TeeJay Posted August 14, 2007 Report Share Posted August 14, 2007 (edited) At last, I have both my SMPs together for comparison. They are so similar, yet so different. Do I have a favorite? Hard to say as there are aspects I like about one which the other does not have, and they all cancel each other out... A quick summary: 2531.80 The first Omega worn by James Bond (okay, the first was the quartz version, but that's a minor detail.) I've read a review where the author criticized the color choice as not being 'serious', and claimed that Bond would actually have chosen a 2254.50 instead. Personally, I disagree for two reasons. 1. Sure, the blue color might not be black, but it is certainly elegant and serious. In low light, it looks black, in direct light, it is a gorgeous blue. Way more interesting than black... 2. Bond never chose his watch at all, he was issued them from Q Branch, irrespective of his own tastes, so no more of this 'Bond would have chosen this or that' nonsense... Anyway, moving on The dial markers of the 2531.80 are larger and more easily read, so slightly more functional, and, as that was the original design, it remains something of a personal favorite. 2220.80 The updated Omega worn by Daniel Craig in Casino Royale. This watch is as different from it's predecessor as it is similar... The dial markers are slightly smaller, but, with the metallic surrounds, slightly more elegant and eye-catching (not in a functional sense of the word eye-catching). The red Seamaster text below the Omega text is probably one of those love/hate details. I did not expect to like the watch (being such a fan of the 2531.80) but it immediately 'won me over' Please note, this only applies to my specific rep of the 2220.80. The gen 2220.80 has the Omega Logo, and Omega Text as metal dial attachments, which I think utterly ruin and cheapen the dial. I would never prefer that detail over the printed text of the 2531.80, or my 'flawed' rep... Both watches are nice, although each will have it's own fans for different reasons. In terms of my own watches, the 2531.80 has had it's factory bezel insert substituted for the replacement insert I was sent for the 2220.80 (due to the accidental damage the '3' numeral) as I felt that with a printing flaw on the 'triangle', and a minor scuff by the '51' marker, it was more noticeably in need of the new insert than the 2220.80, where the damage is much less visible than the pictures suggest. The 2220.80 had a clasp with stronger springs than the 2531.80, so I swapped those round so the watch which will get worn more will have the better quality clasp. My own mental classifications of them, are: 2531.80 - Everyday version 2220.80 - Smart version Time for some photos... Edited August 14, 2007 by TeeJay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victoria Posted August 14, 2007 Report Share Posted August 14, 2007 The first Omega worn by James Bond (okay, the first was the quartz version, but that's a minor detail.) I've read a review where the author criticized the color choice as not being 'serious', and claimed that Bond would actually have chosen a 2254.50 instead. Personally, I disagree for two reasons. 1. Sure, the blue color might not be black, but it is certainly elegant and serious. In low light, it looks black, in direct light, it is a gorgeous blue. Way more interesting than black... Hmm, now that you put it that way, I think I agree with you, TeeJay. 2. Bond never chose his watch at all, he was issued them from Q Branch, irrespective of his own tastes, so no more of this 'Bond would have chosen this or that' nonsense... This one is more problematic because though certainly Q Branch would issue him with gadgetry, and the like, which wouldn't take his tastes into account, after a while, they must've realised they had to coddle him more than the other agents, because of the aura he projected was extra smooth and elegant. Certainly I can see them tailoring certain pieces to fit this aura. Looking at them carefully, I choose the one to right as being more impressive and more 007ish. The first one looks like an older man's version of the SMP, with a weightier, more classic, more "solid", but also duller feel. Did I just make more enemies with that statement? Great review, TJ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted August 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 14, 2007 Hmm, now that you put it that way, I think I agree with you, TeeJay. This is the thing, initially, I thought that 'black watches' were the way to go in terms of smart, but, the coloring of the bezels of the SMPs showed me differently This one is more problematic because though certainly Q Branch would issue him with gadgetry, and the like, which wouldn't take his tastes into account, after a while, they must've realised they had to coddle him more than the other agents, because of the aura he projected was extra smooth and elegant. Ahh, but not so... Think about in Dr.No when he was forced to trade in his existing gun for the Walther PPK against his own preferences (the novel makes it much clearer that he was obeying an order he disliked) Also, in GoldenEye, 006 wore the exact same watch as 007. It was only later, when Bond was issued with 'the new model', that they were different. (Had 006 remaine a loyal agent, he would undoubtably received 'the new model' as well.) Looking at them carefully, I choose the one to right as being more impressive and more 007ish. The first one looks like an older man's version of the SMP, with a weightier, more classic, more "solid", but also duller feel. Did I just make more enemies with that statement? Great review, TJ! No enemies at all, and I totally agree with your opinion between the two. In a way, it's like comparing the dial of a contemporary Submariner (raised markers) to the dial of an older model Submariner or Sea-Dweller (with the flat, white markers). In terms of 'an older man's version', I would view that as the 'older man' having bought the watch new a decade ago, where the younger man has had to purchase the most up to date version. In terms of overall favorites, I think the 2220.80 is the more elegant and visually appealing of the two, but my personal preference is for the 2531.80. As for review, wait till I get my 45mm Planet Ocean back from being regulated and waterproofed... Then I'll be writing a comparitive review of 'the Bond watches', aka the Sub, the SMP, and the PO, in the same manner as my review on the VC Overseas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bandit_99 Posted August 15, 2007 Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 This is the thing, initially, I thought that 'black watches' were the way to go in terms of smart, but, the coloring of the bezels of the SMPs showed me differently TeeJay, I couldn't have said it better. When I started looking at reps, it was all about the black. When I finally purchased a few, I have yet to buy a black one- although, the black UPO on a black strap has made it to my list. However, the blue IMO makes the best looking watch for my taste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted August 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 TeeJay, I couldn't have said it better. When I started looking at reps, it was all about the black. When I finally purchased a few, I have yet to buy a black one- although, the black UPO on a black strap has made it to my list. However, the blue IMO makes the best looking watch for my taste. I don't think there's much in the watch world that can top the Planet Ocean, as that is just a seriously nice watch. That said, it is definitely more towards the 'rugged and functional' end of the scale than 'smart' (Sure, it can 'pass' as a smart watch when worn on an SS bracelet, but if it was really 'smart', Bond wouldn't have swapped to the SMP to go to the casino ) Personally, I think the SMP is one of those watches which everyone should have in their collection, and, rep or gen, I rate it higher than the Submariner as it as a better engineered clasp, larger hands, larger markers, and larger hands, so generally easier to read Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corgi Posted August 15, 2007 Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 I have it GMT version.. very slick watch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted August 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 I have it GMT version.. very slick watch For some reason, I'm not so keen on this specific model in GMT, as the numerals are on the dial, where as on 'the other' SMPs, the GMT numbers are on the bezel insert, which personally, I think a ) makes it easier to adjust the 'second time zone', and b ) creates more of a 'visual difference' between the standard version of a watch and the GMT version (be it Omega, Rolex or even Panerai) That's just my own feeling though. Either way, the SMPs are awesome watches, way nicer than Rolexes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastDiplomat Posted August 15, 2007 Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 Thanks for posting these side-by-side shots, TeeJay. Now I'm even more inclined to pick up a 2220.80 rep. As I've mentioned to you before, I've found one with the 3 o'clock marker and the correct Omega logo (which I know you don't prefer, heh). But I haven't seen any reviews of it online so far, so I'm left debating whether or not to drop the change on it and be the first to review it for others. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. I definitely like the way the wave pattern stands out on the 2220.80 compared to the 2531.80 rep. But will my 2531.80 be jealous of its younger sibling? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeeJay Posted August 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2007 Thanks for posting these side-by-side shots, TeeJay. Now I'm even more inclined to pick up a 2220.80 rep. As I've mentioned to you before, I've found one with the 3 o'clock marker and the correct Omega logo (which I know you don't prefer, heh). But I haven't seen any reviews of it online so far, so I'm left debating whether or not to drop the change on it and be the first to review it for others. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. I definitely like the way the wave pattern stands out on the 2220.80 compared to the 2531.80 rep. But will my 2531.80 be jealous of its younger sibling? Indeed, the one you found really was a very nice rep. I'd be happy with the correct 3 marker, but I just can't stand the joined letters of the Omega text, which is why I prefer this less perfect version as it has printed text instead. With regards the depth of the wave pattern, without comparing two gen SMPs, I wouldn't like to say for sure that they are supposed to be identical, or if the 2220.80 is supposed to have a stronger pattern than the 2531.80 (as in intentional design improvement) The pattern on my 2531.80 is quite noticeable with the naked eye, it just doesn't capture so well on camera... Glad you liked the side-by-side shots though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.