Photography 101- Rolex 1680

[alligoat]

Is this real or is it Memorex?

[Cats]

I'm certainly not an expert but i like the dial and hands very much.

Could be the photo but i see a strange shape of the lower crown guards.

Carpe Diem

Cats

[kbh]

If it's guessing game, I'll guess genuine.

If it's a rep please tell me where to get one.

[trailboss]

Date font and cyclops look crappy.

LOL @ obscure Jello Biafra reference.

Col.

[panerai153]

I agree with trailboss, something is weird about the cyclops. the longer you look at it, the worse it appears. IS the watch tilted forward a little? The cyclops looks like it isn't centered over the date window, and the numbers look fuzzy, like ink bleed?

Just went back and looked at a photo of a 1680 in Skeet & Urul.It looks like the cyclops on this watch is too big. the genuine size is 2 ticks above the 3 and 2 ticks below. this one is 2 1/2 above and below. Not much, but when you make the photo 5X lifesize it really shows.

Arthur

[alligoat]

What about this one? Any similarities in the dial??

[kbh]

Here's (another) gen to compare it to.

[slickdick]

Its a nice gen Polfy!

[alligoat]

Nice one kbh,

Here's a 4th one

[JoJo35]

What about this one? Any similarities in the dial??

Dial is totally different from the first one

[panerai153]

jojo,

How about giving some of us neophytes a quick tutorial on the differences? I saved the two photos, put them side by side, and I can't see anything outside of the patina. I would really like to know, and I'm sure there are lots of others who, like me, just can't pick up the subtle differences.

Thanks

Arthur

[kbh]

Nice one kbh,

Here's a 4th one

All right, the only thing I see is a slight difference in the length of the second hand from your first picture.

On the first picture the CGs look a little smaller. Seems still within Rolex's rather wide tolerances though. Also the crown looks a little larger, another item than can often be changed at the RSC when being serviced.

I think the cyclops is OK. Just the picture makes it look funny.

So when you gonna tell us?

[alligoat]

Ok, mine is a 78, 5.8mil Beyeler dial. Silver date wheel, service crystal, 703 crown and short seconds hand?? Second is a 5.6mil, same L in Rolex left of center of crown, c in chronometer left of = above. Other than the lume, it's the same dial print. KBH's dial is the same vintage- same L and c arrangement. 4th dial is maybe earlier, don't know. L is centered, = and c are in line. Just more of Rolex's quirks- different dial mfrs.

Sorry about the photo, it is Photo 101, I'm still struggling. Cyclops and cg's are OK for a 30 yr old watch- lugs are polished, it's on a 93150 w/ 580 end pieces. My first gen Rolex back in 2005/6.

[gplracer]

Nice watch! I really like it.

[kbh]

Since one dial is .2mm larger, that would account for the appearance of a smaller second hand.

Do you still have the watch? It's a beauty.

[alligoat]

kbh, it's not .2mm larger, it's 200,000 later in SN. 5,8xx,xxx vs the yellow lume dial being 5,6xx,xxx. Both are from around 1978. I still have the watch, but I don't wear it as much as my 16800's, I'm just too tough on those plastic crystals. The second hand was replaced during service 3-4 yrs ago, the lume fell out. I also had a new insert put in, the old one kept falling out. The insert is gen, but I don't know about the seconds hand.

[alligoat]

Here's another 1680, 5,11x,xxx SN. This dial also has the centered L and the c in chronometer under the =.