I think kilowattore is right, the pics are really bad, dull and dark
But I have worked with the good PT VIDEO, extracting some images to get some conclusions as follows:
PAM 504 O-series SF w/P.3000 Clone4 – Oct 2015
Case shape and edges are accurate, really nice. In the same level of ZFac
Obviously the material is wrong since gen is made of Composite and rep is Titanium DLC coated. The appearance and touch is good enough but the gen has less weight. Anyway good approach and more accurate weight than KW.
Crown OP logo is smaller and with very shallow engraving. Completely inaccurate. Worse than KW and ZFac
Overal dial layout is OK and sandwich cutouts are deep and clean.
9 and 6 markers are more rounded in gen and the inner curved stroke is longer in gen
CP is smaller but flat flush and well finished, it is good enough
Hour hand is shorter and the lume is narrower than gen
Minute hand is longer and lume is wider than gen
Hand lume and colour of dial inscriptions are a bit more ecru than markers lume. Gen lume and inscriptions colours are the same, a bit whiter, just like rep markers
Crystal is OK with AR colourless
Caseback and back crystal accurate and good enough.
Movement is the already known Clone4 (not at all a super clone)
In order to get a comparison with previous ZFac and KW versions, read below the comments extracted from PAM GUIDE:
PAM 504 O-series KW w/decorated A6497-2 like P.3000
Case shape and edges are accurate. I like more the edges and corners of ZFac and SF, but this is few noticeable
Obviously the material is really wrong since gen is made of Composite and rep is SS DLC coated. The appearance and touch is really good but the gen has much less weight. In this regard ZFac and SF made of Titanium have advantage. Anyway good approach with fantastic finish
Crown OP logo is good enough, deep engraving, but more squared than gen.
Overal dial layout is OK and sandwich cutouts are deep and clean.
9 and 6 markers are more accurate than ZFac and SF, but 3 marker is narrower
CP is very recessed and not nicely finished or polished. The size is good enough
Hands are correct. The lume is a bit wider in minute hand.
Hand lume, markers lume and colour of dial inscriptions are accurate, uniform and very gen-like. Clearly better than ZFac and SF
Crystal is OK with AR colourless
Caseback and back crystal accurate and good enough.
Movement is the decorated A6497-2 like P.3000, already known and very inaccurate.
PAM 504 O-series ZFac w/decorated A6497-2 like P.3000
Case shape and edges are accurate, really nice. In the same level of SF
Obviously the material is wrong since gen is made of Composite and rep is Titanium DLC coated. The appearance and touch is good enough but the gen has less weight.
Anyway good approach and more accurate weight than KW.
Crown OP logo is really nice, accurate sharp and deep engraving. Better than SF and even KW
Overal dial layout is OK and sandwich cutouts are deep and clean.
9 marker is more rounded in gen and the inner curved stroke is longer in gen. 6 marker is OK
CP is the weird ZFac type bigger and with the raised rim contour. Anyway nicely finished.
Hands are correct. The lume is a bit wider in minute hand.
Hand lume and colour of dial inscriptions are OK. Dial inscriptions colour is more ecru or brownish. Gen lume and inscriptions colours are the same, a bit whiter, just like rep markers.
Crystal is OK with AR colourless
Caseback and back crystal accurate and good enough.
Movement is the decorated A6497-2 like P.3000, already known and very inaccurate.
As you can see all versions have some pros and serious cons.
Regarding SF, as always we have one step forward that is the Clone4 movement, but the colour of dial inscriptions and hand lume remain inaccurate and the hands have inaccurate length and lume width.
Leaving aside movement nothing good to add. Bearing in mind the pros of movement and the cons of the flaws, the the SF evaluation could be considered at the same level of previous versions, a bit over the ZFac. First Class rep good level.
ALE
