WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

281 - 300 of 333 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,606 Posts
Actually in most movies the watch has been issued by the government agency. If they are both spies, could make sense they both have the same watch. I don’t want to know more about the movie but saying this could be consistent with storyline.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dont encourage them. I can imagine the dialogue

"Q, I need a new watch, it needs to be very strong but also light and very accurate"

"youre in luck, Bond speaks very highly of this watch, unfortunately, only licence to kill agents are issued these on bracelet but I think youll find this Nato strap is both durable and comfortable, im particularly fond of the coffee coloured stripes. Speaking of coffee, I find this krups coffee machine to be compact, ergonomically designed and has variable strength setting for those long night missions"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
423 Posts
Nomi is indeed wearing the nato variant of the same 007 watch in the movie..



She will be wearing an Aqua Terra on nato later on as well..

Well so much for consistency and wearing one watch for her throughout the movie.

If she's wearing the same watch as Bond, thats almost as crap as the conversation on the train in Casino Royale. Product placement is one thing but toe curling references to the brand and blatant placement like that isnt good. The way theyre going its going to look like an episode of an apple tv show with their products on screen every 10 minutes. I still want to try this watch on though. I hope I hate it!
I thought the scene in Casino Royale was both funny and sad. Funny in that the brand actually made it in to the conversation. As well as Rolex, which if they were really going to do a true reboot, they should have gone back to Rolex. And Rolex would make a new and perhaps more affordable dive watch. But that's just my dream that will probably never happen.

And sad that it's that blatant now when in the old movies just a watch shot was good enough. Also I recall Vesper sizing up Bond so well that she knows his measurements. One of those movie things that sound cool but are almost impossible in real life. For example. I wear a 31 / 32 in pants. But waist sizes vary by brand and at times are an inch or two off to make people feel better about their size. If Vesper could somehow know Bond's clothing size then she easily would be able to tell between a Rolex and Omega.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,146 Posts
Gorgeous watch!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
360 Posts
So I am not the biggest fan of Omega but they absolutely nailed this one. It is feather light, feels awesome on the wrist (if you can feel it at all), the mesh bracelet is pretty good and I love the dial. As a fan of James Bond it is a must have for me as No Time to Die will be Daniel Craig's last appearance as the legendary character and therefore this watch will be iconic in the future
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
945 Posts
I've got to agree. Everything about the watch is perfect. Size, weight, look. The lume and dial color looks like a deliberate design choice, not just trying to make it look older than it is. I love the no-date dial's beautiful balance and the on-trend use of the mesh bracelet.

There's just one problem: the movement.

Omega fitted it with the cal.8806, which is a fine movement, but they could have given it the cal.8400 and that all but ruins the watch for me.
(The cal.8806 is simply a no-date version of the 8800, the 8400 is the no-date version of the 8500.)

Why is this significant? The 8400 has the independently-adjustable hour hand of the 8400/8900 movements. (This means you can pull out the crown to what would normally be the date-setting position and jump the hour around without stopping the watch. It's ideal for traveling across time-zones or adjusting for daylight saving time without having to hack and re-set the time.*)

Between the 8800 and 8500/8900 I can understand why some people prefer a quickset date vs. an independent hour hand, but for a no-date watch, there's simply no reason to exclude such a glorious feature. I'm sure James Bond, who travels quite a bit, would appreciate being able to quickly change time-zones without having to stop the watch, especially when, in his line of work, he might not always be able to locate a reference clock to set his watch by.


*To see the 8400 in action, check out any video going over the features of the Seamaster 300 Master Co-axial.
 
  • Like
Reactions: keisuke_z

·
Registered
Joined
·
747 Posts
I swear Omega has a knack for making very appealing, special versions of their core watches.

Such a good looking watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,024 Posts
Odd cutout on the side of the case.. I wonder why.



No cutout on the other steel or black ceramic SMP's..


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
423 Posts
As a fan of James Bond it is a must have for me as No Time to Die will be Daniel Craig's last appearance as the legendary character and therefore this watch will be iconic in the future
Maybe and maybe not. I don't think many are after the Rolex from OHMSS. The Pierce Brosnan Seamaster was very popular though. Daniel Craig is a odd Bond who I believe might wear more different one brand watch models than any previous Bond. I would agree if he wore this No Time to Die Seamaster from the beginning. I'm going to wait and see the movie. And perhaps until the announcement of the next Bond actor. Then decide on the watch. I do really like it with that strap. And I think it is the best modern vintage looking watch I've seen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
I've got to agree. Everything about the watch is perfect. Size, weight, look. The lume and dial color looks like a deliberate design choice, not just trying to make it look older than it is. I love the no-date dial's beautiful balance and the on-trend use of the mesh bracelet.

There's just one problem: the movement.

Omega fitted it with the cal.8806, which is a fine movement, but they could have given it the cal.8400 and that all but ruins the watch for me.
(The cal.8806 is simply a no-date version of the 8800, the 8400 is the no-date version of the 8500.)

Why is this significant? The 8400 has the independently-adjustable hour hand of the 8400/8900 movements. (This means you can pull out the crown to what would normally be the date-setting position and jump the hour around without stopping the watch. It's ideal for traveling across time-zones or adjusting for daylight saving time without having to hack and re-set the time.*)

Between the 8800 and 8500/8900 I can understand why some people prefer a quickset date vs. an independent hour hand, but for a no-date watch, there's simply no reason to exclude such a glorious feature. I'm sure James Bond, who travels quite a bit, would appreciate being able to quickly change time-zones without having to stop the watch, especially when, in his line of work, he might not always be able to locate a reference clock to set his watch by.


*To see the 8400 in action, check out any video going over the features of the Seamaster 300 Master Co-axial.
Trel

I’m pretty sure that the 8806 was chosen for two reasons. One is thickness. The SMP Bond is a pretty slim watch by today’s standards. The 8500/8900 series are bigger, thicker, dual barrel movements. They are 5.5 to 5.6 mmm thick. I’m pretty sure they are sturdier also. Using these movements on the watch would mean a thicker and bigger SMP. The 8800 is smaller and at least 1mm thinner.

The second reason is cost. Being a more robust movement with more features means more money. The SMP is a less expensive watch compared to something like a Planet Ocean. You can’t fault Omega for saving the more expensive movement for the more expensive watch in order to create a better value proposition. Also, the 8800 is very comparable in size and thickness to the 2500 it replaces. I could be wrong but I think the 8800 was created as a replacement for the 2500.

Like you state, the independently adjustable hour hand is one of the features of the 8500/8900 series. Some people might not appreciate this and might like the “quick date change” in the 8800 series and other movements. But this system is more prone to damaging the date change mechanism by changing the date without taking into consideration the position of the hands. The 8500/8900 cannot be damaged this way. It is my understanding that damaging the date change mechanism is one of the most common problems with mechanical watches. If I remember correctly, this is one of the things Omega tried to address when they created the 8500 movement years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,024 Posts
Trel

I’m pretty sure that the 8806 was chosen for two reasons. One is thickness. The SMP Bond is a pretty slim watch by today’s standards. The 8500/8900 series are bigger, thicker, dual barrel movements. They are 5.5 to 5.6 mmm thick. I’m pretty sure they are sturdier also. Using these movements on the watch would mean a thicker and bigger SMP. The 8800 is smaller and at least 1mm thinner.

The second reason is cost. Being a more robust movement with more features means more money. The SMP is a less expensive watch compared to something like a Planet Ocean. You can’t fault Omega for saving the more expensive movement for the more expensive watch in order to create a better value proposition. Also, the 8800 is very comparable in size and thickness to the 2500 it replaces. I could be wrong but I think the 8800 was created as a replacement for the 2500.

Like you state, the independently adjustable hour hand is one of the features of the 8500/8900 series. Some people might not appreciate this and might like the “quick date change” in the 8800 series and other movements. But this system is more prone to damaging the date change mechanism by changing the date without taking into consideration the position of the hands. The 8500/8900 cannot be damaged this way. It is my understanding that damaging the date change mechanism is one of the most common problems with mechanical watches. If I remember correctly, this is one of the things Omega tried to address when they created the 8500 movement years ago.
Pretty sure the only difference between the 8800 and 8806 is the no date function on the 8806. The black ceramic SMP uses the 8806 as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,024 Posts
Trel

I’m pretty sure that the 8806 was chosen for two reasons. One is thickness. The SMP Bond is a pretty slim watch by today’s standards. The 8500/8900 series are bigger, thicker, dual barrel movements. They are 5.5 to 5.6 mmm thick. I’m pretty sure they are sturdier also. Using these movements on the watch would mean a thicker and bigger SMP. The 8800 is smaller and at least 1mm thinner.

The second reason is cost. Being a more robust movement with more features means more money. The SMP is a less expensive watch compared to something like a Planet Ocean. You can’t fault Omega for saving the more expensive movement for the more expensive watch in order to create a better value proposition. Also, the 8800 is very comparable in size and thickness to the 2500 it replaces. I could be wrong but I think the 8800 was created as a replacement for the 2500.

Like you state, the independently adjustable hour hand is one of the features of the 8500/8900 series. Some people might not appreciate this and might like the “quick date change” in the 8800 series and other movements. But this system is more prone to damaging the date change mechanism by changing the date without taking into consideration the position of the hands. The 8500/8900 cannot be damaged this way. It is my understanding that damaging the date change mechanism is one of the most common problems with mechanical watches. If I remember correctly, this is one of the things Omega tried to address when they created the 8500 movement years ago.
Pretty sure the only difference between the 8800 and 8806 is the no date function on the 8806. The black ceramic SMP uses the 8806 as well. Everything else about them both is the same from the diameter to the power reserve etc. They use the 8806 coz of the no date.
 
281 - 300 of 333 Posts
Top