ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
6 September 2018, 07:28 PM | #1 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 27
|
Something not right with 116719BLRO
Hi,
I’m very new to this, so please forgive me if I am completely wrong here. I have been looking at GMT master II’s and noticed that the date window on this one looks different (smaller magnification). I have attached a picture of another watch of the same model from the same seller to show the difference. Am I missing something here or is there a reason the date windows look so different between these watches? |
6 September 2018, 07:33 PM | #2 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Kings Bromley
Posts: 444
|
Top one doesn't seem right to me but I'm a novice so let somebody chip in with a more experienced opinion.
|
6 September 2018, 07:43 PM | #3 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Real Name: Eric
Location: AZ
Watch: 4&5-digit Sub/GMTs
Posts: 1,974
|
Quote:
In other cases, the date magnification can sometimes look "off" depending on the distance and focal length of the lens being used. |
|
6 September 2018, 08:01 PM | #4 |
TRF Moderator & 2024 Patron
Join Date: Dec 2007
Real Name: Ken
Location: SW Florida
Watch: One on my wrist.
Posts: 63,322
|
Exactly
__________________
SPEM SUCCESSUS ALIT |
6 September 2018, 10:12 PM | #5 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Halifax
Posts: 518
|
I would question that too ! I learned something new today :)
|
6 September 2018, 10:53 PM | #6 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Real Name: Matt
Location: Florida
Watch: GMT IIc
Posts: 90
|
Here is a thread on the issue. Looks like it was prevalent around 2014.https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=378176
|
7 September 2018, 03:56 AM | #7 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Kings Bromley
Posts: 444
|
If I'm ever in the market for a WG Pepsi then at least I know now
|
7 September 2018, 05:44 AM | #8 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: England
Posts: 518
|
Who’s the seller? Can’t imagine anyone selling such an expensive Watch providing such horrible pictures...
|
7 September 2018, 06:49 AM | #9 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: England
Watch: 16710, 16628
Posts: 7,755
|
Wouldn't deter me but I'm glad Rolex sorted it. Looks aftermarket, but isn't. ..Well it might be.
__________________
GMT II 16710 TRADITIONAL ( D- Serial #) ROLEXFANBOY P-Club Member #4 |
7 September 2018, 01:46 PM | #10 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: Adam
Location: Costa Blanca,
Watch: YMII,GMTII,DAYTONA
Posts: 5,288
|
Known issue or not, and based on your one poor photo.
Act with extreme caution 2nd photo - ALL looks good - 1st photo NOT! A
__________________
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. Winston Churchill "We judge ourselves by what we feel capable of doing, while others judge us by what we have already done." |
8 September 2018, 12:46 AM | #11 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 27
|
Thanks all. A bit surprising to hear that Rolex let these through their quality control. If I had paid that much I’m not sure I would be happy getting one with a lame cyclops.
Sorry for the bad photos. These are extreme close ups from those advertised as the seller has a very good reputation and I suspected there would be a logical explanation without unfairly tarnishing their record. I was therefore trying to avoid any clearly identifiable clues from the photos. Once again thanks for everyone’s insight! |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.