Alex at asks the following:

“Omega seems to have a good history and nice design. But my perception is that the Purists do not really rate Omegas? Or am I mistaken?”

I don’t consider myself to be a Purist or member of the Purists, because I rarely post there. However, for a ‘generic’ or ‘public’ forum, it is one of the best around so I like to lurk over there.

I would expect that Omega is not in the league of most Purists, because Omega isn’t exactly a manufacturer. But, as one of the answers demonstrate, Omega seems to get ‘mad props’ because of its diversity, history and classics (e.g. Speedmaster). Although I am personally heavily disappointed by most new Omega models, except for their bestseller, the Planet Ocean, I have to agree with this comment on

On the other hand, I also feel to have out-grown Omega as a brand, without wanting to sound arrogant in any way. I consider my vintage Omega Speedmaster Professional with caliber 321 one of the nicest pieces one can get from the brand, and almost all other Omegas from my collection (including Seamasters, Speedmaster Pro’s and others) had to make way for watches of other brands. I really don’t know which Omega I would be interested in at the moment. Perhaps the DeVille with Rattrapante (and Co-Axial movement), but then again.. that’s almost in the same league (price-level) as my long wanted Audemars Piguet Royal Oak. And I am afraid that a nice watch as the DeVille Rattrapante would loose in a decision like that….

Anyway, as long as I haven’t got the money for ‘another’ watch, I am not having this problem 🙂

  • Martijn

    Strangely I think that omega is a brand which most collectors have in their early days of collecting. The reasons for that are numerous; famous name, intresting history, lot too choose from, exspensive enough to have status, but not out of reach for most people. To me, it has been a while since I bought an Omega. Their current catalogue has nothing that I really fancy, and even the Planet Ocean is not my cup of tea.
    Have I moved on? I guess so…

    Last week I saw the DeVille Rattrapante. Although it is an intresting complication, I cant find myself in the dial. It is different….but I’m really affraid that within a few years it has lost all of its attraction. I guess for me it misses the timeless look of for example a Royal Oak.

  • georges zaslavsky

    Under hayek, many things went wrong. First Omega ceased to manufacture its own movements and replaced them by average quality etas who aren’t modified by Omega but by Eta for Omega.The coaxial I don’t really believe in it, more a marketing hype than something truely exceptional.Older Omega series of inhouse movements like the cal 100x, 101x, 102x and 103x are of far better quality than an eta 2892-a2.They didn’t need that much tlc like the eta movement who needs to be serviced every 5 years.I am not even tallking about the catastrophic reliability of the cal 33xx which is far to me the reliability of a 861, 1040, 1045 and 321 chrono.Omega isn’t what it used to be.Omega is an assembleur since 1984,an assembleur is far to offer the same quality of products as compared to a manufacture.