Industrial-Sized Deals TextBTS15 Shop Women's Handbags Learn more nav_sap_plcc_6M_fly_beacon $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Off to College Essentials Shop Popular Services gotS5 gotS5 gotS5  Amazon Echo Starting at $99 Kindle Voyage Metal Gear Solid 5 Shop Now Learn more

Your rating(Clear)Rate this item


There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

8 of 9 people found the following review helpful
on March 2, 2007
Why buy this watch which has been in production since 2000 when you can buy the new 2006 edition for a few more bucks?

The 2006 edition of the famous James Bond watch made its debut in the movie Casino Royale. Actually, there are two Omega watches in the movie; the limited edition Omega Seamaster Plant Ocean Big Size 2907.50.91 and the limited edition Omega Seamaster Chronometer 2226.80.00. This style of the James Bond watch first appeared in the movie 'Golden Eye' (1995).

The new 2006 quartz model 2223.80.00 has several refinements that you should consider over this model. Most notably is the appearance of the watch face. The blue wave dial is a deeper shade blue with a more distinctive wave pattern and the Seamaster script is a subtle red. More apparent is the hour markings are now encased in stainless steel mountings instead of painted on as in the previous model. This alone cleans up the watch face and makes it look like it costs thousands more.

Bear in mind that any Omega watch purchased on the internet voids the International Warranty, so read the seller's warranty terms carefully. Some watches offered by Amazon carry Amazon's 5-year warranty which surpasses the 2-year Omega International warranty. This watch is also available in an automatic chronometer with the new Co-Axial escapement movement as model 2222.80.00.

I received the 2223.80.00 as a gift from my wife for my 50th birthday. It is a beautiful example of a luxury watch at an affordable price. The mid-size case is smaller in diameter than the full size gents watch (36.25mm vs. 41mm) and is a comfortable fit for my thin 6-1/2 inch wrist.

If you desire a sharp looking luxury watch with the James Bond movie fame, check out the 2223.80.00.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful
on December 9, 2009
I'm going to be to the point: This is the best working watch I have ever own.

Yes, I know there are die-hard Rolex lovers, automatic movement lovers and the like, but I am looking at this watch from the neutral and practical side, not as a "fan".

I have to clarify I own a Rolex GMT Master. It's a beautiful looking watch that kept good time, according to the standards of the times.

Owning a Rolex in the 60's and even the 70's was OK. Americans, on the average, were not too savvy on the subject of expensive watches, then came the South American drug invasion, Hollywood glamorizing drug lords, Miami Vice and the like and, guess what? Everyone though they looked "cool and expensive" wearing a Rolex. To make a long story short, Rolex beefed up their prices and Wham! Today you have to pay around $3000.00 for a mere stainless steel Rolex and approximately $400.00 just to have your overpriced Rolex oiled and checked by an "Authorized Dealer". My good old Rolex began to run a little slow or fast, some time ago, something my Omega Seamaster 300D never does. I mentioned my Rolex GMT so people realize I own both models so I can not be "Rolex gullible". Oh, yeah, one more thing: If you, like me, live in a large metropolis, I advise you to keep your watch hand inside your pants pocket, since every hood in town knows what Rolexes look like and, as a habit, look at your wrist to "check your watch model out" the moment they cross your path on the streets. My brother was attacked at 11:45 A.M. in plain downtown N.Y. by 2 hoodlums who, he said, were staring at his watch while he walked from the parking lot to his office. First thing they did was grab his arm and remove the Rolex while they sucker punched him from behind. To be perfectly frank, I don't think these people would have recognized an Omega as such.

Now, let's talk about the Omega. I purchased a quartz Seamaster 2561.80 in 1990 and, excluding a $100.00 battery change and checkup; this watch not only keeps better time than my GMT Master, but also is less "luggy". The Omega is much lighter and looks great on all occasions, besides being waterproof (I always swim in our pool with it on and never had a problem).

Bottom line, you want to make believe you're Richie Rich, buy an overpriced Rolex, if not, check out the Omega Seamaster and you wont be disappointed.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
on December 15, 2006
I owned a Rolex Sea Dweller for 20 years before it was stolen in Caracas, Venezuela. After 10 years, it was notorious for losing time--about 5 minutes a month, even after required servicing. The thieves actually did me a favor. With the insurance money, I thought I'd check out the Seamaster. What a great watch! I need to reset the time according to the national atomic clock only about once every three months, and then it's off only by a second or two.

Only one warning, which probably pertains to all dive watches: Be careful wearing it in hot springs, or don't wear it at all. I spent an hour or so in a hot spring in Jordan, near the Dead Sea. The next morning I had condensation under the crystal. I think the metal contracted under the heat--it was much hotter than your average jacuzzi--and moisture must have gotten in around the crystal or maybe the gas port or stem.
22 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
on December 11, 2006
Far and away the best watch I've ever owned... also the most expensive. Bought it as a present to myself 7 yrs ago. Replace battery at 5 yrs as expected. Sapphire crystal is very tough, scratching it took some doing. Keeps excellent time, never off by more than 1 sec (if at all) when I sync it with GMT site. Nice solid satisfying feel on the wrist.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
on February 15, 2007
Where can you get a genuine new Omega for $999.00 with no tax and free shipping. Nowhere else. This was a great buy and looks amazing.

Thank you!
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
on February 12, 2007
this watch is even more gorgeous that it looks online. superb buy. the size is just perfect. and its exactly what is says online.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
1 of 2 people found the following review helpful
on September 29, 2009
I have a mid-size men's quartz Seamaster 120 meters I purchased 6 years ago that now sporadically looses a couple of minutes a day or just stops. \

I have had the battery replaced twice in the last two months at a good local watch shop. They say there is nothing they can do. Disappointing quality. I would not buy Omega again.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
1 of 2 people found the following review helpful
on November 30, 2006
i bought one of these and is the best watch i have ever owned it is great. bon't expect to wear it to work everyday but it is the perfect watch to wear on an evening out. would recomend it to anyone
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
3 of 5 people found the following review helpful
on December 9, 2006
The description of this model (2561.80) says 41.5mm, but it's actually only 36.25mm. This model is the Mid Size.
11 commentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
0 of 1 people found the following review helpful
on January 27, 2007
This watch is a mid-size watch, not 41.5mm as descripted. All other watches is sized by their diameter, this watch decided to dscript the size by including the crown, very deceptive.....
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse

Questions? Get fast answers from reviewers

Please make sure that you've entered a valid question. You can edit your question or post anyway.
Please enter a question.


Send us feedback

How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you?
Let us know here.