@abeardsley2020

You're either being too fussy or incredibly unlucky.

To coin a phrase; lightning doesn't strike twice, let alone half a dozen times.

I've just taken a look at my White Shark C60 300 Atoll and, to the best of my judgement, the alignment of the inner bezel is fine.

I'm not taking photographs as, without a fixed stand or jig and laser alignment to hold the camera straight and steady, ensuring the watch is correctly aligned on the 12 - 6 axis and the centre of the camera lens is similarly aligned, I haven't got a hope in hell of being confident that I have 100% eliminated parallax error.

If one uses a smartphone, regardless of whether in landscape or portrait orientation, you'd have to allow that the camera lens (making sure you're lining up the correct lens as most smartphones these days have two or even three lenses) will be off to one side and align accordingly.



Finally, thinking of the potential distance that the alignment of the inner bezel is out by, assuming you've taken a 100% accurately aligned photo, we're talking of fractions of a millimetre.

Just my observations.

Guy

Sent from my XPERIA 5 III using Tapatalk

I’ve just had a good look at my bronze pro300 and taken a few photos close up, see below.

My observations are that the minute track on the outer bezel is possibly a few MM above the markers on the dial.

You can see by tilting my watch what I would consider an insignificant amount to the left or right, I can photograph the watch the markers out of alignment to the left, out of alignment to the right, or in a line.

Without knowing whether you are taking the photo completely squarely to the watch I’m not certain we can say if this is a problem. The height difference certainly can give the illusion of it being wrong but I’m not sure it is. If I felt it was out of alignment, I’d just tilt the watch a tiny fraction and it would look ok to my eyes.

JAFO wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2023 3:14 pm Actually the 6 index looks as if it isn't quite central to the 3 and 0 of thrbthirty. Maybe the bezel is a discrete unit, and the entire bezel is slightly off.

It would be worth showing a picture of the entire watch head not just the macro shot.

If I zoom in on your photo and take a screenshot. The indentations marked with numbers 1&2 look like very slightly different sizes which suggests the photo is taken ever so slightly off to one side. Like with my photos above it only takes being a fraction out for it to look out of alignment due to the height difference between the separate parts of the case and dial.

However I now realise I’m probably pointing out the bezel arrow is out compared to the minute track…..


[attachment=0]IMG_0814.jpeg[/attachment]

That's curious, because the point of the triangle looks slightly offset from the square on the inner bezel, but it's off in the same direction as the square at the bottom.

Normally that would indicate a parallax issue, wouldn't it, rather than a misalignment caused by a slight rotation.

The minute marks on the dial and bezel are all slightly out of alignment. Assuming you use a camera phone maybe it's caused by the lens of the camera not being directly over the pinion. It's hard to get it spot on, as phone camera lenses aren't dead central in the phone.

I don't think I'd ever notice any misalignment, let alone be bothered to look for it. Life's too short

As a stated in the original post the photos are not to prove alignment or not it’s a representation. I’ve checked it my wife checked it and two other watches friends. When looking at it by eye it’s way off not matter which angle you hold the Watch at or whether rotate it is 90 degrees 180 degrees left right etc. the inner ring is off. It was really intended to make other aware there are a fair few similar posts on the FB groups for CW or at least there was. A man contacted me on fb messenger with the same issues and is having the same conversation with Christopher ward. As I say they said it’s tolerance so I’ve left it at that and returned the Watch. I’ll buy another diver when they ditch the inner ring. My other watches for the most part from them have been good.

While I see the alignment issue in the zoomed pics, they are magnified far more than my own watch appears at arm’s length. I don’t see the same problem up close either with my Pro 300. Seems the watch with the two piece bezel is not for you if you both see and are bothered by the alignment. Hope you do find one that fits the bill.

I just took a look at one of my CW's this morning and noticed the 12 O'Clock triangle is no longer aligned at 12, but is now between the 10 and 11 O'Clock markers. It also appears the date is slightly off as it says the 24th, when it is actually the 9th. I'm wondering if I should contact customer service to see if they will give me a new watch?

JAFO wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2023 6:33 pm That's curious, because the point of the triangle looks slightly offset from the square on the inner bezel, but it's off in the same direction as the square at the bottom.

Normally that would indicate a parallax issue, wouldn't it, rather than a misalignment caused by a slight rotation.

The minute marks on the dial and bezel are all slightly out of alignment. Assuming you use a camera phone maybe it's caused by the lens of the camera not being directly over the pinion. It's hard to get it spot on, as phone camera lenses aren't dead central in the phone.

This is the first thing that occurred to me as well.

mvlow wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 4:38 pm I just took a look at one of my CW's this morning and noticed the 12 O'Clock triangle is no longer aligned at 12, but is now between the 10 and 11 O'Clock markers. It also appears the date is slightly off as it says the 24th, when it is actually the 9th. I'm wondering if I should contact customer service to see if they will give me a new watch?



IMG_5198.JPG

I got a good laugh at this one, thanks!

Seems to me it makes no difference how the camera is oriented, he is trying to relay something he sees with his naked eye. It looks unacceptable to me. Which is too bad it’s a nice watch. If that is acceptable to CW and within tolerance, CW needs to tighten their tolerances. JUST MY OPINION.

watchaholic wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 5:48 pm Seems to me it makes no difference how the camera is oriented, he is trying to relay something he sees with his naked eye. It looks unacceptable to me. Which is too bad it’s a nice watch. If that is acceptable to CW and within tolerance, CW needs to tighten their tolerances. JUST MY OPINION.

I agree.

The OP can see it with the naked eye, in the same way that someone could look at the artwork on their drawing room walls and notice if the frame wasn’t wasn’t correctly aligned by as little as a mm or two.

He made it clear he could see it, yet this didn’t stop people prattling on about parallax etc.

It’s not as if he just took pics of the watch, then looked at them and thought “well I hadn’t noticed that before, the inner ring looks off!”

Neil

watching everyone draw red lines on their watches in MS Paint was fun though

nbg wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 6:00 pm

watchaholic wrote: ↑Wed Aug 09, 2023 5:48 pm Seems to me it makes no difference how the camera is oriented, he is trying to relay something he sees with his naked eye. It looks unacceptable to me. Which is too bad it’s a nice watch. If that is acceptable to CW and within tolerance, CW needs to tighten their tolerances. JUST MY OPINION.

I agree.

The OP can see it with the naked eye, in the same way that someone could look at the artwork on their drawing room walls and notice if the frame wasn’t wasn’t correctly aligned by as little as a mm or two.

He made it clear he could see it, yet this didn’t stop people prattling on about parallax etc.

It’s not as if he just took pics of the watch, then looked at them and thought “well I hadn’t noticed that before, the inner ring looks off!”

Neil

Thank you