly movement *The cal. 2500 uses a more traditional Nivarox hairspring (used right across the Swiss watch industry), whilst the cal. 8500 uses a Silicium hairspring. The idea behind this is that it is less susceptible to changes in temperature compared to a metallic hairspring, is completely unaffected by magnetism, and also has a better elastic memory than a metallic hairspring, meaning it can withstand sharp shocks a lot better Despite the differences, the cal. 2500 is a nice little movement, and is more compact than the cal. 8500 - it will serve you well for the lifetime of the watch Enjoy your new Constellation, and remember, we love pictures here Chris
Thank you, all fascinating information for me. I will post a picture when it comes. The constellation design is unique enough but this design face particularly caught my eye. It's altogether a quite unique watch design in an industry of many similar ones. appreciate your comments. I am busily reading all I can here. rgds
yeah, I like it. the black is easier to see then silver. Also this is the newish one with a pitted surface which is kind of special. Its the 35mm one with the 2500D. I liked the look on my wrist and its lighter. My previous watch I always take off when I am sitting at my desk, but that was ok as it was a quartz. As this is an automatic I figured I would need to keep it on more so lighter is more comfortable for me.
I tried both sizes on in an Omega boutique in Florida. I think the 35 mm version was better suited to my wrist and comfort zone, and having the co-axial escapement inside, in the multi-level form it was meant to be in, is a plus.
I think the 8500 mechanism is more exciting, as its a new build, albeit designed with ETA as well as Omega engineers. However, apart from the extra 12 hours of reserve (60 instead of 48 with the 2500D) I don't think in reality there is any advantage especially as its thicker. The 2500D is based on the best version of ETA's best movement with the escarpment replaced with a co-axial version. So a tried and tested top quality movement with a new innovation. suites me. Also saves £1,000 in the UK ... In the old days they made 30mm and 32mm for men. There is a trend for really large watches today which do not look that good on me . 35mm is already quite big IMHO
Try fishing / boating instead of this. You'll feel blessed to be back in watches once you give that up. There's a good reason there are so many jokes about boats. BOAT = Break Out Another Thousand. What are the two best days of a boat owner's life? The day he buys his boat, and the day he sells his boat. boat noun \ˈbōt\ a hole in the water that you throw money into
I tend to see this hobby as requiring big capital, not expensive. Many collectors in here have beaten SP500 and NASDAQ in term of returns in thier collection.
Cool! Congrats! My first (serious) watch was a Constellation (of their Constellation'95 collection) that I received as a graduation gift. It also has a nice structure in the dial. Although I never wear it anymore (it is very small, I think smaller than 35mm) I do like the design of this Constellation models (including yours). It is based on the 'Manhattan' design that OMEGA did in 1982 and it just evolved over time. I actually didn't pay attention to their new range, which include yours. I am surely going to check them out. However, I think I would need 38mm as I am fat. RJ
