ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
|
6 February 2015, 03:59 AM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 229
|
Another cyclops thread
Hey Folks,
Sorry for adding to the threads about cyclops magnification concern, but i'm trying to be proactive in this purchase rather than reactive. My dealer has two blnr's in stock that she is offering at a good discount. The place is an hour from my work and I want to stop by, but wanted to show pics of the two different watches she sent me. Any issues with the magnification on either one-or reason to chose one over the other? I'm leaning towards the one with the"8" in the date window due to the cyclops looking straighter I guess and the crown on the reheat being more centered. I'm not saying that these things should be an issue for anyone, but if having a choice, I might as well take things into consideration. Truly, thanks in advance. JP |
6 February 2015, 04:10 AM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: NYC / Milan
Watch: 6263
Posts: 3,938
|
both seem normal to me at least
|
6 February 2015, 04:13 AM | #3 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: New Mexico
Watch: Seiko #SRK047
Posts: 34,460
|
The camera angles are different, so that much is hard to discern from the photo, but you should definitely pick the one that pleases you most.
__________________
JJ Inaugural TRF $50 Watch Challenge Winner |
6 February 2015, 04:13 AM | #4 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: UK
Watch: RLX
Posts: 437
|
Agree. Both are fine.
|
6 February 2015, 04:25 AM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 5
|
Different camera angles always messed with the cyclops/date centering. IMO it's very rare to see a crooked cyclops on the newer style Rolex models. That being said, the one on top does seem to be slightly straighter than the second one. Most likely camera angles though.
|
6 February 2015, 04:32 AM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: London
Posts: 1,221
|
The cyclops with the three looks crooked to me also. Go for the '8' date one.
|
6 February 2015, 04:46 AM | #7 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Real Name: Richard
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Watch: TT DJ
Posts: 4,456
|
Quote:
Best to decide once you can see them in person...
__________________
Today, I believe my jurisdiction ends here... Lug Hole Lover® |
|
6 February 2015, 05:01 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: London
Posts: 1,221
|
Maybe, but since I've seen quite a few crooked cyclops it's most probably because it is. And even if the camera angle is off the date window should be parallel to the edge of the cyclops... I think anyway.
|
6 February 2015, 04:54 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2014
Real Name: Mitch
Location: CONUS
Watch: DSSD and others
Posts: 1,186
|
Looks like camera angle...mag looks good at 2.5x
|
6 February 2015, 05:02 AM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: CA
Watch: me watch you
Posts: 461
|
Seems like normal magnification.
__________________
116610LVc 1803 Wideboy 1680 Red MKIV |
6 February 2015, 05:27 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Earth
Watch: es out for watches
Posts: 85
|
The "3" looks crooked. Go with the "8"...With close to a million watches produced each year these things can happen
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Tempus Fugit - Carpe Diem - Memento Mori! |
6 February 2015, 05:38 AM | #12 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2012
Real Name: John
Location: Manassas,Virginia
Watch: Ol'Bluesy & Hulk
Posts: 2,871
|
Both have the correct magnification. Either one is fine.
|
6 February 2015, 05:43 AM | #13 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wisconsin
Watch: 116622 YM Blue
Posts: 505
|
Use a loupe to inspect both watches........
__________________
Life is filled with choices......and consequences! 2019 Sky-Dweller Giveaway 2019 GMT CHNR Giveaway 2019 DEEPSEA Giveaway 2018 Rolex Red SD43 Giveaway 2018 Bond Submariner Giveaway 2020 Rolex + Tudor GMT Giveaway 2020 Rolex Submariner Giveaway |
6 February 2015, 05:47 AM | #14 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Wales UK
Watch: Cosmograph Daytona
Posts: 70
|
Both look fine.
|
6 February 2015, 05:48 AM | #15 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Real Name: Tom
Location: Long Island NY
Watch: me sell games
Posts: 1,898
|
looks good to me
|
6 February 2015, 05:49 AM | #16 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 6,625
|
They seem normal but I like the number 8 better than the number 3
|
6 February 2015, 06:40 AM | #17 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 229
|
Quick, helpful advice! Thanks guys!!!
|
6 February 2015, 08:13 AM | #18 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 229
|
Bonus question-I have one dealer offering new for $8100 and this one new for $8300 which includes an extra 2 years of warranty, which they state will go through Rolex. Would make no sense to not pay the extra $200 for the warranty I'm thinking? Both no tax
|
6 February 2015, 09:58 AM | #19 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Sydney, Australia
Watch: ing the detectives
Posts: 3,745
|
Both are fine. Camera angle makes the '3' look crooked.
|
6 February 2015, 10:10 AM | #20 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Real Name: Eddie
Location: Australia
Watch: A few.
Posts: 37,533
|
Both look ok.
__________________
E |
6 February 2015, 10:34 AM | #21 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: LA
Watch: Rolex(4),15400
Posts: 1,105
|
Return it all!
|
6 February 2015, 11:21 AM | #22 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: usa
Posts: 19,537
|
83 hundo, no brainer for two more years
|
6 February 2015, 11:51 AM | #23 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 16
|
I'd be interested in seeing a normal 2.5 compared to a lesser magnification one.
I'm not sure if mine is correct or not and I can't go to any AD's for a while. I have a DateJust II and I think it is ok but not sure. I didn't know of this issue when I purchased it a month ago Larry |
6 February 2015, 07:55 PM | #24 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Close to Rolex AD
Posts: 3,474
|
I have an exact watch but don't remember about these dates. I have another watch with cyclops, DJ II, some numbers seem like misaligned but I think it's due to double digits vs singular digits.
For instance: 6 exactly sits in the middle equal space between left and right 27 is a different story, 7 by microns of microns look bigger than 2 Don't let these bother you
__________________
|
6 February 2015, 07:55 PM | #25 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Real Name: Hendricks
Location: USA
Watch: 116600
Posts: 826
|
Gotta see it in person .. But from the pictures both looks fine . Angle of the shot can be the reason why
|
6 February 2015, 11:05 PM | #26 |
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Real Name: Travis
Location: FL / NYC
Watch: Yes..
Posts: 33,493
|
Mag is good on both.
I also think it's the camera angle but the cyclops with the "3" appears slightly crooked. Just go with the "8". |
7 February 2015, 03:00 AM | #27 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 229
|
Thanks everyone. Cyclopes have always looked crooked to me when looking at close up photos. Are they supposed to be parallel to the date window? If I look at the "8" photo even that looks a little off if you apply a straight line over it. Strange....
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.