I've had this a while now and it's always had a plain glass on it. Recently been thinking about returning it to standard configuration with a cyclops. What's the general opinion?
I used to dislike the Cyclops....now I love it, it's like a beauty mark. Don't get me wrong the dial is great with or without it, but there are plenty of dials without cyclops and to me it's an iconic part of the Tudor and Rolex lines. So my opinion is yes, restore the cyclops.
It looks really weird to me w/o the cyclops. Actually the dial looks different as well. Are you sure it's authentic? I ask because I own one I purchased new in 1978. Yours might just be newer than mine and they made a few tweaks.
It looks really weird to me w/o the cyclops. Actually the dial looks different as well. Are you sure it's authentic? I ask because I own one I purchased new in 1978. Yours might just be newer than mine and they made a few tweaks.
Mines a 9411/0 which were produced in 1975/76. Maybe yours is a later model.
No Cyclops for me. I don't like date windows, and I especially don't like cyclops. IMO, this one looks better without cyclops.
But it's not about me, it all depends on what YOU like. If you think you're more likely to wear it, and if it makes it more 'authentic' to its origins, then go for it!
Cyclops. For me it's always the 127 crystal on the sub with date. The date window is a little too small to see without it.
For the non date, a super dome.