So I've built up my collection over the last few years -- about a dozen pieces, mostly sport watches and some complications from a handful of brands. But I have these two rose gold dress watches (yes, I know they both look yellow in the pictures; it's the lighting), and am trying to decide if they're too similar -- and if so, whether I should get rid of one of them (i.e., the Omega). Figured I would pitch it to the folks here and see what you think.
I picked up this vintage Omega Seamaster (17400) about 2.5 years ago after my first work trip abroad, from that same country (so it has some sentimental value). It's plated, but is in incredible condition, and I think it wears well (35mm). I got an extract from the archives, and it dates to 1960 and was sold in Yemen, which I think is pretty cool.
The Patek Philippe Calatrava (3796R) came along about a year ago, when I wanted to get a solid (and not plated) piece in the collection. It was a great deal at the right time, and came with the box and papers. It's in a whole league of its own, and even though it is small (31mm), I think I can pull it off. I tried the modern version (5196R), and even though the diameter on that watch is 37mm, I think it just wears too large.
The thing is, in passing, they are both quite similar -- modest, rose gold dress watches on brown straps. On closer inspection, there are some subtle and distinct differences -- case size and shape, dial color (the Omega is more of a champagne, whereas the Patek is more of a silver), second hand (center on the Omega, sub on the Patek), and batons (onyx on the Omega, gold on the Patek).
So, what do you say? Are they distinct enough to keep both? Or should I get rid of the vintage Seamaster?