# Omega Seamaster Professional 600m Planet Ocean 45.5mm



## mthwatch

Sure, the official name sure is a mouth full - but you do get a lot of watch, so perhaps the long name is justifiable.

Please enjoy my totally biased review. Kidding...;-) Edit* **Added some pics***

A preface:

This watch was my final watch purchase of 2008 (quite a year for me and for my watch addiction). As some of you know, my collection changed very, very often this year. From a U-boat Flightdeck to the Bell & Ross BR02 and many watches in between, I figured out what it is that I truly love about watches. In the end, I found out that I'm more of a "quality over quantity" guy - which didn't surprise me. What did surprise me was that I was drawn to more "classic" watches after initially being attracted to stylish, modern, large and slightly flashy watches. More importantly, I became aware of the art and craftsmanship inherent in fine watches. As the year progressed, I became much more interested in what made watches tick - the movements. With these things in mind I decided to liquidate my small collection and own only one nice watch (we'll see how long this lasts). In late November I traded my BR02 for a 45.5mm Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean.










I had considered the PO just before I purchased the BR02, but didn't pull the trigger because I was so infatuated with the BR02 at the time. However, shortly after I acquired it, I fell very much out of love with it. It wasn't that it didn't "speak to me", but I just couldn't figure out what justified the rather hefty price tag. Sure, its a fairly well made watch, but the movement is unbelievably ordinary (most likely the SW200 automatic movement) and the dial finishing was somewhat disappointing. I also had a very difficult time with the rubber strap, as it just didn't fit all that well. In the end, it just didn't feel like a very special, expensive time piece.

Not so with the Planet Ocean. This is really, truly, a special and superbly well made watch. The dial is so beautiful - I spend way too much time staring at it. I really love the matte finish. It gets regularly bashed, but I prefer it to a shiny finish because it is so legible and easy to read in bright lighting conditions. Some people have an issue with the double AR coating, however I find it to be fantastic. We'll see how it ages, but in general, I'm pretty easy on my watches.










The applied hour markers and shiny, beveled hour, minute, and second hands really add a nice bit of "sparkle" and actually enhance the legibility of the hands, which, coupled with the outstanding SuperLuminova C3 application, makes this watch readable about 99% of the time. This watch has the brightest lume that I've ever seen. It is visible all through the night - still legible at 6:30 when I get up! The really cool thing about the C3 lume that Omega uses is that it is so incredibly sensitive to low light sources. I'm continually amazed that even in my somewhat poorly lit office, I can step outside and enter a dark room and wow - it glows like a torch...really. Other watches that I wear don't really show any lume reaction unless you're outside for a second or two. With the Planet Ocean on, all you have to do is expose it to a little bit of light and it will glow for quite a while.










One thing that really surprised me was how much I loved the stainless steel bracelet. Now, I'm not a bracelet guy. I'm not. I initially wanted to get the model that came on rubber, but for an extra hundred bucks for the bracelet - I thought, why not! Now I don't take it off! I recently compared this watch to its main competitor, the Rolex Submariner, and the bracelet on the Rolex was such a disappointment. That's not to say it isn't well made, because it is. I know it is. It just doesn't _*feel *_as well made. Not even close. It has such a nice, reassuring weight to it. It feels indestructible. It feels like an expensive and well made object. And the slightly rounded links are just so attractive. I love the brushed finish and the polished sides really are a nice touch. I know that the "weight" issue is subjective - but I like something with some weight to it. Perhaps that is why I cannot stand titanium rings or watches!










Notice the beautiful scalloped edges on the bezel - this is unique for some reason on the 45.5mm Planet Ocean. The 42mm has more of a notched bezel. Sure, its a small detail, but one of the many small choices that lead me to this watch.




























The clasp is very well made, although it does scratch easily. I'm surprised that it doesn't bother me more because I'm usually a bit anal about scratches. The two button system works very well and the watch is easy to put on and take off. The clasp doesn't have a micro adjustment (like Rolex, for example) but I was able to achieve a perfect fit with the help of a very patient AD and a combination of full and half links removed.










I personally love the modern take on the old Seamaster 300. The case styling is very beautiful and has wonderful details. The slightly curved, polished lugs are an amazing Omega styling cue. This is flawlessly done. It adds a very nice touch to the case, giving it a nice bit of flash depending on the lighting.

The bezel has a very nice feel to it. There is a bit of weight to it and it takes some effort (but just the right amount of effort) to ratchet it around. It is very precise and lines up perfectly between the lume dot and 12 o'clock. The helium release valve and the crown have a nice, polished finish and screw down very reassuringly. The crown is a very nice size, neither to small or too large, and quite easy to screw in or out. The helium release valve is a bit small and can be difficult to turn. Sometimes I double check it using a t-shirt for leverage.

People will endlessly debate the 45.5mm vs. 42mm case size, but this is purely subjective and the decision between one or the other is highly personal. I like large watches. There - I said it. I'm not worried about it going out of style because its not! This watch is just too beautiful. Get the one you like - that's my advice.

The case back is perhaps my all-time favorite, and probably my favorite bit of design on the watch in general. It is just so well done. The hammered texture surrounding the hippocampus is such a classy touch! I love flipping this watch over to check it out...I used to be so crazy about exhibition case backs that, at first, I was disappointed that I wouldn't be able to see the beautiful 2500 caliber movement, but the Seamaster case-back is just so timeless!



















Finally, the most important part of the watch. The movement.










This is the reason I bought this watch. Not for the Co-Axial escapement - although it is a very cool technical innovation. I wanted a very well made, chronometer grade movement. I wanted a movement that I felt was a valuable horological instrument. I wanted to know that the money I spent had been spent somewhat wisely (after all, it is a watch). This movement is very robust and quite reliable. Based on the very nice ETA 2892-A2, the 2500C is very highly modified movement and is quite beautiful in its own right. Accuracy is very important to me and this movement has been spectacular. For example, I last set the time on January 1st. I'm writing this at 11pm on January 11th and right now my watch is exactly 2.5 seconds fast. Outstanding.

In the end, I'm finally very happy. My watch really suits me well. I'm an active person and I love to be in the water. I finally have a watch that can keep up with me, take a beating, but still clean up and accompany me out for a night on the town. Its rare to find a watch that can be dressed up - with a bracelet it can be easily worn with a tuxedo or a suit - or dressed down with a rubber strap - and it is ready for a day at the beach. Or you can be like me and wear it with a shirt and tie!



















Of course, Omega has a certain cache that is undeniably cool, and to be honest, that is always part of the equation. I certainly feel proud to own such a well made, well engineered instrument. That, I found, is the idea! To 2009, and hopefully, my next Omega!


----------



## kimnkk

Fantastic review and fantastic pictures :-!

Couldn't agree more about the dial mate, its so simple yet so mesmerising!


----------



## BenL

Excellent review and great pictures! You make me want to get the PO as my next Omega! :-!


----------



## ripper

Thanks for the review. It's great!
And awaysome watch! But we know that! :-!


----------



## jmsrolls

mthwatch said:


> One thing that really surprised me was how much I loved the stainless steel bracelet. Now, I'm not a bracelet guy. I'm not. I initially wanted to get the model that came on rubber, but for an extra hundred bucks for the bracelet - I thought, why not! Now I don't take it off! I recently compared this watch to its main competitor, the Rolex Submariner, and the bracelet was such a disappointment. That's not to say it isn't well made, because it is. It just doesn't _*feel *_as well made. Not even close. It has such a nice, reassuring weight to it. It feels indestructible. It feels like an expensive, exactingly made object. The slightly rounded links are just so attractive. I love the brushed finish and the polished sides really are a nice touch.


Great review but please clarify your comparison with the Sub bracelet. I am assuming that the Sub bracelet was the disappointment.

The Oyster links on my EXPII look great but their hollowness and the clasp are chintzy compared to Omega bracelets. The heft and feel of the Rolex bracelet is nowhere near the bracelet on the PO or any Omega for tha matter. Admittedly it would be nice if the PO bracelet had micro adjustments or screws to make "fine-tuning" the fit easier. At least the PO bracelet is all brushed like the Oyster which makes touch-up easier in the event of the inevitable scratches. (For whatever reason, Rolex saw fit to polish the center links of the bracelets on some newer models forcing owners to "brush their own".)

Fr. John†


----------



## mthwatch

jmsrolls said:


> Great review but please clarify your comparison with the Sub bracelet. I am assuming that the Sub bracelet was the disappointment.
> 
> The Oyster links on my EXPII look great but their hollowness and the clasp are chintzy compared to Omega bracelets. The heft and feel of the Rolex bracelet is nowhere near the bracelet on the PO or any Omega for tha matter. Admittedly it would be nice if the PO bracelet had micro adjustments or screws to make "fine-tuning" the fit easier. At least the PO bracelet is all brushed like the Oyster which makes touch-up easier in the event of the inevitable scratches. (For whatever reason, Rolex saw fit to polish the center links of the bracelets on some newer models forcing owners to "brush their own".)
> 
> Fr. John†


Thanks John - I've edited that section about the bracelet to make it a bit clearer. I agree completely about the fine tuning. A micro adjustment would have been a very welcome addition to the PO and the all brushed look is very attractive - and easy to maintain.


----------



## mikeand

Let me go get a paper towel to dry off my desk.


I had been had been leaning towards making this my one big purchase for 2009 and you have just reinforced that decision for me. After acquiring 6 watches over the last 6 months, I have started to feel like quality over quantity was a better approach. Now I just need to flip a couple of recent acquisitions and build the watch fund. 

Thanks for the great review.


----------



## paduncan

jmsrolls said:


> Great review but please clarify your comparison with the Sub bracelet. I am assuming that the Sub bracelet was the disappointment.
> 
> The Oyster links on my EXPII look great but their hollowness and the clasp are chintzy compared to Omega bracelets. The heft and feel of the Rolex bracelet is nowhere near the bracelet on the PO or any Omega for tha matter. Admittedly it would be nice if the PO bracelet had micro adjustments or screws to make "fine-tuning" the fit easier. At least the PO bracelet is all brushed like the Oyster which makes touch-up easier in the event of the inevitable scratches. (For whatever reason, Rolex saw fit to polish the center links of the bracelets on some newer models forcing owners to "brush their own".)
> 
> Fr. John†


Isn't Rolex now making solid links with their watches? If so, is it fair to compare a Rolex that is a few years old with a new PO?


----------



## mthwatch

I'm not sure about Rolex's manufacturing process, or whether or not the links are solid or not. I was comparing my PO with a brand new Submariner at my local AD. The bracelet just feels flimsy and light in comparison with the PO bracelet.


----------



## mthwatch

mikeand said:


> Let me go get a paper towel to dry off my desk.
> 
> I had been had been leaning towards making this my one big purchase for 2009 and you have just reinforced that decision for me. After acquiring 6 watches over the last 6 months, I have started to feel like quality over quantity was a better approach. Now I just need to flip a couple of recent acquisitions and build the watch fund.
> 
> Thanks for the great review.


That sounds a lot like what I did. I think it would be a great idea and if you're really crazy about the PO then you cannot go wrong. You really can't.


----------



## paduncan

mthwatch said:


> I'm not sure about Rolex's manufacturing process, or whether or not the links are solid or not. I was comparing my PO with a brand new Submariner at my local AD. The bracelet just feels flimsy and light in comparison with the PO bracelet.


Was it brand new for 2008 / 2009 or brand new before they made SEL (Solid End Links) standard?

What I am getting at would be like comparing a brand new Rolex with an Omega 200m Seamaster. Apples and oranges...


----------



## mthwatch

paduncan said:


> Was it brand new for 2008 / 2009 or brand new before they made SEL (Solid End Links) standard?
> 
> What I am getting at would be like comparing a brand new Rolex with an Omega 200m Seamaster. Apples and oranges...


I understand. It was a brand new 2009 Sub. 100% positive.


----------



## jmsrolls

paduncan said:


> Isn't Rolex now making solid links with their watches? If so, is it fair to compare a Rolex that is a few years old with a new PO?


My EXPII is an M series produced in 2008 with solid end links only. The remainder are hollow as are the links in the 2009 V series EXPII.

Between Christmas and New Years, I visited a local jeweler's new store. One of the owners and I were chatting at the Rolex case when a young sales person came over with a QoS PO that had just arrived.

The owner admitted that they had just taken on Omega and he knew little about them. I played dumb (not difficult, I know) while the young man began to describe the PO to his boss and me. He had obvioulsly done his homework as he compared the PO to the Rolex dive watches including the new DSSD.

After we three had talked and compared the watches for while, the owner asked which watch I preferred. Here again, playing dumb I said the PO. The owner, still holding the PO in one hand and the DSSD in the other, said "Me too."

Rolex makes fine watches but so does Omega with comparable quality for considerably less money. I love my EXPII (after removal of the Cyclops) and find even the hollow links to be comfortable and good looking. But overall, the bracelet and especially the clasp are chintzy compared to the PO's.

My 2¢.

Fr. John†


----------



## paduncan

jmsrolls said:


> My EXPII is an M series produced in 2008 with solid end links only. The remainder are hollow as are the links in the 2009 V series EXPII.
> 
> Between Christmas and New Years, I visited a local jeweler's new store. One of the owners and I were chatting at the Rolex case when a young sales person came over with a QoS PO that had just arrived.
> 
> The owner admitted that they had just taken on Omega and he knew little about them. I played dumb (not difficult, I know) while the young man began to describe the PO to his boss and me. He had obvioulsly done his homework as he compared the PO to the Rolex dive watches including the new DSSD.
> 
> After we three had talked and compared the watches for while, the owner asked which watch I preferred. Here again, playing dumb I said the PO. The owner, still holding the PO in one hand and the DSSD in the other, said "Me too."
> 
> Rolex makes fine watches but so does Omega with comparable quality for considerably less money. I love my EXPII (after removal of the Cyclops) and find even the hollow links to be comfortable and good looking. But overall, the bracelet and especially the clasp are chintzy compared to the PO's.
> 
> My 2¢.
> 
> Fr. John†


Ok, but here again, you are comparing the Explorer with the PO - I believe the new SUBMARINERS have the solid oyster bracelet with the glide lock clasp. Certainly the new GMT Master II has a substantial bracelet as well, ceramic bezel insert, etc. Even my new 2008 Rolex Datejust has SOLID links in the jubilee bracelet (no tiny hollow links at all) with integrated clasp, which has a nice sturdiness to it.

Let's face it - the chincy bracelet / clasp argument is really becoming boring (and outdated). I actually prefer the lighter feel of the older Rolex bracelets, as they tend to float on the wrist better. But alas, we are in an age where heavier, bigger watches are more in style.


----------



## mthwatch

Really - all of this is subjective. I didn't mean to start one of those Rolex vs Omega arguments but my review did start with a comparison - namely the BR02 and the PO. Basically - I can see where my money went with the Planet Ocean. It feels so solid and so well built. The BR02 just didn't *feel* expensive. It didn't feel like a $4000 dollar watch. Not at all. I *wanted* it to feel like a $4000 watch, but it doesn't (to me - again, this is subjective). Now, I was just hanging out at my local AD and the sales lady and I got into a little discussion concerning Rolex. She handed me a couple and I really got to compare the two watches (which is not something I normally do. I've handled Rolex watches only a few times previously). Again, I just didn't feel like the Submariner was *worth* $3500 _*more*_ than my Omega. Where did that money go? Marketing doesn't interest me. 904 grade steel sounds interesting, but not $3500 interesting. If I'm going to be spending a lot of my money on something, I want to know that it largely went into the product that I just purchased.

Using the same logic, I know where the money goes when you purchase, say, a Patek Phillipe, or a JLC or something of that caliber. These watches are (mostly) hand made and you won't be seeing one every ten seconds (especially in a place like San Diego). Someone very skilled (and well paid) spent a long, long time making a watch for you. The high price, in my mind, is largely justifiable. Paying an extra $3500 for the Submariner over the Planet Ocean just doesn't make sense to me. But that's my opinion, and mine only. I really like the stying, I like the size, I love the history and obviously the brand is very prestigious. But I will not be buying one anytime soon because they seem so ludicrously overpriced to me. I have the same problem with Panerai (And I LOVE Panerai!) - and with them you're not even getting a real in-house movement (I know they're starting to do some interesting things, but really...$5000-6000 for a lightly modified ETA movement and no complications? Not on my current Salary!!).

Bottom line - If I was to spend $6000 dollars on a watch, this is what I would do. Save another $4000 and buy a JLC Master Compressor!

Sorry for the long rant....


----------



## mthwatch

Forgot to mention - the moment Omega decides to ramp up their price increases and squeeze out a lot of us...that'll be it for me. I love the 8500 caliber movement and all, but I don't want to spend $6000-$8000 on a Seamaster. I'd rather hold out for a more exclusive brand that is lower volume and more hand made. I'm not a strictly anti-Rolex guy by any means....really. I'm not.


----------



## 3Dials

You, my friend, have _got _to stop writing such in-depth reviews and taking such gorgeous pictures! I was safe from all of you Omega PO fanatics until I saw your beauty. Sigh. Time to start saving...


----------



## sunster

Great review! Love the pics.
Have to say I think you're a little harsh on the BR02...I love mine and I think it compliments the PO nicely in terms of a collection....but then I didn't pay full price for mine as admittedly I'd agree that they're over priced new


----------



## paduncan

mthwatch said:


> Really - all of this is subjective. I didn't mean to start one of those Rolex vs Omega arguments but my review did start with a comparison - namely the BR02 and the PO. Basically - I can see where my money went with the Planet Ocean. It feels so solid and so well built. The BR02 just didn't *feel* expensive. It didn't feel like a $4000 dollar watch. Not at all. I *wanted* it to feel like a $4000 watch, but it doesn't (to me - again, this is subjective). Now, I was just hanging out at my local AD and the sales lady and I got into a little discussion concerning Rolex. She handed me a couple and I really got to compare the two watches (which is not something I normally do. I've handled Rolex watches only a few times previously). Again, I just didn't feel like the Submariner was *worth* $3500 _*more*_ than my Omega. Where did that money go? Marketing doesn't interest me. 904 grade steel sounds interesting, but not $3500 interesting. If I'm going to be spending a lot of my money on something, I want to know that it largely went into the product that I just purchased.
> 
> Using the same logic, I know where the money goes when you purchase, say, a Patek Phillipe, or a JLC or something of that caliber. These watches are (mostly) hand made and you won't be seeing one every ten seconds (especially in a place like San Diego). Someone very skilled (and well paid) spent a long, long time making a watch for you. The high price, in my mind, is largely justifiable. Paying an extra $3500 for the Submariner over the Planet Ocean just doesn't make sense to me. But that's my opinion, and mine only. I really like the stying, I like the size, I love the history and obviously the brand is very prestigious. But I will not be buying one anytime soon because they seem so ludicrously overpriced to me. I have the same problem with Panerai - and with them you're not even getting a real in-house movement (I know they're starting to do some interesting things, but really...$5000-6000 for a lightly modified ETA movement and no complications?).
> 
> Bottom line - If I was to spend $6000 dollars on a watch, this is what I would do. Save another $4000 and buy a JLC Master Compressor!
> 
> Sorry for the long rant....


I COMPLETELY agree with your sentiments. A watch has to speak to you, and if value is an important buying consideration (as is look, feel, etc. for you), I totally understand why you love the PO.

I just want to make sure that people aren't comparing new Omegas with older Rolexes and coming to false conclusions. If the comparison is with new Rolexes and new Omegas, each having the latest revision that both companies offer, that is a fair comparison, and all sentiments as a result are fair game.

I have 5 Omegas and 2 Rolexes so I suppose I fall into the "for one Rolex you can buy a few Omegas" category. Indeed, I was after a Rolex GMT Master IIc, but just couldn't justify the price over a Omega SMP 300m GMT I just picked up, which I absolutely adore. So, for me it isn't Rolex vs. Omega, it is simply "can we start comparing new Omega POs to new Rolex Subs with the latest bracelet, and clasp (and not Explorers, or other watches with older style bracelets and clasps?). Sadly though, the faulty comparisons will keep happening.


----------



## jmsrolls

paduncan said:


> I just want to make sure that people aren't comparing new Omegas with older Rolexes and coming to false conclusions. If the comparison is with new Rolexes and new Omegas, each having the latest revision that both companies offer, that is a fair comparison, and all sentiments as a result are fair game. . . .
> 
> So, for me it isn't Rolex vs. Omega, it is simply "can we start comparing new Omega POs to new Rolex Subs with the latest bracelet, and clasp (and not Explorers, or other watches with older style bracelets and clasps?). Sadly though, the faulty comparisons will keep happening.


There is no need to ramp off onto Rolex vs. Omega but note that the store owner and I were in fact comparing the QoS to the *current* Sub, SD, SDD, GMTIIc, and DSSD models.

As I stated, I love the look and feel of the Oyster on my EXPII but the clasp is uncomfortable on my wrist compared with the clasp on my SMP. The bracelet is really not what one would expect on a watch with an MSRP of almost $6k especially when I compare it to the bracelet on my 2254.50 with an MSRP of $2.3k.

Admittedly, the new Rolex bracelets do have a sturdier look and are an improvement but again, the clasps are not comfortable on *my* wrist. I would also mention that I do not find the clasp on the current ref. 1998 Speedy Pro bracelet to be comfortable either. It boils down to being a matter of personal preference.

And speaking of personal preferences, the SMP GMT and PO cases are too thick for me to wear comfortably. I owned four 2538.20s before giving up and going with the EXPII's lower profile. And as much as I love the looks of the PO, I "make do" with the 2254.50.

Some like vanilla while others prefer chocolate. This would be a boring world if such were not the case.

Fr. John†


----------



## LexWatch

*GREAT REVIEW!* And as such, I also appreciate the great discussion coming from it. Although for most this might be beating a dead horse, for an Omega n00b like me, hearing the comparisons and personal experiences of everyone between the SD and PO really helps me to make my own judgments on what to purchase.

And like Father John said above, the world would definitely be quite boring if we didn't have variety and an individual's passion for their preference..! Cheers everyone. :-!


----------



## mthwatch

LexWatch said:


> *GREAT REVIEW!* And as such, I also appreciate the great discussion coming from it. Although for most this might be beating a dead horse, for an Omega n00b like me, hearing the comparisons and personal experiences of everyone between the SD and PO really helps me to make my own judgments on what to purchase.
> 
> And like Father John said above, the world would definitely be quite boring if we didn't have variety and an individual's passion for their preference..! Cheers everyone. :-!


I absolutely agree. This is a very constructive argument (unlike many I've seen in my time here). But - a lot of it does come down to personal preferences. There is surely some wriggle room in terms of "value", but lets be honest. We ARE talking about a luxury watch purchase! Always go with what you like!


----------



## zeppelin

Can you really get both the bracelet and the rubber strap for just $100 extra??? What's the best way to get both? Can you just tell the AD that you want both?

I'm strongly considering a 42mm just like yours, and I really think it would be cool to have both if it's not too much trouble to change.


----------



## mthwatch

zeppelin said:


> Can you really get both the bracelet and the rubber strap for just $100 extra??? What's the best way to get both? Can you just tell the AD that you want both?
> 
> I'm strongly considering a 42mm just like yours, and I really think it would be cool to have both if it's not too much trouble to change.


No, sorry - I don't think I wrote that section clearly enough. I went with the model with the stainless steel bracelet, and not the rubber because the rubber strap was an extra $150 or so. If I had gone with the rubber, then I was looking at almost $500 for the bracelet alone, if I wanted to order it at a later date. I'm glad I went the way that I did...I decided on the steel bracelet model because it was only $100 or so more than the model that came on rubber...it was a no brainer for me.


----------



## Gharddog03

Pics are awesome. I gotta say the Omega PO 45.5mm is my favorite watch to date. Thanks for the review.

Genaro


----------



## AIKO

paduncan said:


> Was it brand new for 2008 / 2009 or brand new before they made SEL (Solid End Links) standard?
> 
> What I am getting at would be like comparing a brand new Rolex with an Omega 200m Seamaster. Apples and oranges...


I agree.


----------



## Dangerous9

Your Omega is awesome. That's really my grail watch right now. I love it, but can't quite go into more debt to get it right now.....someday thought!


----------



## jmsrolls

AIKO said:


> I agree.


I would agree as well if that were the case however it wasn't.

The AD and I were comparing a brand new 2008 QoS with the complete 2008 lineup of Omega "V" series sport watches.

Apples and apples.

Fr. John†


----------



## Jockinho

Great review of a wonderfull watch. Currently saw one irl and wow, it was as beautiful as it is on the pics. Enjoy it


----------



## dtmartin46

mthwatch-

GREAT review. Good, honest, candid, straight forward feedback on an excellent timepiece. 

This watch is also on the top of my list right now... I ALMOST pulled the trigger on one as a splurge for xmas, but my better financial instincts took over. <| Lame...

I always thought the PO was good, but not great. When I first saw it in person a few years back, I thought "Hmm, thats a a great look, but it's sort of basic..." But after I actually put one on my wrist in an AD, i did a complete 180...I finally tried one on about 6 weeks ago, and instantly fell in love with it. It's just about perfect, IMO. Perfect blend of elegence, sportiness, and quality. The whole phrase "goes good with a business suit, or a wetsuit" is over-used, but the PO definitely embodies this phrase perfectly. Not that i'd ever own/wear only one watch, but if you had to, the PO would fit the bill. 

Thanks again for the great review and pics.


----------



## mthwatch

dtmartin46 said:


> mthwatch-
> 
> GREAT review. Good, honest, candid, straight forward feedback on an excellent timepiece.
> 
> This watch is also on the top of my list right now... I ALMOST pulled the trigger on one as a splurge for xmas, but my better financial instincts took over. <| Lame...
> 
> I always thought the PO was good, but not great. When I first saw it in person a few years back, I thought "Hmm, thats a a great look, but it's sort of basic..." But after I actually put one on my wrist in an AD, i did a complete 180...I finally tried one on about 6 weeks ago, and instantly fell in love with it. It's just about perfect, IMO. Perfect blend of elegence, sportiness, and quality. The whole phrase "goes good with a business suit, or a wetsuit" is over-used, but the PO definitely embodies this phrase perfectly. Not that i'd ever own/wear only one watch, but if you had to, the PO would fit the bill.
> 
> Thanks again for the great review and pics.


Thanks for the very kind words. I tried to be as honest as possible.

I had the same initial reaction to the PO...and the whole Omega line actually. Very nice, but perhaps boring. And then I put one on. I warmed up to it, for sure. About two days later, I had fallen pretty hard for it. It just feels so GREAT on the wrist. It feels special. Take tonight, for example. I'm just out of the gym. I probably look terrible. I'm out getting a quick coffee - shorts and a tank top (hey, its not my fault I live in San Diego and it was 78 degrees today - sorry mid-westerners! And northerners! And anyone else cold) BUT - I throw the Omega on and damn, suddenly I don't care! A little like the way Bond walks into the most luxurious hotels all bloody and beaten, torn clothes, etc. But that Omega is still nice and shiny!


----------



## krpster

Awesome review!:-! The more I see the PO the more I want one....great pics!


----------



## Sodiac

Great review, great photos, great watch! I want one!


----------



## nbachff

I was on the fence between a rolex submariner and the PO. You have sold me on the PO with your review and amazing pics. Great wrist shots! Thank you!


----------



## mthwatch

nbachff said:


> I was on the fence between a rolex submariner and the PO. You have sold me on the PO with your review and amazing pics. Great wrist shots! Thank you!


Wow. That's a bit of pressure. But really, I don't think you can go wrong if you really love the PO. I hope you enjoy it as much as I do.


----------



## razer

The pictures are just fabulous. They do complete justice to the watch.

I've been doing the usual ping-pong between watches, and every time I feel that I've strayed away a bit from my grail, I come back to this thread. One look at the pictures and your review, and all others are quickly forgotten.

Truly a great write up.


----------



## Roger Federer

Great review, great pics, fantastic watch:-!


----------



## mthwatch

razer said:


> The pictures are just fabulous. They do complete justice to the watch.
> 
> I've been doing the usual ping-pong between watches, and every time I feel that I've strayed away a bit from my grail, I come back to this thread. One look at the pictures and your review, and all others are quickly forgotten.
> 
> Truly a great write up.


...Very kind words. I feel the same way every single time I check the time. Anytime I start thinking about the "next" watch, I feel satiated. I haven't bought a watch since November. Kind of a record for me.


----------



## seaside

Very cool pictoral review, thank you! It is clear to me that PO really shines in true life pics. It's full of many neat design details, old and new, cleaverly combined. And it works! The becel is the design part I'm drawn instantly whenever I see PO. Omega really got that one right. Kudos for them too that you can choose between 42 mm and 45,5 mm models, so people with smaller wrists at least have an option! |> I am curious about thickness though, since my SMP 300 M has lower profile, how has it felt in use. I once tried blue Seamaster Chrono with it's 15,5 mm and difference was considerable. Somehow it's easier to forgive encreased thickness for chronos... I don't think that profile is a dealbreaker for me, though. Have to get back to it when the blue chrono issue is solved...! b-) PS. You have some REALLY nice pics there! :-!


----------



## mxv

I recently bought an Omega AT at an AD. When I got home from the AD I found this forum and started reading reviews/posts similar to this one on the PO and absolutely fell in love with it.

This was an excellent review and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it and seeing the pics. Since I bought the AT, I am now trying to flip it to use the proceeds for a new or 'like new' PO. Having ~6.5 wrists, I think I'll go with the 42mm in black/white. The look is stunning.

As for Rolex, personally, they look like a status symbol watch to me that screams "look at me". In my opinion, Rolex is just flamboyantly extravagant. I'm sure that they are well made, but personally, I would never own one because I'm not that type of 'flashy' person. Whereas Omegas, are more of a 'stealth' luxury watch, because they are clearly beautifully designed, well made watches that exude quality and workmanship. That is what I personally want out of watch.

I think the first time I saw a diver's watch was in a James Bond film. (It was an old James Bond with Sean Connery.) I think the thought of getting a diver watch like that was planted then and re-enforced in subsequent Bond films. However, over time, the thought of Rolex became less attractive to me because it was increasingly becoming (if it wasn't already) a status symbol watch. 

When I broadened my horizons beyond Rolex and independent of Bond, Omega watches just caught my eye (~5years ago). That is when I bought my first Omega SMP 300 in mid. I liked it but thought the case too small and the look wasn't as traditional as I wanted. The OP hit it out of the park for me with the PO. Based on my wrist size I think a 42mm is the way to go for me. 

Apologize for the digression, but just wanted to thank you again for the excellent photos and review.

Matt
:-!


----------



## richardbb85

nice watch :-!

thanks for the review too


----------



## shogo_ca

I was torn between speedmaster and PO and now my choice is made.

The only problem: its gonna be my first high end watch, where will i stop?


----------



## zeromaster

Wow great review I myself own an Orange Dial and you could not say it better everything in this review is right on.
I hardly wear my PO but I think I will start wearing it more now haha.
I also owned a Rolex YM and the PO is brighter at night. The YM has the brighters lumn than any other rolexes and the PO is even brighter.


----------



## lwendt33

When is the price supposed to go up on the Omega Seamaster Professional 600m PO? Did it already go up or what date did prices go up? I'm looking at the model with the rubber band and was quoted a price around $3000. That was from a FAD.


----------



## Joe Joe

Beautiful watch ! Thats going to be my next buy !!!!! :-!


----------



## slapshot18

Was very close to buying this watch but may opt for Panerai 104 now.


----------



## Stipey

Thanks for the review... It's a great wathch :-!


----------



## Swifty2k

Great review! 

Fantastic looking watch! If there weren't so many around here, I'd have a 42mm black/black please!


----------



## Ginuwine

Great review! the watch is also beautiful!!!


----------



## murfdog

OMG I'm in love....will you marry me? The Omega, not the owner..............


----------



## honeyjames

I like this watches. It is really a beautiful. I have two watches of Omega. It is made by good quality. To wear a button and comfort in the absurdity of the quantum is not written on the face of quantum limited edition.


----------



## maxhav

That's an amazing piece! Definitely in my to-buy-before-I-die list!

Thanks for the amazing pics!


----------



## TDKK

Wowser!


----------

