Like this content? Please check out The Real Time Show podcast, where my friends Alon, Rob and I give you a peek behind the curtains of the watch industry, all while offering our candid, unfiltered thoughts.

Note 1: In this article I provide many links to external sources. I provide these only for credit or further context, and no endorsement is implied. I do not receive any compensation from providing these links.

Note 2: If you do want to support my work on this site, please do visit my SHOP page.

Edit 11/27/2022: Added some text explaining my thoughts on why a dive watch is a good choice for a “One Watch” versus other categories such as “tool watch” and “dress watch”.

I’ve been into watches for well over a decade now, but it’s only recently that I think I’ve settled into a very comfortable groove within the hobby.

I feel confident stating that anyone passionate about any interest can relate to the typical progression of the watch-nerd: you start off wanting to experience as much as possible, but over time you gain more knowledge, you become more sure of your preferences, and you end up content with owning just the smallest number of pieces that most suit you.

In watch-world, the logical, highly discussed end to this journey is “The One Watch”. This is the point where, after years of buying, hoarding and flipping, someone arrives at the horological nirvana of owning that one model that will be so satisfying that they never feel the need to own another watch ever again, and they can live out their days simply by constantly refreshing the Watchicity app.

For “normies”, this is absurd, I mean…

“Who even needs a watch at all when you can just check your phone?"

If you’ve found this page though, you’re in way too deep already and you know that “The One Watch” ideal is so coveted because for you and me, it’s just that:

An ideal.

The One Watch is the endpoint somewhere off in the distance of a journey that is highly personal, but for me, I think I've gotten as close as I may ever get with the Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean 600 m in 39.5 mm sizing, with a black dial (reference number 215.30.40.20.01.001).

Am I Omega-biased? Yes. Am I an Omega “fanboy” though?

The Urban Dictionary defines a “fanboy” as follows:

“An extreme fan or follower of a particular medium or concept, whether it be sports, television, film directors, video games (the most common usage), etc.
Known for a complete lack of objectivity in relation to their preferred focus. Usually argue with circular logic that they refuse to acknowledge. Arguments or debates with such are usually futile. Every flaw is spun into semi-virtues and everything else, blown to comedic, complimentary proportions.”

With regards to Omega, that’s not me.

At least I don’t think so…

As I mentioned in the intro, over the years I’ve become very comfortable with what I care to sink my money into, and over the last few years those choices have consistently involved Omega. Here are some examples:

1. After buying and loving the blue-dial Omega Seamaster 300M with a blue dial, I found a deal I could not pass up on a black dial and went for it (because “options”…)

2. I thought I wanted to add a Panerai to my collection, but ultimately further research got me much more excited about the titanium Planet Ocean Chronograph 600 m

I get it, some of you might now be muttering to yourself “well good for you David, congratulations on being a free-thinker and really doing your part to support the underdogs of this industry”.

But, let’s be honest: Omega makes some fantastic watches, full stop, and the brand happens to do so in large part because it is so well-known and well-capitalized.

To the extent that everyone comes from different backgrounds and likes different things, your mileage may vary when it comes to the Swatch Group’s cash cow, but my journey really has led me there. Maybe I’ll write a more in-depth post in the future on why Omega aligns so closely with my tastes, but at a high-level, I really appreciate that:

1. The brand has a wealth of iconic models from which to choose and an absolutely gigantic back-catalog

2. It packs impressive amounts of tech into its watches, leading to some of the strongest bang-for-buck you can find in the market

3. Omega watches are, for the most part, readily available for purchase

4. The brand is not afraid to take risks technically, which occasionally leads to some misses, certainly, but overall gives the impression of an organization that doesn’t rest on its laurels for too long

That last point is worth dwelling on for just a moment because it speaks directly to one of the complaints you hear a lot from seasoned collectors: the industry pushes out vintage re-issue after vintage re-issue, never really caring to put the time and effort into new things.

When I wrote that Omega does well because it’s well-capitalized, that’s true but it’s only part of the story, and indeed it does disservice to the risk-taking that has gotten Omega to where it is.

For instance, the co-axial escapement bounced around for decades as an idea - from one of the most respected minds in the business, so it’s not as if the concept lacked credibility - until Omega finally decided not only to take the plunge, but commit to it fully as part of their brand identity.

You could also point to the recent Chrono Chimes or the Aqua Terra Ultra Light as examples of a brand that makes watches for the deep-pocketed, hard-core enthusiast just as well as it makes killer watches for the mainstream.

But no, I am not a fanboy.

I’ve never had that much of an urge to buy a Moonwatch: there’s no date complication and the water resistance kind of sucks.

The brand’s vintage re-issues (like the Seamaster Diver 300) don’t do anything at all for me.

Overall, not everything they make is to my taste, but the things I like - due to the company’s technical chops, their design language, etc. - I really like.

Before sitting down to this review, I felt I had to write what amounts to a quite long disclaimer, because if you consider an article I wrote a few months back on an Omega Aqua Terra, plus this one, plus some others that may come down the pipeline, you may be inclined to disregard my thoughts immediately because I can come across a a “fanboy”.

Do I usually have a positive, pre-conceived notion of an Omega model because of my perception of the brand and my successful experiences with their watches?

Absolutely.

Does that mean I stan for anything and everything the company releases?

Absolutely not.

I buy what I like, and on that point, keep in mind that because I don’t work for a blog, I don’t just get sent models to try out. What I write about is what I own, and though that’s a clear sample bias, I think it’s a sample bias with some weight to it.

With all that in mind, believe me when I tell you that the Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean 600 m in the 39.5 mm configuration is a really, really…

REALLY

Good (one) watch.

The case is 100% Omega - with all that entails - and I’m here for it

Different people are going to have different opinions on what type of watch is ideal as a “One Watch”. My personal view is that if I have to wear strictly one watch every day, it’s going to be a dive watch. I’ll freely admit to never having strapped on even a single scuba tank, but dive watches are so ubiquitous nowadays that they are what comes to mind when you think “watch”. Throw in water resistance and looks that are accepted as conventional more or less everywhere (especially in today’s “casualized” society), and you’ve got a prime candidate for the franchise tag.

Yes, one could opt for a dress watch but those can be very limiting depending on your use-cases. Also, while a dive watch could certainly fall under the category of “tool watch”, when I think of the latter I’m seeing something like a Sinn, which is incredibly utilitarian, but maybe to the point of overdoing it if you have to dress up (again, anything goes nowadays, and this is my personal opinion only!).

Whatever your specific choice, Omega is remarkable in that it covers, or has covered, pretty much everything. Furthermore, despite Omega’s expansive range of models, you don’t have to look too hard to realize that there is absolutely a unifying set of design codes to tie most modern offerings together, especially in the Seamaster line.

The first design cue that I recognize instantly are the “lyre” or “twisted” lugs. That second term is a bit of a misnomer, because it’s not so much that the lugs were created then bent, but rather that there is a large, polished bevel running down each side of the case, giving the impression this housing was machined and then contorted.

Omega has also chosen to make the lugs relatively stubby, which makes the overall case look more “tonneau”/”Turtle”-ish than round. If you know modern Omega watches, you know that this has allowed the company to do away with crown guards entirely, by enveloping the crown with the case.

This can occasionally make the crown somewhat hard to grip and turn, though this component is deeply knurled which does help with getting a solid grip. However, proportioning the case in such a fashion goes goes a long way to mitigating two other aspects of Omega’s case design that get much, much more negative attention from watch enthusiasts:

1. The diameter of the watches, but especially

2. The case thicknesses

Regarding the diameter, Omega stands out by offering several different sizes. This is unusual in the watch industry, where every new release is greeted by groans of “if only they had made it a 1mm smaller/larger, it would have been an insta-buy”. This absolutely should seem strange because in pretty much other sector of the apparel industry, it is totally normal to offer a range of sizes to suit different client tastes and body types.

Where it gets tricky is that the various sizes of the Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean 600 m do not offer the same specs; I’ll cover this at various points throughout the article, but for now I’ll just say that if it’s wearability you are after, the 39.5 mm model is the one you want to go for.

Whereas the now-discontinued 37.5 mm model looks just a tad awkward (on account of being smaller than pretty much every other dive watch on the market), and the 43.5 mm versions can quickly be overwhelming if you don’t like your watches oversized (note there was a 42 mm version for sale in the past, but for this article I’ll stick to what’s currently available on Omega’s website), the 39.5 mm is a “Goldilocks” watch that will look and feel fantastic the instant you try it on.

Ok, so on my particular reference the diameter is great, but for many watch lovers, the Achilles’ heel of Omega cases is not diameter, but thickness, and let me tell you:

Trigger warning #1: No, this case is NOT “too thick”!

It doesn’t matter what the thickness for any Omega dive watch happens to be, there will always be someone who says “it’s too thick”.

Why?

Simply because it’s an Omega dive watch, and apparently anything that comes out of Biel/Bienne that’s meant for diving is “too thick”.

But, really, “too thick” for what?

Is a bank vault door “too thick”?

Maybe, if you were trying to fit it into a residential house, but it would be totally justified if your goal was to secure a large assortment of valuables.

The 39.5 mm Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean measures in, per Omega’s own specs, at 14.2 mm thick.

This is not some random number meant to upset watch buyers (after all, no easier way to sell something to your customers than to set out to upset them on purpose…), but rather a dimension that resulted from a deliberate design process, dictated by an overall design intent.

At some point early-on, someone decided they wanted this watch to have 600 m of water resistance, then someone else calculated how thick the watch would have to be to withstand this pressure (with another deliberate design aspect, a see-through caseback!) and then the design team did some massaging of the proportions (within the technical constraints) of all the elements to end up with the final product.

So, is it this watch “too thick”?

Not to Omega, to them, it’s exactly as intended!

What about to you?

Well, what do you see yourself wearing it with?

If you consistently wear the tightest of dress shirts, day-in and day-out, sure, I could see that being a problem.

But if you spend your days working from home, or in business casual at the office, and then spend weekends outdoors, this watch will be absolutely, 100% fine for you.

Now, does this watch ultimately look like something that appeals to you?

That’s another thing entirely and the answer comes down to your subjective assessment.

But, is this Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean 39.5 mm - or in any other size, frankly - “too thick” in an absolute sense?

Of course not.

Trigger warning #2: The Helium Escape Valve (HEV) is not a big deal!

The second iconic aspect of many of the Omega Seamaster models is the Helium Escape Valve, and perhaps unsurprisingly, this design cue can be quite polarizing.

Indeed, I’ve heard people refer to it as a wart on the side of the case, and I’ve even seen someone ask if removing it and welding the case shut will void the Omega warranty (I literally cringed writing that sentence).

My two cents on this follow the same lines as they do for the case thickness: this was not just stuck on the watch arbitrarily, and whether you like it or not is totally up to you, but just because you don’t care for the HEV, that does not imply that the design is flawed.

I will never even come close to saturation diving so of course, for me the HEV is totally superfluous, but you know what?

I hardly ever notice it now, and I would be surprised if someone didn’t feel the same way after wearing the watch for even a short amount of time.

As far as I’m concerned, the HEV is part of Omega’s design language, and if I buy an Omega, it’s because I like the way Omegas look, HEV included!

It’s a wild notion, but bare with me: if every watch has to be bounded by a certain thickness range, and can only have such-and-such things present (or not) to look attractive, then that’s pretty fricking boring.

If what you want is a Submariner - the prototypical, stripped-down, never-really-changed example of what a dive watch looks like - then by all means, get a Submariner.

Personally, I’d much rather live in a world that has a ton of cool options from which to choose, which can then suit everyone’s own tastes and preferences.

I promise that I’m not trying to gaslight you into thinking some really weird looking watch is actually totally conventional, in an effort to make myself feel better about my own choices.

The Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean 39.5 is not an "out-there” design at all, it just happens to be its own thing, stemming from it being Omega’s take on the traditional dive watch. If you do happen to get comments from passers-by, I’m 99% sure they won’t be from anyone wondering what the hell you were thinking, but rather from fellow horologists complimenting you on your Omega!

The bezel is far less controversial

Having gotten so heated about the overall case shape, it’s probably good that I end the discussion of the overall case configuration with the bezel, which is…

Totally fine.

That sounds like a backhanded compliment, but it’s not intended to be.

When I say that the bezel is “fine”, I mean that it does a very good job at what it is meant to do: the action is pleasantly clicky and the knurling on its edge provides a stable surface which you can grab when you’d like to turn it.

My two favorite parts about the bezel are subjective and in-line with why I like Omega generally. First, I really like the Liquidmetal construction of the bezel insert, whereby molten metal is pressed into cut-outs on a ceramic dial. The engineering that must have gone into this is awesome and is the type of work I’d expect from Omega. If you’re used to the Submariner’s bezel, the Planet Ocean presents a totally different effect, much less matte and far more slick (like, well, liquid metal…).

Second, the font used is fun - in my opinion it wouldn’t look out of place on the speedometer of a modern Porsche - and it really fits with what I think is Omega’s intent to push the standard dive watch design forward into the 21st century.

Suggested improvement item for future models: If I had one complaint about the bezel, it would be that it’s not fully lumed (only the “Creamsicle” configuration offers this feature).

The dial is excellent, but one change could make it perfect

In the 39.5 mm, stainless steel option, Omega offers two dial colors: blue and black. As much as I’m tempted by the idea of a solid gold option with a brown chocolate dial, I’m not there yet, and I think most people will opt for stainless steel.

Assuming you fall into that camp, as much as I really liked the blue dial when I tried it on, if you’re only looking to buy one, I’d say go for the black.

The blue dial is a vibrant, bright blue - it looks beautiful - but in crazy watch-land, the “rules” might say that it could be harder to wear formally. Though the idea of wearing such a colorful watch in the summer is appealing, in my opinion it’s easier to wear a black dive watch in the summer than to try and make a blue dive watch (in this shade of blue) work the rest of the year.

With that aside, my view is that the dial and handset are really well done, again typical of Omega’s design language for the Seamaster Planet Ocean.

The dial itself is made of ceramic, specifically zirconium dioxide and presents a deep, inky sheen to it. Though I wouldn’t say that the Planet Ocean is “blingy”, when you combine the slick Liquidmetal/ceramic bezel with the deep, smooth black ceramic dial, you do end up with something that is premium-looking. If you’re into vintage watches and patina, this is not the watch for you as neither material will age, so short of you dropping the watch and shattering the dial and/or scratching the heck out of the case, it will look the same in 50 years as it does now.

This won’t be the last time I mention Omega’s technical prowess, but I like this “ageless” aspect of the watch. “Charm” is one thing, but durability is another, especially when you’re spending this much money, so the high performance nature of the dial is appealing to me, and I look forward to seeing it shrug off the years I put into it.

Turning to the indices, the 5-minute marker intervals are applied, with the indices shaped, faceted and filled with lume (the minute hand and lume pip are different colors from the rest of the lumed components, to track elapsed time in dark places more clearly). The indices at 6, 9 and 12 are shortened to make room for actual, metallic cut-outs of those numbers.

Suggested improvement item for future models: I would prefer to have the numbers filled with lume also, in the style of the latest Rolex Explorer. Not only would this look fantastic, I’ve read a comment that someone didn’t purchase this watch because in the dark there is no way to differentiate “up” at noon from “down” at 6 (that’s “Crazy Watch World” stuff, but no judgment because I’m in it also), so filling the numbers would address this issue.

There is quite a bit of text on the dial, but it’s broken up by spacing and coloring (the pops of orange are a callback to what appears to be the Planet Ocean line’s “official” color), and I notice in particular the applied “OMEGA” logo. I’ll get to a comparison with the Seamaster 300M later, but on that watch’s dial the logo is printed, helping to establish the Planet Ocean as the premium option, even compared to the venerated Bond icon.

There is a date, which I really appreciate. I’ve written this before and I’ll write it again: if we’re going to convince ourselves that mechanical watches are useful, we should want as much useful information as possible on them. If you fall into the category of “I can check the date on my phone”, that’s a slippery slope towards not wearing a watch at all, and that’s just no fun. I do find the date very useful here, and Omega’s taken the effort to color-match it with the rest of the dial (if you agree with this paragraph, you might like this).

Finally, the hands are classic Omega Planet Ocean, with a broad-arrow for the hours and a longer broad-arrow for the minutes. I suppose that for maximum legibility, it might be better to have two differently shaped hands, but in the daytime you can easily tell which is which, and in the night-time, the minute hand and lume-pip are lumed in different colors from the hour hand and indices, allowing you to read the time easily in low-light conditions.

Overall, this is a dial that doesn’t stray far from the expected configuration of a traditional dive watch, but each element is done in the “Omega Way”, leading to something I expect many watch enthusiasts would recognize even if it were separated from the case.

The bracelet is very good, but…

You knew the Rolex comparisons were coming, and if there’s any aspect of the Planet Ocean that can’t match the Crown, it’s the bracelet. This is however nowhere near a deal-breaker, because it’s more of a testament to just how good Rolex’s bracelets are, rather than a knock on Omega’s offering on the Planet Ocean.

From a qualitative point of view, I like the clasp mechanism. The clasp itself is milled with deep OMEGA engraving, and perhaps due to being vertically brushed, it hasn’t shown much in the way of scratches, despite several months of consistent use. In keeping with the large, polished bevel on the case, and Omega’s attention to detail, the edges of the clasp have a nice, large, polished bevel.

The actual deployant mechanism is activated with a twin-trigger system employing two polished buttons that feel nice and taut; when you close the clasp, you don’t feel as if the watch is going anywhere. When you open the clasp, you can see Omega’s “on-the-fly” adjustment mechanism, which offers you 3 positions of bracelet length, without you having to remove the watch from your wrist.

The links are all brushed (I really like this, as opposed to having, say, the middle links polished) and the bracelet can be sized with screws rather than pins, hats off to Omega for going this route.

This is where the improvements for the next version start:

1. The bracelet does not taper, which is more of a subjective preference on my part

2. The lug width on this 39.5 mm watch is 19 mm. This is such an awkward measurement, but it’s not a deal-breaker because nowadays there are quite a few aftermarket options, and even Omega offers a good selection of very well-made (if very expensive…) straps and bracelets.

3. The overall feel needs to be tightened up to compete with Rolex. This is something you’ll only understand if you’ve handled both a Planet Ocean and a Submariner, but whereas the former has a very well-made bracelet, the latter’s offering feels like something that would work on, well, a submarine.

I’ve spoken exclusively of the bracelet because that’s what I opted for, even though that went against my recent watch-buying habits. Whereas the maxim is to “always buy the bracelet”, I’ve opted for rubber straps on pretty much all my recent Omega watch purchases (and watch purchases generally).

Switching gears to the Seamaster 300M, the rubber straps on offer are sporty, well-made, and very good-looking. For some reason, the Planet Ocean only offers a “dress-type” leather option with a deployant clasp. Apparently these are water-safe but they just look a bit awkward against the “tool” nature of the watch, and it would feel weird taking one of these straps into the water.

Now, if you wanted to opt for an Omega NATO, a “technological-satin” strap, any number of luxe leather options, or the super-expensive but sweet-looking mesh bracelet, you could certainly do that and I’m pretty certain they would all look awesome, but it’s disappointing there is no fitted, full-rubber option as found on the Planet Ocean’s little brother the 300M.

Final recommendation: buy the Planet Ocean on a bracelet.

The movement is typically spectacular for Omega

So far I’ve described a handsome, well-constructed watch. This does count for something, but nowadays that’s table-stakes, because even micro-brands are offering exactly that for around the USD1,000 - USD2,000 mark. Where Omega really shines, and what allows them to charge far more than that for their watches, are their movements.

I’d argue that the modification of an ETA 2892 with the co-axial escapement at the beginning of the 2000’s marked the start of their journey to move all their movements in-house, and they have managed to do just that. I admire Omega for the technical specs of their watches, and if you move farther up the value chain to the manufacture level, it’s hard to argue that there is any other brand out there that beats Omega in terms of industrializing such high-performance movements.

In the 39.5 mm Planet Ocean you’ll find the Omega Master Co-Axial 8800 calibre, which presents a considerable set of characteristics:

1. The movement (and the whole watch, really) meets the rigorous METAS specifications

2. The co-axial escapement is easy to take for granted in 2022, but this really is a phenomenal technical achievement, and you’d usually have to spend way, way more than what the Planet Ocean costs to get anything other than a traditional Swiss Lever escapement

3. Free-sprung balance with silicon balance spring, making the watch essentially amagnetic (mounted on a full balance-bridge for shock resistance)

4. Nicely decorated in an “arabesque” motif, machine-finished certainly, but still very nice to look at

I’ll get into how this compares to other watches further on in the article, but for now I think it’s fair to say that this is a world-class, cutting-edge movement that will absolutely last your lifetime and beyond with proper servicing.

I’m not a watchmaker so I can’t make a completely fact-based comparison to the popular Rolex 3135/3235, but my hypothesis would be that they are comparable in terms of robustness, and I prefer the looks of Omega’s movements (bonus: you can actually SEE Omega’s 8800 through a see-through caseback!).

Suggested improvement item for future models: Whereas the 39.5 mm gets the Calibre 8800, the 43.5 mm Planet Ocean model gets the Calibre 8900, which has many of the same attributes but differs in one key feature: switching up the traditional setting mechanism for a three-hand/date watch for an quick-set hour feature.

In a typical watch, you pull the crown out to hack the watch when the seconds hand reaches twelve, then you set the time by spinning the hour hand, and then quick-set the date. In the 8900 configuration, you can “jump” the hour forward or back in one hour increments while the seconds hand keeps running. Though you lose the quick-set date functionality, I do find the jump-hour capability useful for traveling and daylight-savings time changes.

Comparing the two models on Watchbase, I find that the diameter for the 8800 is 26 mm versus the 8900’s 29 mm measurement, so it makes sense that the larger movement would be in the larger watch. That said, the 8900 has two mainspring barrels for better isochronism, so I don’t think it’s the jump-hour functionality that’s adding to the movement’s diameter.

In future models, even if we can’t get a double-barrel configuration in Omega’s “entry-level” movement, I’d love to see the jump-hour feature added.

The Omega Planet Ocean 600 m 39.5 mm is not a cheap watch, but it does offer tremendous value

Let’s talk price now, because though it’s very easy to become jaded in the watch hobby to what constitutes “value”, I think that for what you’re getting, that is to say a piece of high-tech machinery that you could wear every day for the rest of your life, the Planet Ocean is a great value play.

On Omega’s website, the watch has an MSRP of USD6,550, but…

This is Omega, a brand which seems to genuinely want to put watches in the hands of end-consumers, so these are freely available, and you can even find them on the grey market.

I don’t want to veer off-topic here, so if you prefer to buy from a boutique or an AD, go for it, at the MSRP you’re still getting a lot of watch for the money. If you are a bit of an experienced buyer though, you can get an even better deal.

I’ve seen a blue-dial version of this Planet Ocean on an American grey-market dealer’s Instagram page for less than USD5,000! A quick search on Chrono24 seems to confirm that you can find these all day long for right around that mark, and at that price things start to get really, really interesting for the buyer.

The USD5K mark is, rightly or wrongly, used as the benchmark for “entry level-luxury” in horology; set aside the fact you can great watches for a couple of hundred dollars, and that five thousand bucks is a shit-ton of money, but just humor that premise.

For around USD5,000, you can get a watch that is NOWHERE near entry-level, with cutting-edge specs, killer looks, and from a brand that is recognizable and prestigious.

I’ll take that a step further and state that the Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean 39.5 mm not only stands up when looked at by itself, it also holds up very well to other models against which it might be cross-shopped.

The Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean 600 m isn’t just a “Submariner killer”…

The Oris Aquis Calibre 400

I realize I’m undercutting my “Planet Ocean = killer value” argument right off the bat with this watch, but I wouldn’t feel honest if I left the Oris Calibre 400 out of this dive watch comparison.

Oris really changed the game with this movement and watch, because while it is nowhere near the Planet Ocean, price-wise, the specs - and of course value - are extremely, extremely tasty.

Unfortunately, at the moment the smallest size in which the Calibre 400 is available is a full 2 mm larger than this particular planet ocean. Also, for me the case shape of the Oris has never really done it for me.

Still, Oris set the tone for the industry with this watch, and anytime you’re thinking of spending a couple grand for a dive watch, the Aquis Calibre 400 has to be on the list.

The Tudor Black Bay/Black Bay 58

I’m going to be somewhat controversial here because not only am I lumping two different watches together, I’m also looking at models that are substantially less than a Planet Ocean.

Indeed, a quick Chrono24 search tells me that I can easily find Black Bay 41 mm and Black Bay 58s for around USD2,500 to 3,500.

Considering that even a grey-market Planet Ocean costs about twice as much as one of these excellent Tudor models, is this a valid comparison?

I think so, and here’s why.

I own a Tudor Black Bay Steel, and it presents many of the elements I find appealing in the Planet Ocean: pleasing design, an in-house movement, it comes from a reputable brand-name, and on top of that the bezel has bank vault-like action. Overall, it is a ton of fun to wear.

You could absolutely buy a Tudor Black Bay and be done with buying watches for the rest of your life, but in the context of a much more expensive watch like the Planet Ocean, the following question naturally arises: is the additional cost of the Planet Ocean justified against the lower cost Tudors?

Again, I think so.

Whereas the Tudor Black Bay has a very “vintage” styling, the Planet Ocean, at least to me, looks like a 21st century dive-watch. Also, whereas the Tudors have aluminum (or in my case steel) bezels, the more advanced materials on the Planet Ocean do give that watch a much more premium feel, and of course there’s the fact that the Planet Ocean is substantially more water-resistant.

Finally, whereas the Tudor movements are very good (and I’ve gone on record saying that their specs should mitigate their lack of finishing), the Omega movement, again, looks like something that came out of a high-tech lab, plus it’s nicely finished, plus you can actually see it!

The Tudor Pelagos 39/Tudor Pelagos 42/Tudor Pelagos FXD

Now things are starting to get interesting!

Again, for expediency (this article is already long and only getting longer…) I’m combining several watches, but I’ll come out and say that neither the 39 mm nor the FXD are for me an option due to the lack of a date.

So that leaves the updated Pelagos 42 mm with the in-house (not ETA) movement, and if you’re cross-shopping between this and the Planet Ocean, you’re going to have a hard time deciding.

On Chrono24 these list - shockingly - for somewhere around USD3,500, which means you are getting an obscene amount of watch for the money:

1. Titanium construction

2. An adaptable, spring-mounted bracelet that is exclusive to this watch

3. Tudor even throws a two-piece rubber strap into the deal!

4. 500 m of water resistance

For someone on the fence, I’d imagine the choice would come down to some combination of the following: the more retro styling of the Pelagos 42 compared to the design-forward Planet Ocean, the more subdued look of the Pelagos 42 compared to the Planet Ocean (matte titanium and ceramic vs polished steel and ceramic), the size of 42 mm vs 39.5 mm, and course a brand-name preference.

The Omega Seamaster 300M

Ok, now we get to the really interesting comparisons, the ones that prospective Planet Ocean buyers will realistically make when they are considering this watch.

As I said earlier on, I own both the black and blue version of the Omega Seamaster 300M. Omega did a fantastic job with the 2018 update, turning it from something I originally found way too “90s” into a sleek, contemporary, high-performance diver, all at a price that makes it hard to beat.

That said, if you made me choose between the Seamaster 300M and the Planet Ocean 600 m 39.5, my money would go to the latter. The factors driving this decision are pretty much all totally subjective so you may feel completely differently, but for what it’s worth:

1. The Seamaster 300M presents a diameter/thickness trade-off, in that it’s slightly more thin at 13.6 mm, but at 42 mm it wears more broadly. It’ll be up to you to decide which of the two Omega divers suits you better, but my preference is the smaller, slightly more versatile diameter size.

2. The Omega Seamaster 300M was originally introduced in the early 90s as a signature Omega diver, and even today there’s nothing that looks like it. Over time, that could continue to delight you, or perhaps the novelty might wear off; sometimes, you just want to wear something a bit subdued. I’ll pick on the “wave” dial: some people don’t mind it, some people think it looks awesome, others think it looks a bit cheesy and contrived. Bottom line: if you are attracted to a classic like the Rolex Submariner but don’t want to deal with everything that comes with it (more on that shortly), you may prefer the Planet Ocean 39.5 mm more straightforward styling over the Seamaster 300M..

3. Somewhat related to that point is the very close association that the Seamaster 300M has been granted with respect to the James Bond franchise (reinforced even further with a pair of recently announced 300M watches). Yes, I know the Planet Ocean - among other Omega models besides the 300M - has appeared in 007 movies, but if you played word association with any watch nerd and said “Bond Watch” I’m pretty sure you’d get a majority of respondents saying “Omega 300M”. If you love that, more power to you, but maybe you think wearing the watch veers into “cosplay” and don’t want that association. Granted, there’s fair amount of cosplay involved in watches (and dive watches!) generally, but maybe feeling as if you’re dressed up as a very well-known, fictional character is a bit much for you.

4. Depending on your preference for bracelets vs. rubber straps you may opt for the Planet Ocean over the Seamaster 300M. While I’m sure the Omega 300M bracelet is very well made, even though I recognize it’s part of the watch’s iconic looks, it’s the only part of the watch that still seems dated to me. The 300M wears fantastically on the factory rubber strap option if that’s your jam, but if you prefer bracelets, I would opt for the more modern look of the Planet Ocean.

You can find Seamaster 300M models on either rubber or bracelet for somewhere between USD 3800 and USD 4500, so you’re looking at anywhere from USD 1,000 to USD 1,500 to get from that watch to a Planet Ocean 39.5 mm.

There is no doubt that is a lot of money, but in the context of “One Watch” that will last you a lifetime, I do believe the marginal cost is worth the marginal benefit.

The former is a fantastic watch, while the latter is more premium in ways that are perhaps subtle (the applied dial, the increased water resistance) but notable.

The Rolex Submariner/Sea-Dweller

When you talk about Rolex divers vs. Omega divers, the match-up that most commonly comes up is the Submariner vs. the Seamaster 300M.

This is false.

I understand why people make this equivalency: the Submariner is Rolex’s entry-level dive watch, so it’s only natural to want to compare it to Omega’s entry level model.

Let’s look at the facts though: the Rolex Submariner, if you can get one, is a five-figure watch, with LESS water resistance than the Planet Ocean 39.5 mm.

The reality is that whereas people want to use specs to establish a comparison (such as using the depth rating to make the case the Sea-Dweller is the more appropriate rival), it is completely appropriate not only to match up the Planet Ocean to the Submariner, but to say that the Planet Ocean is indeed the smarter buy.

Yes, the Submariner’s bracelet is better, but objectively…that’s about it, and I say that as someone who’s owned a 16610 and a newer 116613 “Bluesy”.

On top of that, you have to deal with the baggage that comes with owning a Rolex in 2022, so in the end it becomes very clear that not only is the Omega Seamaster 300M highly competitive with the Rolex Submariner for far less money (Rolex arguably doesn’t have anything directly comparable, a testament to Omega’s aggressive pricing/product strategy), the Planet Ocean (to me) is a more interesting, more fun watch, at a price that is also far less than the Rolex Submariner.

A few quick words on the Rolex Sea-Dweller now.

While the watch does have more than double the Planet Ocean’s water resistance, it is 43 mm in diameter and substantially more expensive. I also prefer the Omega’s design language to Rolex’s, which is certainly more classic, but after years seeing, reading and hearing of “ROLEX ROLEX ROLEX” everywhere, to me it has become quite boring.

Unless you really, absolutely, must have The Crown, I could not personally justify the jump in price from the Planet Ocean to the Sea-Dweller; to me the marginal benefit just isn’t worth the marginal cost.

The Blancpain Fifty Fathoms

Once you get passed the Rolex Sea-Dweller, you get into a quite rarefied space I’ll call “super-premium” divers. Indeed, whereas it’s very easy to find a dress watch or general steel sports watch above USD10,000, it’s more difficult finding dive watch models (not counting the fact that some steel watches come in much more expensive precious metal variants).

For ease of comparison, I’ll use the Blancpain Fifty Fathoms as a proxy for the super-premium category as a whole, and again, as great as this watch is (and these watches are), it is hard to justify why you would spend the incremental money relative to the Planet Ocean.

I completely understand that pretty much any mechanical watch is irrational in modern times, so if someone wants to spend extra money on a Blancpain because it makes them happy, they should absolutely do that. I have to believe though that in reality, all but the most deep-pocketed of buyers, for whom many thousands of dollars aren’t even an afterthought, will be doing some sort of cross-shopping, and against the Planet Ocean 39.5 mm, these super-premium divers don’t hold up.

Yes, with the Fifty Fathoms you get titanium construction, a UFO-like lume shot owing to the sapphire-capped, lumed bezel, and a more premium name brand, but the watch is thicker, and at 45 mm in diameter (not considering a number of limited editions) it is far larger than the 39.5 mm Planet Ocean. Also, if you think a 19 mm lug width is awkward, try the Fifty Fathoms’ 23 mm…

These issues are model specific, but broadening this slightly to other super-premium divers, are any of those models really going to exceed Omega’s use of materials and movement excellence to the point where so much additional money is justified?

I don’t believe so.

Comparison final thoughts

Re-reading this section I find it interesting that I’ve built what is - to me, at least - a bell curve for dive watch value (strictly speaking, Swiss dive-watch value, you can flame me in the comments for not including anything from Seiko, and at least the Seiko Marinemaster 300…).

On this bell curve, you have watches that are priced-below the Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean that are still excellent despite not offering quite as much as that watch, and then others priced above the Planet Ocean that aren’t worth the incremental cost (again, to me).

Even if some may disagree with me about the relative positioning of the Planet Ocean when up against these other watches, I think we can all agree on two objective facts:

1. The Planet Ocean is an excellent watch, but

2. Despite being an excellent watch, the Planet Ocean line gets way, way less attention than pretty much every other watch in the comparison list

Why is that?

The Planet Ocean is a callback to the bygone days of “really nice watches”

By pure coincidence, over the days I was mentally outlining this piece I came across a recent upload by Fed at Federico Talks Watches, who asked the question:

“Is This Omega The BEST Every Day Watch?”

I encourage you to read the comments as the feedback is very interesting, ranging from:

“I absolutely love mine. I have a commercial diver friend and he went totally nuts when he learned I had one because it's the grail watch of his profession.”, to

“The Planet Ocean is a little bulky and is well overdue a reworking”.

In the video, Fed isn’t talking about one particular size of the Planet Ocean, and despite laying out the hypothesis that no configuration offers proportions to his liking, he’s still puzzled as to why this is not a more popular watch.

To me, the lack of hype (let’s just call a spade a spade) around the Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean 600 m reminds me of a time not that long ago when luxury watch brands continued their long tradition of simply making “really nice watches”.

I don’t mean this pejoratively at all, rather I’m trying to convey that watch companies had to keep improving for the delight of a relatively small community of enthusiasts, rather than perhaps resting a little too comfortably on the laurels provided by a small handful of models that are now “hyped”.

While Omega does have watches like the Speedmaster Ed White and Silver Snoopy which require waiting, overall I’ve been very happy to observe that this is a brand that does not want to cultivate hype at the expense of preventing consumers from buying their products.

Furthermore, while Omega’s marketing resources are probably quite vast, they are still, like everyone’s, limited, so pushing the heck out of the Omega Seamaster 300M and the Speedmaster likely means there is less to go around for the Planet Ocean line.

Does this make the Seamaster Planet Ocean 39.5 mm any less excellent?

Not even close.

The Planet Ocean is the “Thinking Man’s” dive watch

As an owner of a Planet Ocean 39.5 mm, I realize that calling it “the Thinking Man’s dive watch” makes me sound like a knob, but I’m actually paraphrasing something that Tim Mosso from Watchbox said not too long ago.

I’m really sorry I can’t link to the direct YouTube video (if you happen to know the source, please do let me know in the comments), but in it Tim talks about the Omega Aqua Terra, and refers to it as “the Thinking Man’s Rolex Datejust”.

I can’t help but agree with that.

The Datejust is an excellent watch while also being so classical and ubiquitous at this point that it can come across as quite boring. While the Aqua Terra is no Richard Mille, it is to me, via a combination of design and technology, the more exciting watch if you’re looking for a daily-wearer.

That’s how I feel about the Omega Planet Ocean 600 m in the 39.5 mm size. While we as watch lovers appreciate just how much work goes into watches, I’m not sure that we really, really think about what goes into them; watch companies take slabs of metal, wafers of silicone and volumes of ceramic powders, then use those materials to shape hundreds of tiny pieces into something that we can use for a lifetime.

In my opinion, no brand does this at a grander scale than Omega, while also creating designs that make me excited to wear them. The r/WatchesCircleJerk sub-Reddit would have a field day with what I’m about to write: when I wear a Rolex, I don’t feel that excited, but when I put this Omega Planet Ocean on, every morning, or when I look through the case back, I just think “wow, how cool is this?!”.

This watch is so well-done that I find it very hard to get excited about wearing much else in my collection. A positive effect of this for my bank account is that anytime something is announced by one of the big brands, so far the answer to the question “that’s nice, but do I need it when I already have this Omega?” has always been “no”.

And sure, perhaps my love for the Omega brand generally plays into that just a little bit, but the Omega Seamaster Planet Ocean 600 m 39.5 mm is truly an excellent watch.

Go try one on.

You might just become a bit of a fanboy (or girl) yourself, and it may become your One Watch as well.

(But if you still end up wanting to hear about many other watches, please do take a moment to give The Real Time Show a shot!)