The issue is that the computer renderings of the watches on the IWC site are frequently different from the actual watches. It's not easy to find a good shot of a real watch dial for comparison. The above shots are from Intime and a google search. The third pic I cooked up in photoshop from crops of the other two pics- constrained proportions when adjusting sizes to get them as close as possible. There is some slight difference in the shape of the numeral 4, but to my eye it's not a huge tell unless you were doing a side by side comparison. Its mostly in the width of the top horizontal- the curve looks pretty dead on to me. What is the bigger issue is the date font thickness and the shade of red used in the reserve display- gen is more red and rep more crimson. All in all, though, I find this to be an acceptably high level of detail. The way i see it is it's basically a 98 percent discount for a dented can, and in the end I'm saving several thousands of dollars by wearing a watch that left the factory just a bit imperfect. This all works out in the end as the factories keep improving different versions- we're a focus group of sorts. Despite the hype, the factories are likely very interested in what we say since we're all so damned OCD regarding this kind of minutiae. No normal person is going to call any of this out at any point unless you are attempting to deceive someone by trying to sell a rep as a gen.
In any case- still waiting on those QC pics to come down the pike...
Edit: Another comparison... different gen watch, same rep pic, larger comparison shot.