# Comparison Review: Omega AT 8500 vs. Rolex Datejust



## tfar

This is a comparison review between the Omega Seamaster Aqua Terra 8500 Co-Axial and the Datejust/OP series. It is posted here to avoid biases and bickering in the respective brand fora and to give it good exposure for the benefit of those who seek info on the subject. The Review section of WUS seems to get not so much traffic, unfortunately.

Let's start with some pics of similar looking watches.









Shamelessly lifted from budubub. :thanks









Thanks, Amazon.

I own the Omega and I own an Explorer I as well as a Sea Dweller and have had more than enough time to familiarize myself with the Datejust features and characteristics.

Why is it important to compare these two watches? Two reasons. First, both watches are meant to be able to serve a man or a woman as a "one-watch" for all their life. They are among the very rare watches that will go from beach to boardroom or even ballroom without a glitch. They both have achieved a near perfect balance of sporty and elegant and they have very similar features and even sizes. Thus they are direct competitors. Second, Rolex has stood without a challenge to the crown for a good 30 years or even more. This particular watch has the stuff it takes to set an end (Omega is the last letter of the Greek alphabet) to the crown's story.

I have hence structured the comparison in three parts. Things that _I find_ the Omega has to its advantage, things where _I find_ the Rolex wins and issues that can easily swing one way or another. I hope you find my outlook on things fair and equitable. I think it is, as I have nothing to gain from being biased against my own decisions.

You can see excellent pictures of the Omega clicking the link below and I will post the obligatory wrist shot once I get good light.
https://www.watchuseek.com/f20/aqua-terra-teck-231-10-39-21-02-001-a-329901.html

Enjoy!

*Advantage Omega AT 8500*

The Omega has the longer power reserve and a two barrel movement. 60 hours (62h have been reported) versus 50h for the Rolex.

Both watches are COSC but Omega is said to now regulate their watches to a 4 second range. I have not heard of an Aqua Terra running worse than +2 per day. But I have heard and owned Rolexes running worse. I do know that Rolexes can also run close to zero but it would seem that Omega is leading by a nose length in the accuracy department.

The independent hour hand is a clear advantage for the traveler. No more stopping the movement to set the time.

The same goes for the really easy and quick date change via the hour hand jump. This feature works better in reality than I thought it would. And the date can be changed forward AND backward.

The Omega does have a 50% higher WR rating at 150m despite it's crystal back. The back is screw-in by the way.

The Omega also has a 50% longer warranty for three instead of two years. This even applies when bought grey.

It is a "fancy feature" the Rolex lacks. It makes sense because the Rolex 3135 movement is nothing big to look at. The AT 8500 movement clearly has the nicer finish. World's first rounded Geneva stripes all over the bridges and rotor, blued screws, beautifully colored jewels, quite a few chamfered and polished edges, red inlaid engravings. Really, for an industrially produced movement this is probably as good as it gets.

Even the exterior finish is at least in the same class if not better than Rolex. For example the crown has alternating polished and matte ridges and the Omega symbol sits polished on a matte background. The hands and markers are white gold, too, but on the Omega they also play with the light through polished and brushed surfaces and chamfered edges. Very detailed and intricate. The teck dial, inspired by teak planks on a boat deck, is at least as elaborate as anything that can be found on a Datejust without going nuts with diamonds. The case sides are brushed, which makes wonderful sense. These are the surfaces that are most prone to scratches and on a brushed surface it's much easier to get them out yourself. Easy everyday maintenance is a clear advantage in my book.

The crown is easier to grasp and turn because it is bigger and offers a better grip.

At the same time it is better protected because it screws down half-way into the case. Integrated crown guards so to say. Cool.

Things look similar for the crystal. It doesn't protrude as much over the bezel as on the Rolex and has thus less exposure to chipping.
It is also domed and AR coated from both sides, which results in better readability. From certain angles you really think there is no crystal.

The bracelet and it's nicely integrated double deployant clasp are on one level with the new Jubilee bracelet but more elegant than the Oyster bracelet and clasp and at least as secure but more secure than the Jubilee. Center AND end links are solid. The full bracelet is brushed except the polished sides. That makes it much easier to maintain a finish yourself as opposed to the polished center links in the Rolex models.

The movement is groundbreaking for Omega and for watch making. It is the first really new and innovative "workhorse" movement from anyone in years. It is conceived in-house with the help of watch making legend George Daniels and production is supposed to be transferred to Omega from ETA soon. This will make it a complete in-house movement. The machinery and standards of production up to 1/1000 of a millimeter set a new level for industrial production. The co-axial escapement is supposed to prolong the service interval. If this turns out to be true it will be a clear advantage. Other horological details are at the same level as the 3135 and even the new updated version of it, once the Silicon hairpspring is used. You can already get that in the ladies' model and the Aqua Terra Annual calendar. While the movement has more power reserve and more torque it is also flatter by a little bit which is quite an achievement. This flatness doesn't however translate to a thinner watch. I presume that's because of the sculpted dial and indices and the display back. Still the proportions are spot on.

There is more lume on average than on the Datejust series. This makes for better readability at night. But the hour hand is only lumed at the tip which needs some getting used to.

Not everybody has one (yet). Personally, I find this a great advantage. While the Datejust is an icon and has deserved its crown, it has also become really common. Given that Omegas production numbers are lower, I suppose the AT will never be as common as the DJ.

The Omega, finally, is undeniably the less expensive watch - a clear advantage for me, especially in light of its accomplishments and how it compares to the Rolex DJ. It is at least as good or better but costs between 15 and 50 per cent less than the Rolex, depending on discounts and models.

Now let's see how the old Rolex stacks up against the young kid on the block (Omega is the older brand, btw).

*Advantage Rolex Datejust*

First and foremost, the brand's prestige and recognition is not easily topped and clearly stands above Omega. No flames please!

The Rolex movement has proven reliability and accuracy records and is a very fine, rather high-end movement, that is industrially produced in-house. The new Omega Cal. 8500 has the potential to unseat the 3135 but it will have to prove its meddle first. I'm not so sure for example how the tiny tolerance co-axial escapement will respond to shocks. I haven't heard anyone reporting of failures yet but we'll have to see. I give the 3135 the benefit of doubt.

The DJ is an iconic design, there is no way around it. It also has one more size variation to choose from and sheer countless bezel, dial and bracelet combos available. OTOH, this also makes it easy for the specialists to pick combos that really look bad.

It will be much easier to find a good choice of 20mm lug size leather straps for the Rolex than 19mm straps for the Omega.

Not all versions have great lume on the DJ. But if it has lume, it has lume also along the hour hand. I think I prefer that to only the lumed tip on the AT.

The DJ has a quick-set date. Yes, it is quicker than the AT method but not by much and it only moves in one direction.

The jump date on the Rolex is more instantaneous. It really snaps. On the AT it seems it first moves a little bit and then it snaps.

The 36mm version is flatter than the 38.5mm version on the AT. Personally, I like that.

Due to the slightly slower beat rate, the second sweep is not quite as smooth on the Omega.

The new Rolex clasp style, while bigger than the AT clasp, has more micro-adjustments and the Easy Link system. So you have to choose between elegant on the AT and practical on the DJ for the Oyster. If you choose the new Jubilee, the Jubilee will be even more elegant but the Omega more secure.

The shine and bling of a fresh Rolex is amazing and it clearly stands out against the Omega on this point which is much more subdued. I guess that's not a clear advantage for the Rolex but for some people it might be. I like both, so I gave them both a "+" on that issue. This is mostly due to the 904L steel which achieves a higher polish and is 3x more expensive. BTW, that translates to about $4 more of material cost, if that.

The Rolex will probably have the higher resale value but it also has a much higher entry price. If we look at resale value as percentage of purchase price the two might not be too far apart. But probably Rolex gets the point here.

We see that most Rolex advantages aren't as clear-cut as the Omega advantages already. Let's get to the issues that can really swing both ways or are matters of taste.

*Undecided*

The display back on the Omega is more susceptible to breakage than the Rolex steel back but it is less susceptible to scratches that occur far more often and easily than breakage. I think it's also esthetically superior and it still provides superior WR rating.

Loupe or no loupe? That is the question.

DJ 36mm version a bit small for many today but Datejust 2 just looks terribly proportioned, whereas both AT versions look well balanced and it just depends on your wrist size and preference which one you choose.

Design that everyone will recognize on the Rolex. Some think that's good, others would like something more discreet. The branding is particularly discreet on the silver/white model where the applied logo and the printed very small writing really blend with the dial. Can't say that for the Rolex crown.

The Omega design with the teck dial and lyre lugs is a bit retro. I think that's good, as in the last 20 years there was not a single model that really sang to me, whereas the classics from the 50s and 60s were always singing to me. But it might be not forward enough for some. Not that the DJ design is forward. 

The second/minute track around the dial of the Omega is not exactly wonderful (if remotely useful) but the Rolex Rehaut is seen by many as terrible (and really has no use).

The Omega has lume also on the second hand. Some will like that others not.

The Omega in 38.5mm weighs 150g with all links. The DJ in 36mm with all links of the Oyster bracelet weighs around 110g. So the Omega will feel like the more substantial watch. However, when you have them on the arm, you will forget they are there for both of them.

The ticking of the Omega is marginally louder than that of the Sea Dweller which is most likely due to case construction. But it also has a little ring to it, like a bell. I find that quite pretty but it could be interpreted as sounding cheap.

*Conclusion*

Rolex better put on the warm clothes. Really warm. I find that the new Omega Aqua Terra beats even the new Datejust, especially in the really tangible criteria like WR, PR, crown operation, lume. It also has the potential to beat it on the movement but we will see. And I find it does beat it on finish. If you take the price into consideration the Rolex has to take its hat/crown and leave the scene. Sorry. Does this mean I don't love me Rollies anymore? Hell no! They are fantastic watches in their own right and they deserved the crown for a long time. But now it might be time to surrender. I think the new AT 8500 will be as much of a universal everyday watch as my Explorer I has been for more than a decade for me. One is black, one is white. Ebony and Ivory live together in perfect harmony&#8230; at least in my watch box.

Till

Finally the promised pics.


----------



## lvt

Excellent review Tfar :-!

(What does it mean Tfar by the way ? :-d)

Personally I think the above Datejust is not the right opponent of the AT despite its oyster bracelet, the Explorer might be a better opponent, can you try to compare the Explorer to the AT ?


----------



## tfar

tfar are my initials, simply. What does lvt mean? 

I picked the Datejust as an opponent because it has a date. Or do you mean the Explorer II? I think the date is a super critical feature and having one is a very clear advantage. I wanted to level the playing field. I also didn't pick the Milgauss because it has no date and is a better comparison to the IWC Inge with the anti-magnetic feature and so on. It is also a bit too "fashion and loud" to go to the boardroom and ballroom. I didn't pick the E2 because the GMT feature would be a very clear and unfair advantage for that watch. At the same time, again, it is not really a watch for the ballroom. You can pull it off with a suit but with a tux it looks misplaced. That's why I chose the DJ series and this one as a particular example because it has a similar silver style. Just to have something visual to compare, making things a bit more concrete. In principle it is really a review of one series of models compared to another series of models.

Till


----------



## tfar

And some critical points before I forget. The packaging was so-so. Red Omega leather box. Not bad, protects well but is rather unassuming. That is in sync with the watch but after all I'd expect a little more. The Rolex packaging might not be the most tasteful but at least it's a bit more impressive. If compared to the macassar ebony box that comes with much cheaper Maurice Lacroix models, both boxes can literally go packing. Let alone the superb "emballage" of a Zenith box ...
On my particular box some of the silver Omega printing from inside the lid had come off and fallen onto the watch. No big deal. Probably the Texas heat but still not superior quality. Also the apparent foam inserts in the box, not nice. I prefer that they invest money into the movement and the watch and they have undoubtedly done that but it seems all Omegas come in this red box with the same instruction manual and card holder. They could have then invested a bit more design detail into the making of these boxes. I do like the card holder, though. I put my extra links in there.

The clasp is a bit tricky. Double deployant as I said. But you need to press down the push buttons only to lift the main side with the Omega logo. You'd think that either both sides would open together or that you have to push again for the other side. My other deployants are like that. Here the other side is opened not by the buttons but simply by pulling on it with one hand. This is not intuitive but secure. The "inferior" side is held by friction with two tiny spring-loaded balls. I'd say the bracelet will fit a person with 7.5" wrists but suppose that it might be tight for a person with 8" wrists. They might need additional links.

I had a good chance to check the lume overnight. Could be better but I almost always say that. The Citizen Chronomaster has the best lume of all my non-diver watches. It actually competes very well with my divers. The 12 o'clock lume is not different from the other lume markers. This makes the dial more elegant but it also means you have to rely on the crown position for finding up and down. Having only the tip of the minute hand lumed is really a quirky decision. Yes, it allows you to read the time very precisely but first you gotta find the thing. The lumed second hand really is easy to see, though. And I wish the lume on the hour hand extended a little further. I maintain my point that there is more lume on it than on most Rolex DJs but the layout of the lume could be better.

Till


----------



## Raza

Nice review, Till! I lean Omega, and lean that way in this comparison as well.


----------



## v76

Really nice review there Till, good job! I definitely see an Omega with the cal. 8500 sometime in my future ...


----------



## BaCaitlin

Great review! The 8500AT is one that I keep looking at but still undecided. The hour hand looks like the arrow tip has broken off or something. If it wasn't for that, it would be part of my collection already...Still it is a very beautiful watch..


----------



## acdelco

Very detailed review of great watches. I own an AT 8500 and this piece just ooozes quality in every which way. The movement is state of the art...one of the most advanced ( if not the most) mass produced time only movements out there. As you mentioned, the finish on the movement is superb.


----------



## Ananda

thanks for the review. wow, looks like the omega wins in every category!!! well, except withstanding the test of time and brand perception. i perceive rolex to be a brand that produces products that stand the test of time. i can't say the same for omega right now. maybe time will change my opinion.


----------



## SpringDriven

I am concerned about one detail in your review:

"The Omega also has a 50% longer warranty for three instead of two years. This even applies when bought grey."

No grey market Omega has an Omega warranty. The Grey market dealer might provide their OWN warranty, but it is not covered my Omega.

I hope that this statement does not mislead anyone into thinking that they can purchase a grey market Omega and get the Omega three year warranty. That is a false statement.

Otherwise good review, and congrats on your new AT!


----------



## a-Tom-ic

One of the best new-owner reports I've read on WUS, and a good comparison as well. I want one of these two watches. If only the AT were just a little smaller, shorter, and plainer-dialed. Maybe the smart move would be to see how Omega's lineup evolves as the 8500 is inevitably incorporated throughout the range.

Thank you for sharing! :thanks


----------



## TobyJC

Don't foget the Aqua Terra is also offered in 41.5mm and the newer Annual Calendar is at 43mm.

Omega all the way for me. I wouldn't consider anything under 41mm.


----------



## hidden by leaves

Thorough in theory, but I have to say limited in reality. How can you do a real comparative _review_ when you do not actually have one of the watches in question?

To me you (one) can talk until the cows come home about statistics and measurements and pictures, but it always comes down to how it is on the wrist.

I would have been more interested to hear how your AT compares to another watch you actually own after having worn them both for a significant period of time out in the real world.

Just my $.02.

HBL


----------



## Boosted6

Great review Tfar!


----------



## tfar

First, thanks for the very positive comments from everyone and the warning by SpringDriven not to misunderstand my warranty formulation. Very clearly, when you buy it grey there is no Omega warranty. But grey dealers will give you three years of their own warranty to match Omega's. Evidently, a dealer warranty is in all likelihood not as good as a mfr warranty but I never had to use either, except on my Panerai. And frankly the Cartier service in Paris sucked the gonads of a grey-haired, long-eared animal. 

I knew the comment on not owning a DJ would come, which is why I explained in the intro that I own two Rolexes with two movements, a 3000 from 1990 and a 3135 from 2008. I also own three different bracelets with three clasps. The Explorer has the same case, weight and dimensions as a DJ. It wears like a DJ. It just has different dial and hands and has no date wheel. Whereas the Sea Dweller has the same movement as a newer DJ. A ladies' DJ is in the possession of my mother and before was in the possession of my grandmother for decades. You can count on me to be perfectly able to extrapolate from that experience to the DJ. What will be different with the DJ as compared to my watches is the esthetic experience. I clearly state that one of the DJ's great advantages is that it comes in so many versions. Since I never liked the loupe and I didn't like the evident crown emblem, I chose the Explorer I for myself because I found it nicer than any Datejust. If I had only compared the AT to the E1, Rolex would have lost yet another point which is having no date. That's my only beef with the E1. I can live with it because the dial is so perfect and beautiful without it. And I got the SD over the Sub because it lacks the loupe and the rehaut and because the proportions are better in my eyes. Still when you have an E1, you should be perfectly able to imagine what it is to have a DJ. It's like an E1 with date, loupe and a different dial. Not really hard to imagine, especially when you've seen and handled the DJ many times. It's the same on the wrist.

I got the AT 8500 for a number of reasons. I really liked the new technology and features like the integrated crown guards, the PR and the WR. I liked that it had no loupe but still an easy to read date. I wanted a silver dial everyday watch quite in the style of the Rolex I posted above. But on the current Rolex models I didn't like the loupe, crown emblem, railroad index for hours and rehaut. Hunting down an old one would have resulted once again in lacking lume and would be more time consuming. I am also not a huge Omega fanboy. In fact, much of their production of the last 20 years never sung to me. But I thought it would be nice to have that brand represented in my collection. The AT came to the rescue.  And I really liked that I could get quite exactly what I wanted with superior specs to the Rolex and without buying one of the most ubiquitous models on the market for about 30% less than what I would have paid for the Rollie.

Till


----------



## tfar

I added some photos including a pic of the E1 for a more direct on wrist comparison.

Till


----------



## RacingGreen

I think that when Omega extend the 8500 through their range and in-house the manufacture, they will have a very strong proposition.

An in house movement with genuinely innovative features and fabulous finishing, versus the pointless reinventing of the wheel that other brands have undertaken to achieve the cachet of in-house manufacture.

That and, IMHO, the finest quality of case fit and finish at the midrange pricepoint, and they have an offering, which if marketed effectively really could give Rolex a run for it's money.

The latter will be important though, in my experience they are miles behind not only Rolex, but also Tag Heuer, in terms of non wis recognition, when it comes to shelling out on a 'status' watch. Probably behind Breitling too.


----------



## Eric L.

Moved to Reviews, but I left a redirect on Public which should stay there for a while to keep the traffic moving.


----------



## novedl

great review and the aquaterra is sweet:-!


----------



## tfar

RacingGreen said:


> I think that when Omega extend the 8500 through their range and in-house the manufacture, they will have a very strong proposition.
> 
> An in house movement with genuinely innovative features and fabulous finishing, versus the pointless reinventing of the wheel that other brands have undertaken to achieve the cachet of in-house manufacture.
> 
> That and, IMHO, the finest quality of case fit and finish at the midrange pricepoint, and they have an offering, which if marketed effectively really could give Rolex a run for it's money.
> 
> The latter will be important though, in my experience they are miles behind not only Rolex, but also Tag Heuer, in terms of non wis recognition, when it comes to shelling out on a 'status' watch. Probably behind Breitling too.


I quite agree which is one of the reasons I wrote this comparison. Once the production is moved to the Omega facilities, it will be an in-house in the strictest sense of the term. Fit and finish is spectacular on this particular watch. I've never seen a bad detail on another Omega, either. The same can't be said for Rolex. But you are right that they lack in brand status. Not really enough luster and glamour. For me, Tag is a bit of a "prolo" brand but even they are really making some nice watches now and working on the brand image. I think in the watch tier thread I listed Omega and Breitling in the same tier 3. For me Tag is tier 4 but borderline 3. They will get there. For others it's already higher, I'm sure.

But one thing is sure. When you do the punch per punch between this Omega series and the DJ series, the DJ gets beaten up a good bit. :-d

Thanks for the link, Eric.

Till


----------



## tfar

Accuracy update on day 1. There will be more updates in the future, of course, but first impressions count.

Accuracy after 24 hours with a full hand wind (at least I suppose it was a full wind), wearing it for 10 hours on day one, 12 hours off the wrist and two hours wear on day two, is exactly 0 seconds. Now, that I really, really like. It's what I was hoping for. :-!


----------



## tfar

Day 2. There was no deviation after the first 24 hours. After the second 24 hours I see -1 second. I'll report back in a few days how it's going. I think I can live with a watch that is ever so slightly slow, provided that the daily rate is really, really accurate.

Till


----------



## Verdi

good review. thanks for it.

I hv an Omega, PO and Im looking to buy a Datejust right now. 
I like both brands now after I really disliked Rolex for many years. Since Im not that rich to get what I want (Pateks and Vacherons and maybe JLC) I have to stop at this range so as I said Im looking at DJ. 

What I can tell you is that I have an Omega, the PO, a nice watch with the new co-axial mvmt which let me down. Ive had it for almost a year and recently it started to loose time, the watch stopped a few times eventhough I was wearing it. I was unlucky I know (the watch is now getting repaired, it 3 takes weeks). What I want to say is that the movmt is great but hasnt passed the test of time yet. Its very accurate but mine broke. 

The DJ is something that passed the test of time and Im sure there were many pieces that broke down, but it is not very common. (unlike the Rolex GMT's. My friend has one and it run fast. He went back to the dealer who sent it for service but told him "Sir, it runs fast, this is how you know its real". the watch came back and its the same). 

Dont get me wrong I love my PO, I still belive it looks better than the Sub,(personal view and opinion) and I ll keep it but I wouldnt buy another Omega. 
Im now ready to buy the DJ which to me is so classy and I hope reliable.


----------



## tfar

Verdi, sorry to hear about your woes with the 2500 calibre, where many failures have been reported. I hear when it comes back from revision it will be perfectly good and stay that way.

The 8500 caliber in the NEW Aqua Terra is however, a different movement, that was designed for the co-axial escapement. I have not heard of any failures yet in the almost two years it is on the market.

As you said, and as I duly noted in my review, the DJ definitely stood the test of time. If there is one watch that has stood the test of time it's the Rolex DJ. As such it is a clear buy recommendation. And if there is one look that you find especially pleasing, go for it.

However, I'd say, point for point, the NEW AT is the better watch, when you make abstraction of the brand image where Rolex is hard to beat. But even the brand image can fire back at you. I say, go to an AD and handle both watches. Re-read this comparison and then make a decision. Any decision you make, you won't regret it. They are both great.

Oh, and the line your friend got from the dealer is incredible. I would have jumped at his face with certain body parts first.  Tell him to bring the watch to an independent watchmaker. Doesn't even need to be Rolex certified. They are rather easy to work on. Tell him to take some time sheets of how the watch runs and how he wears it and bring those along. Then the watchmaker can adjust his Rolex to run around +1-2 seconds per day. They are all capable of this kind of accuracy. Accepting anything less is not necessary. Accepting such a BS line from an AD is outright humiliating, IMHO.

Till


----------



## Verdi

You said it very well. 
At the end of the day you cant compare these brands but you can only compare specific models.

My friend did not bother with the watch. Got the rolex from his parents when he got his pilot's license and he doesnt wear it too often. He is not into watches and he only told me the story when I asked him why he doesnt wear it more often. He wears a Casio for work.


----------



## CitizenM

Wonderful review. My roommate is probably going to pick up one of these fairly soon. It's a sign of how great this watch is, because he normally only buys the same watch over and over again (buys maybe 5 POs a year). He bought three POs last week.


----------



## tfar

Your roommate buys 5 of the same watches every year? How strange! Why would anyone do that? I don't get it. Does he give them away? He should get that checked out. 

BTW, found this blogger review yesterday:
Time Keeps on Ticking: The Omega Aqua Terra - Omega's return to greatness?

Comes to the same conclusion as I do but with less detail.

Till


----------



## grotius

Excellent review. While both watches are not to my taste (a little on the serious side ), I couldn't help being intrigued reading through your write up.


----------



## CitizenM

tfar said:


> Your roommate buys 5 of the same watches every year? How strange! Why would anyone do that? I don't get it. Does he give them away? He should get that checked out.
> 
> BTW, found this blogger review yesterday:
> Time Keeps on Ticking: The Omega Aqua Terra - Omega's return to greatness?
> 
> Comes to the same conclusion as I do but with less detail.
> 
> Till


I don't know what's wrong with him, but I was out of the watch hobby for a number of years, and going to school with him returned me to it.

On rare occasion he'll buy a watch that's only 90% similar to his collection, like last week he bought a white faced seamaster gmt. But no, he normally just buys tons of POs. Black bezels, orange bezels, chrono, non/chrono and so on, then all those variations with the different straps and bracelets.

As per the "return to greatness," I'm inclined to agree. The 8500 is a very impressive movement, probably the absolute best pure mechanical movement under the Zenith El Primero, excluding maybe some GSes.

And it's so much more than that. The idea that a sub-$5000 Swiss watch was actually MADE by the company who's name is on it? This is a fairly big deal. I was hoping most of the companies would just go out of business--I felt they had embarrassed themselves by being mere jewelers, contributing nothing to horology.

At any rate, I'm happy to see Omega actually make watches again. I know the 8500 has been out, technically, since 08, but now I hear it's making it into the models people actually buy--maybe even POs next year.

It's not really my style, but I LOVE the movement. I just wish Omega and Rolex cared about complications--I love lots of complications. If it weren't for that, I'd be saving up for one now.

As it stands, there's only one real problem with the AT 8500: the Ananta GMT/SD.


----------



## tfar

Well, he also must be not very money-wise. Would be cheaper to just get a different strap and learn how to change those. You should tell him, really.  LOL!

I totally agree on the Omega comeback. Love it. And what a great movement. Even the design is a success in my eyes. The Datejust target is obvious. The Ananta GMT/SD is not really in the same category of watch. Much bigger, much sportier. So they aren't direct competitors. I'd see that competing rather with the GMT Rolex. BTW, the Grand Seiko SD GMT SBGE001 blows the Rolex GMT out of the water.

I just think, right now, in the sub-6k category of watches that are as close as possible to a 50/50 balance of sporty and elegant, nothing beats the AT 8500.

I'd even go as far as saying that it is among the best if not the best 3-hand movement on the market right now.

Till


----------



## CitizenM

I know what you're saying about the Ananta, but I think it's moderate sportiness and added complications actually make it an even greater value. 

Speaking of finishing though, the 8500 is probably the best looking movement short of a Vacheron or Breguet. 

As per it being the best 3 hand, I can't really comment because I'm not that familiar with the super-high end stuff like Patek, IWC and so on, but my immediate competitor would probably be a GS of some sort, SD or otherwise. They have a longer reserve, as good (or better, in the SD's case) accuracy and are conservatively designed. The issue, to me, is that GSes generally make me yawn, where I'm actually pretty intrigued by the new Tek dial. 

The only reasons I wouldn't buy the new AT are preferential, and that's basically my love of lots of complications or a skeleton. Hence my undying romance with the Ananta Double Retrograde or Breguets in general. 

Speaking of skeletons, why on earth is Omega not making a skeleton 8500? That movement is gorgeous. 

And, as per my roommate's financial struggles, money's (apparently) no issue around here anyway, but he generally makes a substantial amount of money on the PO trade, buying low, refinishing and selling high. He's basically renting a watch for 6 months at negative $50 a month or so. But he almost always has three POs in a given day-to-day rotation. Sadly, none of them are as accurate as my Planet Orient. Lol.


----------



## PSV

Nice review, thanks for sharing! The new Cal 8500 is certainly a welcome direction for Omega.

I guess it depends on one's definition, but is the Cal 8500 truly an "in-house movement"? From what I understand, they various components comes from different brands within the Swatch group and they are not all developed/manufactured by Omega per se - is that true?


----------



## CitizenM

PSV said:


> Nice review, thanks for sharing! The new Cal 8500 is certainly a welcome direction for Omega.
> 
> I guess it depends on one's definition, but is the Cal 8500 truly an "in-house movement"? From what I understand, they various components comes from different brands within the Swatch group and they are not all developed/manufactured by Omega per se - is that true?


As I understand it, this is true of the majority of Swiss so-called in house movements. But I'm not too bothered by it--if a few small parts here or there are sourced from elsewhere, but 97% is made by them, I think that's ok. It's more about proving that you're a real watch maker and not some jewelry designer.

If you want to get serious about in-house, you have to pay a lot or go to Japan.


----------



## PSV

CitizenM said:


> As I understand it, this is true of the majority of Swiss so-called in house movements. But I'm not too bothered by it--if a few small parts here or there are sourced from elsewhere, but 97% is made by them, I think that's ok. It's more about proving that you're a real watch maker and not some jewelry designer.
> 
> If you want to get serious about in-house, you have to pay a lot or go to Japan.


This thread sheds some light on Cal 8500 https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/3-mov...omega-calibre-8500-some-questions-233389.html

In this case it more than "a few small parts", thus it is technically not an in-house movement per se, but still it is a great movement.


----------



## CitizenM

Thanks for the link. That was very helpful. I do wish they had spent some time discussing what I consider to be the standard in high-end movements, the El Primero, however. 

It's kind of shocking how far ahead Seiko is than everyone. Even the cutting edge movements from Omega don't match the accuracy, reserve or smoothness of a 10 year old GS. Which costs less.


----------



## acdelco

After thinking about it for awhile and being honest with myself, I can say that the silky and sparkly AT 8500 (an acquired taste for many WUS members because it isn't "pure sporty" like a dive watch) is the highest quality and most luxurious feeling watch that I own or have owned ... with the exception of maybe the Breguet Marine Big Date. ( I own or have owned many other Omegas, Rolexes, IWCs, a GP, and Breitlings.) It's not my favorite watch...but the craftsmanship and detail is undeniable. It's not the kind of watch that pops out at you right away. It simply grows on you and doesn't stop.... as you slowly take in and luxuriate in the finer details.


----------



## GradyPhilpott

To each his own, but as far as overall looks, I'll stick with the DateJust. I find it odd that you have plenty of photographs of the Omega, but a single pathetic Amazon "picture" of the DateJust and the only wrist shot you provide of a Rolex is of the Explorer, a watch you're not comparing to the Omega.

I've got nothing against Omega. In fact, I might own one someday, but while you may be unbiased, your review shows quite a bit of bias.

Don't feel bad, bias is a human frailty and in science much effort is put into controlling both for bias and for intervening variables.

I know that there are plenty of DateJust owners here who can look at their own, but just to give a fair advantage to the DateJust in terms of photography, heres a few of my new DateJust, although they are not comparable to the quality of the photographs of your Omega, they are after all, photographs.


----------



## CitizenM

I don't think Tfar gave a biased review. Aesthetics are going to differ from person to person, although I'm very bored of Rolex's designs personally (they don't really take many risks these days...). But objectively speaking, in terms of price and the quality of the movement, I think it's a landslide victory for the AT. 

Really, the only thing holding the 8500 back is the 25000 bph. I like really high BPH movements, 36000 or a spring drive, so that would actually be a small factor for me.


----------



## GradyPhilpott

I didn't mean that he purposely posted a biased review, only that bias shows in his review.

As I said, a conscious effort must be made to avoid bias, since we all are biased. It's part of being human.


----------



## acdelco

As some point when you're comparing two watches and you've decided which one you like better, there's going to be some bias.

All I can tell you is that I've handled many datejusts and owned two ( one with an oyster bracelet and one with a superjubilee bracelet) and that the AT 8500 is overall, the superior watch. This is my opinion.

Tfar wrote a good detailed review. He's mentioned many times before in his posts that he thinks that Rolex overall is superior to Omega. He owns Rolex watches. Yet, he says what he says about the AT. That's got to tell you something.



GradyPhilpott said:


> I didn't mean that he purposely posted a biased review, only that bias shows in his review.
> 
> As I said, a conscious effort must be made to avoid bias, since we all are biased. It's part of being human.


----------



## GradyPhilpott

I see my point is lost.

I agree that he made a good case for his preference and even if he didn't he's still entitled to his opinion.

Obviously, bias is not clearly understood here.


----------



## Eric L.

GradyPhilpott said:


> I see my point is lost.
> 
> I agree that he made a good case for his preference and even if he didn't he's still entitled to his opinion.
> 
> Obviously, bias is not clearly understood here.


I understand your point, and yes the review does obviously show an underlying degree of bias despite an appearance of objectivity. That said, I think many people who read the review can detect this as well, and people can make their own minds up for themselves. Both are fine watches.


----------



## Barnaby

Eric L. said:


> I understand your point, and yes the review does obviously show an underlying degree of bias despite an appearance of objectivity. That said, I think many people who read the review can detect this as well, and people can make their own minds up for themselves. Both are fine watches.


For what it's worth, I think it's an excellent review and very balanced.


----------



## acdelco

I agree that it's an excellent review...it may be biased but it is balanced and very well reasoned. Bias is certainly understandable IMO after being objective in your comparison. If you're writing for WatchTime, maybe not. But, WUS isn't WatchTime IMO. OUr passion/pride of ownership will come through.


----------



## tfar

How there is bias, I don't know. Bias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think I list just about all the factors. I gave advantages to both. Results and method are clearly presented. I own at least one watch from each company. There is no benefit for me dissing one or preferring the other. I have pride of ownership for both. I can tell you that one for sure.  Once the tally is there it becomes clear that based on practical and horological criteria the Omega gathers more points. The only technical thing the Rolex can score with is a Breguet overcoil. Big deal. Rolex scores big for prestige and choice of models.

If there are others who also own both watches or very similar models who can think of anything I forgot to mention, that would be very interesting to have in the review for sake of completeness. Not to mention that I haven't seen any more complete review/comparison of these two models on the web.

I'm glad most of you enjoyed the review and found it helpful. Thanks!

I have also worn the watch for a week straight with no special regime as for winder or how to put it down. It runs consistently -1 second per day with no variation between days or positions. I think that's very good and better than the cal. 3000 and the cal. 3135 I have. My 3000 runs at around +2 and the 3135 almost +4 with visible but small variation between days and positions. I prefer -1 to +4. Not sure if I prefer -1 to +2. It's still twice as accurate but it's easier to set a watch that runs fast. Just pull the crown, wait and push crown in again. How lazy can one get? 

Till


----------



## chaosman

great review!


----------



## mistercindy

Excellent review. Thank you. I've been thinking of buying a steal on steal 41.5mm AT in teak grey. I tried one on in a store and, in my opinion, it's a stunning watch. I'm trying to get myself psychologically ready to fork over the money!

BTW, I currently have a Rolex GMT Master with a two tone jubilee bracelet, and a stainless JLC Master Control with a leather strap. I think the AT will fit in nicely!


----------



## sneakertinker

Awsome review and thanks for taking the time to post it up tfar...This post is a little past it's prime but let me throw my long winded opinion in here...

I can say I was recently caught in a battle between a 38.5mm 8500 AT...A DJ on Oyster Bracelet...and on the opposite end of the spectrum a DSSD...I currently own two Mid Size SMP (1 Quartz and 1 Auto) and have owned three PO's, two full size SMP's, a LV Sub, and a Speedy Pro...Needless to say I do have a tendency to become disenchanted with a watch and subsequently pass the piece along to fund the purchase of something else...I've flirted with selling off my remaining two SMP's a couple of times in the past six months of so and have both times ended up keeping them because I couldn't decided what I wanted to replace them with...I narrowed it down to the above three and will finally be letting go of the SMP's this month sometime...Bottom line I've decided that one of these three watches will be my one and only for the foreseeable future...

Admittedly I've been leaning heavily in the direction of the DSSD as it differs from the two watches i'm going to be moving along...That being said I took a drive to my AD today to take a look at the three models and I'm firmly planning on purchasing the DJ...

My reasoning for this is due to a couple of different things...First off I decided that I would never need the use of a dive watch like the DSSD...When I do go diving I use a dive computer anyway, and I cannot use the piece in a dressy type of occasion...Besides if I need a sporty type watch I have a G-Shock 6900 that I can use for the purpose that this piece would obviously be most suited for...Crossed that one off the list...

Secondly the AT just kills me with the AR coating on the outside of the crystal...Having owned the aformentiond three PO's I have experienced scratches, dings, and swirlies to the AR coating of the Crystel on each piece...I don't really want to have to go through the hassle of removing the AR coating myself...

Finally while i've heard nothing but good things regarding the 8500 from Omega it's just too new a movement for me to throw my "one and only" tag on the piece...Rolex DJ is set in stone as having a fairly bullet proof movement...

These reasons alone are why I opted to pursue the DJ...Other than that I found the two pieces to fairly equal on the grounds of finish, style, and versatility...DJ just edges out the AT for me though...

Here is the models I was looking at...

**Random photo found on Google**









**tfar Photo**


----------



## AT8500

I have bought a AT8500. The moment I steeped into the Omega Boutique, AT8500 41mm wirh grey teck deck just hit me. I pondered over saw other Omega but this was the ONE. I even went to other luxury watch shops, but the tug of AT8500 was just too much. 

The right mix of style, elegence, soberity ( I don't like too many dials, colours and other bells and whistles - can't wear in office with all these). A month later still can't get over admiring it. AT8500 is the one, none other like it.


----------



## M0NG00SE

Great review. Very insightful for me as I look for my first "Nice" watch.


----------



## Iliyan

Thank you for the great comparison. It is well written and doesn't seem biased. The AT is certainly capable of competing against the DJ.


----------



## entropy96

The only issue I see in this comparo is that the OP does not own a DJ and owns a AT.
This review is anything but objective.
We as WIS tend to be biased towards what we purchased.


----------



## richy176

tfar said:


> Well, he also must be not very money-wise. Would be cheaper to just get a different strap and learn how to change those. You should tell him, really.  LOL!
> 
> I totally agree on the Omega comeback. Love it. And what a great movement. Even the design is a success in my eyes. The Datejust target is obvious. The Ananta GMT/SD is not really in the same category of watch. Much bigger, much sportier. So they aren't direct competitors. I'd see that competing rather with the GMT Rolex. BTW, the Grand Seiko SD GMT SBGE001 blows the Rolex GMT out of the water.
> 
> I just think, right now, in the sub-6k category of watches that are as close as possible to a 50/50 balance of sporty and elegant, nothing beats the AT 8500.
> 
> I'd even go as far as saying that it is among the best if not the best 3-hand movement on the market right now.
> 
> Till


HI - I am quite new to the forum so only just read your great review. Have you done one between the Rolex GMT and the GS SD GMT?

I see that you say the GS blows the Rolex out of the water - I like the look of both but could get the GS for a lot less money as Seiko ADs seem more willing to discount. I have read comments from people saying they could never justify the cost of a GS bearing the Seiko name but that does not worry me and nor does the fact that the Rolex may hold its value more over the next 20+ years. More interested in enjoying my watch now and take the view that a £5000 watch over say a 10 year period works out at less than $1.40 per day and few would bat an eyelid at spending that on a cup of coffee!


----------



## Nauticqua

I would definitely pick the AT over the DJ. There's just way too much the AT offers for the price. It's almost not fair though, if you picture the two as phones. The rolex is like an iPhone 4, which in the electronics world, has stood up reliably well for years and continues to be quite decent without much change. The omega is more like a samsung, which was pretty good before, but now their phones are using newer technologies, and just offer way better up to date features. So while the rolex has been more of a steady reliable piece, the omega is brand new, state of the art, especially with their fantastic processor, errr newer coaxial double barrel movement.

In this case I would choose the AT, but if it were the OP versus a new sub? Sub all the way.

Paul

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## smuggled_sheep

Great review!:-! Both are really awesome, its just a matter of personal preference.


----------



## vmed_cha_gr

OMEGA ++++!!!!!!!!


----------



## entropy96

Which brand do you prefer?

I would choose the DJ, but only because I prefer most Rolex models over Omega's.


----------



## seekingw

For me is not about the brand, Personally i like some Omega models and some Rolex models, between these two i think i would go for the Omega


----------



## hesoffran

Great review! Although Omega seems to be a better watch from a technical perspective, I would prefer DJ if i am only allowed to pick one. But it makes sense to own one from each. Omega has great movement and DJ is just a timeless classic. 
On another note, I think all watch reviews are biased because of the personal taste of the reviewer. 
That being said, the original review feels slightly biased but the real bias is in the follow up replies.


----------



## VoltesV

Awesome review. 

Hands down Omega AT would be my choice between the 2. 

Already a modern classic IMO.


----------



## MrDagon007

I must say that I am quite tempted by the new "amagnetic" variant of the AT. I tried it on at the dealer and my credit card was itching.


----------



## Vorollo

Thanks for the review, which I don't find biased either. But my following assumptions are: 

If I had to order a single one-watch for the rest of my life to be worn every day (I am not 20 anymore but not 60 either), I would chose the AT over the DJ (I have owned both ATs and modern DJs in the past). The present DJ is somewhat expired in terms of image and technology, left its zenith long behind. The present AT has the first "inhouse" (ok, this can be discussed elsewhere) coax-movement inside and many more will follow in the long run. In 50+ years from now, the present ATs will bear this "heritage" image, whereas the highly demanded Rolexes from the 50ies and 60ies won't transfer their heritage status to the present DJ models. In other words: Omega build a (further) legend right now. Rolex - with their DJs - don't. They build up on their former heritage. 

Just my own 2 cents.


----------



## VoltesV

Good review. Cheers.


----------



## Ducatiti

I was in the same situation last month and just found this thread today. Glad I did both, went with the AT and read this thread.....Made a feel better hehe.


----------



## hpintime1

nice review


----------

