HauteHippie

Browse the Watch Repair & Upgrade section a little. We've been talking about AR and cyclopes over there a wee bit.

If the pearl really is recessed, and I'm not so sure it is compared to the gen, then maybe it would be possible to shave some material off the underside of the bezel insert so that it sits lower inside the bezel and effective gives the pearl a less recessed position....

Nice post. Don't do this on an AR coated crystal though.

It is.

Like I said, a group of crystals have already been sent to the coating company. So, we'll start over with a new group of crystals for the next run. The magic number is 20 and the price is $40 USD each.

It has been mostly done for a while. I just need a new set of hands. With the current hands it is too silly looking to show photos. Got any spare MBW sub hands Tribal?

You lazy. Yea right!!!! But I do agree that on the 1665 they look good enough as is.

FYI the current lot of crystals getting AR coated have already been shipped to the coater. The next run will hopefully take place next month some time.

There are European residents participating in our group AR now. For what it's worth...

Looking forward to hearing the cause of this one....... Weird.

6-8 oz is good strap thickness IMO. That's about 2mm, so the strap would come out to about 4 to 4.4 mm in thickness. No internal filler needed. The straps with internal fillers tend to be stiffer and less comfortable. For example, HKTan straps are the stiffest I own. The greg straps appear to use an internal filler, but for some reason are able to remain pliable and comfortable. But the most comfortable straps I've got are the simple fold-over such as those from vintagerstraps.com. Light weight leathers just don't do the job. Also, the amount of labor necessary to build a strap with filler is probably almost double.

Soon, and here's more info: http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?s=&amp...st&p=153033

Two thumbs up. Way up!! I can't wait to see the final product.

The photos you show below are focused just fine, but the aperture is too big (f-stop number too small) resulting in a shallow depth of field (Eddie Lee syndrome). For example, in the 2nd picture, the 600m/2000ft appears to be your focus point - and it is in focus. You need to stop down 3-4 stops I would say and then things should look better. In fact, for these types of shots from a tripod, there should be no reason to shoot at anything other than f/22 - unless you want to for some reason. So go into aperture priority mode (for starters), dial up f/22, take some more shots, and then report back.

OK, and you know all too well that your 16610 is no longer available.

Bertie, I'm sure there are exceptions, but I believe A series PAMs had 6mm cyclopes.

I've been toying with the idea of making a few straps myself. I've recently found some really nice 6-8 oz hides that would make gorgeous straps... Maybe I'll stop into one of these stores and check it out.

Here is a partial list of comma countries: Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada (French-speaking), Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Chile, Colombia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Estonia, Faroes, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Greenland, Hungary, Indonesia, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg (uses both separators officially), Macedonia, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Paraguay, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, South Africa (officially, but decimal point is commonly used in business), Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, Uruguay, Venezuela, Vietnam, Zimbabwe Woops, I just crapped on my own thread.

And here are a few.... Plenty more where these came from! I've been getting PMs, and to answer everyone - I'd really like to test fit these before shipping to anyone. Unfortunately I don't have a suitable watch on which to mount one of these in my hands at the moment so I'm trying to work something out... As soon as I do, I'll fill your orders. I can say right now that I'm quite happy with what I see when simply placing one of these cyclopes on top of a crystal. Distortion looks to be as well managed as I could hope for, and the magnification looks very good. As for the final specs, here you go: Diameter: 6.75 (6,75 to non USA members) mm. Thickness: ~1.22 mm Material: Sapphire AR Coating: None Magnification: 1.55x - 1.7x depending on rehaut The final diameter came up a hair under what I had originally intended. Without going into technical details, I ran up against an edge thickness requirement that became more stringent half way through production. So I had to make some adjustments. In order to not appreciably increase the total thickness or decrease the magnification strength of these lenses, I had to sacrifice a little in the way of diameter. Nevertheless, I feel these lenses are sized very appropriately. Stay tuned...

Mineral crystals are not a problem. The only potential problem will be if we try to coat a sapphire crystal that has a mineral cyclops attached, or mineral cyrstal that has a sapphire cyclops attached. In these cases we might see Newton's rings, so it is going to be best to ensure that the cyclops and the crystal are of the same material. More info on Newton's rings here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_rings

The Bergeon holders I bought off EBay work fine. They're stamped with Bergeon part numbers and came in the familiar Bergeon packaging. I suppose they could be fakes, though I guess I wouldn't know the difference.

I really like that white/silverish dial AP ROO... Very nice!

All non-VIPs who have been around for more than a couple months really ought to step up to the plate here. There's no such thing as a free lunch. So if you've taken your test drive and have enjoyed the ride, then by all means, do your duty to give back and help keep a good thing going!!