Dr No
[Moderator Omega - Wristscan]
37640
The aesthetics of the crown is turning out to be an issue. If the design is driven . . .
. . . by functional requirements - i e, more conducive operationally under water - then well and good.
From my layman's perspective, though, the design comes off as aesthetically odd. Other details - open 6 and 9, lollipop seconds, small triangle - are rooted in classic SM300 references, but the crown is a departure.
Best,
Art
What are your thoughts on the new Seamaster 300?
I like the sandwich dial, the lollipop seconds hand, the minimal writing on the dial, and the updated bracelet. The only thing that seems off is the crown. But, overall, I think it’s a nice upgrade. Still wearing my Trilogy Seamaster 300 this week: ...
I look
to the leather strap version and blue dial. I adore that watch, and i want it.
I think it's a great upgrade!
It turned a watch I'd decided I wasn't interested in into... a watch I'm interested in.
+1
Not a fan of the hour hand nor of numerals in general but find myself thinking this watch "as a whole" is very appealing. Cheers Marc
Love the sandwich dial, love the faux patina (I know, most hate it).
And the lollipop too. And what about the “bronze” version. That looks super interesting too. 41mm puts these outside my interest though.
I used to own the earlier version.
The overall look of the earlier version is pleasing. By owning and wearing it, I have found: 1. the back clasp could be trimmed down a little. 2. the metal ring inside the ceramic bezel can get dents if you are not careful. That means the bezel does not p...
Love it
The sandwich dial is gorgeous. I like the depth of this technique. Honestly I like the usefulness of a date function, and wish this version had a date window at 6 o’clock. I know it distracts from the “purity” of the design but function comes before form,...
I’m more into its predecessor but overall one of the greatest watch designs.
And one of the better reincarnations. I was close pulling the trigger multiple times but the fauxtina just puts me off.
Reading all these comments shows how
particular we all are, nitpicking here, finding fault or beauty there. Great fun! Cheers Marc
The shape of the indices doesn't bother me at all and
I can even "unsee" the pretty funny marshmallow image you came up with, Nicolas, whereas I don't like the crown but don't take offense aesthetically. Those renders are notoriously terrible anyway and this release makes me want to see the watch in the meta...
Omega needs to stop releasing their pieces using artist renditions.
Utilize professional photographers (Henrik???) to help show the true character of their pieces. When Omega released the 1948 Seamaster, those renditions did nothing for me. Once I started seeing live wrist shots (e.g. from Nicolas), I fell in love!
I have an older titanium version and I love it. Accuracy compared to some other Omegas I own of that era is good, +3 pre day. The overall asthetics are very nice, The crown is better than
the new one. The look of the bezel on the new one is different but very nice looking. It's inner steel section may accumulate "patina". Happy to own the one I have but would also be happy to own the new version. Omega continues to make sweet watches! ...
I do like many things about this watch,but....
...the faux lumina is a show stopper to me.
Back to basics??
Somehow the watch now looks more like the original versions. Whilst the color scheme reminds me of the Railmaster. I’m plus and minus on this update. The hands and bracelet are great. Color not so much in my humble view
The aesthetics of the crown is turning out to be an issue. If the design is driven . . .
. . . by functional requirements - i e, more conducive operationally under water - then well and good. From my layman's perspective, though, the design comes off as aesthetically odd. Other details - open 6 and 9, lollipop seconds, small triangle - are ro...