One of those, Should I be concerned about this?

[Spectre38]

You all are just killing me.

You're all just enablers, allowing me to continue my ridiculous post.. Thanks ! It just makes me smile.

[Wcdhtwn]

I think you should break out the electron microscope to provide unarguable evidence to Rolex.

[Lithographica]

Originally Posted by Spectre38

Whoa... it's not Nikon, but it sounds like somebody doesn't like Nikon. Just going by your "Lithographica" name... youre what... An ASML guy? EVG? SUSS? Canon, Ultratech?

My PI had a Nikon stereo microscope in her lab and the software was infuriating. Crashes, lag, lost settings, etc... It's a wonder I made it through grad school without tossing the damn PC out the window! The actual scope was nice though lol

[aayates]

Let's get the folks with scanning electron microscopes or similar to spell out ROLEX in single Rolesor molecules. Then I will feel we've seen all the imperfections...

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by Spectre38

So while at work I couldn't help but place my 16710 under the microscope and I found something a bit concerning... I assume the lettering under Rolex, where it reads Oyster Perpetual are supposed to be 600 μm... But as you can see, it's not.

I may just let it slide...

We're just lucky I can't fit a watch in my SEMs. My real question if how did you calibrate your microscope?

[nigelUK]

Get a Grand Seiko . .

if you want electron microscope accuracy

(someone normally chimes in with the 'get a Grand seiko' line at this point)

[fsprow]

I believe either the watch or the microscope has been magnetized. Or fakes.

[toolr]

What’s your concern?