-5
you see from (probably TD) bad quality images of 640x480 that the Logo is too thick vs gen?
I’m sorry but for someone that probably has seen neither a gen nor the rep in question that is quite a statement.
i am really not in the business of flaming anyone, but this is just such a great example of so many things wrong with „reviews“ in this hobby.
I agree with you to a large degree. Without the rep and gen both in hand, it is not possible to do a proper review/comparison. I have said this a few times. I am not in favor of anyone who does not have the gen and rep in hand doing a comparison/review post. This holds true also for specific rep vs rep comparisons. I own the gen 15500 and 15400s and because I do not own the rep, I refrain from comparison/review threads until and unless I have both in hand.
Having said that, some flaws, like dimensions (thickness, length, width, proportions etc) can be seen from pics if you observe carefully. Color can be a lot trickier as you need both watches under the same lighting and angles.
It is far more credible, like you implied, for comparison/review posts to be done having both or all the objects of comparisons in hand. I like the one which Mech500 did on the blue 15400. Anybody can google, or look at gens through shop windows, or go to an AD to handle one briefly. Anyone.
But to do a proper review, I think that one will at least need both watches in hand for a meaningful period of time, and compare them through live observation rather than subjective memory.