Community Stories

Please show and help me discuss about 2652 vs 2782

Peemacgee
Posts
6,308
Likes
9,750
Caliber561 Caliber561
It's visible in the first photo. I suspect the rehaut is blocking it in the other shots.
OMEGuy OMEGuy
I suspect that's not possible.

I think it’s just a dodgy after market crystal obscuring the text.
here it is clearly refracted in the crystal

A834A608-CCFD-42E3-A281-3C8ADCE9CFF4.jpeg
 
OMEGuy
Posts
2,086
Likes
2,897
Peemacgee Peemacgee
I think it’s just a dodgy after market crystal obscuring the text.
here it is clearly refracted in the crystal

A834A608-CCFD-42E3-A281-3C8ADCE9CFF4.jpeg
Listen to your eyes...
 
Caliber561
Posts
1,567
Likes
2,677
Peemacgee Peemacgee
I think it’s just a dodgy after market crystal obscuring the text.
here it is clearly refracted in the crystal

A834A608-CCFD-42E3-A281-3C8ADCE9CFF4.jpeg
This makes sense to me. @OMEGuy you're right, the rehaut can't be blocking the swiss made because its edge is clearly visible in the photo.
 
Peemacgee
Posts
6,308
Likes
9,750
OMEGuy OMEGuy
Listen to your eyes...
That comment really doesn’t make any sense.
Regardless of whether you consider the dial original or not, you said that the SWISS MADE couldn’t be missing in the one pic you posted but still be there on others.
i was merely showing you that it is clearly there on the dial but obscured by a thick edged after market crystal.
 
OMEGuy
Posts
2,086
Likes
2,897
Peemacgee Peemacgee
That comment really doesn’t make any sense.
Regardless of whether you consider the dial original or not, you said that the SWISS MADE couldn’t be missing in the one pic you posted but still be there on others.
i was merely showing you that it is clearly there on the dial but obscured by a thick edged after market crystal.
Ok. Since I am respecting your expertise and experience, I won't continue this discussion.
 
JimInOz
Posts
17,942
Likes
37,520
OMEGuy OMEGuy
+1 👍

What I noticed when first looking at the pictures, was also that the print looks too glossy and raised, while not quite sharp.

959786-71ef73e6d4e6e407113782831487f2c0.jpg

BTW: Where is the "SWISS MADE" in this picture? Photoshopped away? 😕

It's there, you just have to look for it.

Screen Shot 2020-04-03 at 10.22.43 AM.png
 
qazwsx1
Posts
966
Likes
3,956
JimInOz JimInOz
It's there, you just have to look for it.

Screen Shot 2020-04-03 at 10.22.43 AM.png
Thank you. I add more pic try to focus this word.
27DEB8E3-5C60-433E-BDAF-D8664C5B80BA.jpeg
 
cicindela
Posts
15,048
Likes
24,057
cristos71 cristos71
Non-screw back, it must be a different ref
Yep, made a mental error 🙄, 2852
 
mondodec
Posts
843
Likes
880
AFAIK there were cross-over versions of this model, all with later serial numbers, and I've seen a few of them over the years. I believe the dial is genuine, remembering that Omega had a number of dial contractors and there were some inconsistencies in the fonts and markers between them.

Even with 14 million serial numbers, it was early days for the Constellation collection, which really didn't standardise until the advent of the 2699 and 2700, and even then different parts contractors producing cases and dials meant continuing but marginal variations.

Cheers

Desmond
 
OMEGuy
Posts
2,086
Likes
2,897
JimInOz JimInOz
It's there, you just have to look for it.

Screen Shot 2020-04-03 at 10.22.43 AM.png
Yes. I can see clearly now the rain is gone... 😎
 
qazwsx1
Posts
966
Likes
3,956
I add more pics focus on ‘SWISS MADE’ word, plus
my wrist shot in natural light.
Thanks,
D930DE18-2395-4519-BA7F-CB4532A19AA4.jpeg 443963E4-C051-43E7-B382-653DC7485D19.jpeg 9F3E66F5-4208-4286-808D-F1DA7D14BF27.jpeg
 
Peemacgee
Posts
6,308
Likes
9,750
I refer to my previous answer m'lud.....

Peemacgee Peemacgee
it is clearly there on the dial but obscured by a thick edged after market crystal.
 
JimInOz
Posts
17,942
Likes
37,520
OMEGuy OMEGuy
😕

So WTF are you on about?

Edit: PS: You are aware of the physical aberrations caused by the characteristic called refraction of light I presume?
 
OMEGuy
Posts
2,086
Likes
2,897
JimInOz JimInOz
So WTF are you on about?

Edit: PS: You are aware of the physical aberrations caused by the characteristic called refraction of light I presume?
Since both of the closeup pictures I posted above are taken from nearly the same angle, I wonder why nobody wants to see that the "SWISS MADE" was obviously "wiped away" in the first one. Even the end of the crosshair isn't visible in the first pic, while it's present in the second.

In the second picture, you can even see the "SWISS MADE" twice. On the dial and on the tension ring as well, while in the first picture it's simply not there and the area where it should be looks blurry.

Refraction of light?

I don't think so.
 
qazwsx1
Posts
966
Likes
3,956
OMEGuy OMEGuy
Since both of the closeup pictures I posted above are taken from nearly the same angle, I wonder why nobody wants to see that the "SWISS MADE" was obviously "wiped away" in the first one. Even the end of the crosshair isn't visible in the first pic, while it's present in the second.

In the second picture, you can even see the "SWISS MADE" twice. On the dial and on the tension ring as well, while in the first picture it's simply not there and the area where it should be looks blurry.

Refraction of light?

I don't think so.


can I add more pics to prove that is it the same dial??

On the left is the pics that you suspect (post yesterday)
On the right is my pic posted today.

71611C90-C565-4540-938D-EAF4F82BCD50.jpeg

Do you see some minor spot on the dial that on the same location on both pics?
I try to use different color off the arrow.

thanks,
 
Peemacgee
Posts
6,308
Likes
9,750
OMEGuy OMEGuy
Since both of the closeup pictures I posted above are taken from nearly the same angle, .

I think the clue is in your comment
(by chance, the two pics the OP posted while I was typing show the slight angle difference perfectly)

OMEGuy OMEGuy
I wonder why nobody wants to see that the "SWISS MADE" was obviously "wiped away" in the first one.

I have no dog in this fight ( or a one with a bone 😉) but the OP has no reason to try to bamboozle the Forum with doctored pics.
He's a collector just like everyone else here - he's just acquired the watch and is not trying to sell it, and is simply trying to get comments on his new watch from more seasoned collectors.

OMEGuy OMEGuy
Even the end of the crosshair isn't visible in the first pic, while it's present in the second.

As it happens it is there, which, perversely, supports your theory more than decries it -but it just goes to show that anomalies due to the refraction of the edge of a crystal do happen in photos.
 
JimInOz
Posts
17,942
Likes
37,520
OMEGuy OMEGuy
....... nearly the same angle, ................



Nearly.

In a phase of my previous life, "nearly" mean't the difference between going home for dinner, or going home in a plastic bag.

Quite a lot of difference in this case, although the principle is the same.

A minute difference in the angle of observance can either accentuate or attenuate the angle of refraction, therefore causing a difference in the perceived image.
 
OMEGuy
Posts
2,086
Likes
2,897
Unbelievable and unvaluable insights here. 👍
Edited:
 
9 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...