Since a lot of Bond's equipment seems to stem from Fleming's observations of the items used by the SOE during WW2, was there a Rolex watch that was popular among the operators of that day?
Hmmm - Point taken, I guess to be more accurate would be to say the Rolex runs down a lot quicker, not slower, than the Seamasters. In terms of robustness, I can only state my own experiences, my PO has had a good kicking and looks fine and the SM before that truly had a good hiding and my Dad wears it now and gives it more of a thrashing and at 18 years old is going strong. Proof is in the pudding I suppose, some of the straps on old Subs look and feel like those on some ropey Bolex. That said, the strap on my 114060 Sub is pretty awesome.
I love both watches but am no fan of the amount of dreadful other watches they churn out, I certainly don't believe that Rolex has more integrity as a company in terms of marketing strategy and Bond, but you'd know better than most.
We don't know what Rolex Fleming gave Bond. He himself had a 1016 during the later years of his life, but the description can be applied to many Rolex watches. Fleming carried the .25 Browning, but gave Bond a .25 Beretta. So there is no proof either way.
I'd like to know where the myth of Rolex not being as good a timekeeper comes from. COSC rate them in exactly the same accuracy category. I used to work for Rolex and my less-than-better-half used to work for Omega marketing. Even she acknowledges that Rolex are still better made.
I like Omega's, the PO is a beautiful watch and I like its looks over the Sub. But when you compare a well worn 10 year old Omega to a 10 year old well worn Rolex. There is a huge difference.
By teh way Higgins, Omega have improved their bracelets no end in the pin/screw department. My main gripe on a watch of that quality price point is the flimsy crown/stem they still use and that blasted AR coating on the outside.
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
Agreed, Omega and Rolex make some dreadful looking things.
I don't mind Bond wearing Omega, as I don't mind him driving an Aston. But as a Fleming purist, I'd love to see Rolex and Bentley back. I wish they'd use Omega's that didn't look visually similar to the Sub though. Even moreso with this new Seamaster without crown guards and on a striped Nato too. I liked the Aqua terra, that stood out as being slightly different.
I have a couple of Omega's and love them, my brother is a Rolex fan and we often have this debate.
Despite my my heart telling me Rolex might be slightly better my main problem with them is that they are "common". I dont mean that everyone has one but everyone knows the brand and its the first thing they buy when they win the lottery. Maybe it's just the part of Saaaaaf East London that I live in but everyone seems to wear them around here (although I suspect over half are probably fake). I am yet to see another person wearing the same PO or normal Seamaster as me (Jeremy Clarkson aside) which is why I like them. I do agree that they bring out to many models though and it does cheapen them.
As for the bond connection, Goldeneye was the first one I saw in the cinema so the Omega is kind of normal to me.
I have my eye on an IWC for my next purchase but that it another discussion.......
At the moment though Omega are churning out far too many models and devaluing the brand - White Side Of The Moon anybody??
Love the look of the Casino Royale / QoS Planet Ocean however they changed it fast and never really gave it a chance to become iconic.
Aqua Terra Skyfall already discontinued etc for a new model - changed the look for the worse like the PO.
They could learn from Rolex in this department and let their models establish. The amount of Speedmaster models about to be released is staggering - getting a bit novelty
I'd like to know where the myth of Rolex not being as good a timekeeper comes from.
I can only offer my own experience...
Some years ago I purchased the original model of Sea Dweller direct from the Bond Street Rolex store. Within a month I noticed no matter what I did to set the watch correctly, when the Seconds Hand hit the 12 marker, the Minutes Hand was at the position of showing either 15 seconds before, or 15 seconds after the minute it should have been pointing directly at.
I took the watch to the Rolex Service Centre at St. James Square and after an inspection, was told by the head service engineer in person, and I quote, "I thought we had worked out that problem with those particular watch model movements". I was advised to take the watch back and have the Rolex store provide me with a replacement watch. Not exactly instilled with confidence in the product, I opted for a refund.
I cannot comment on the reliability of the SD Deep Sea movement, because having ordered one of those I ditched it because despite being the same size case as my PO 45.5mm, Rolex were providing them then with a stupidly small and flimsy metal strap compared to the Omega PO watch strap. Plus they would not supply another half link to customise the strap to my fit satisfaction. Omega on the other hand provided the extra half link for free.
Interestingly, reading this thread has highlighted to me just what affection the original CR and QoS PO watches are held in. I agreed the blingy looking current offerings of Omega are not to my taste. I'm not a fan of the new SMP 300, with its white coloured Seconds Hand and polished centre bracelet links. I have both the CR 45.5mm and QoS 42mm PO, and was intending on letting the latter go, as I prefer the big chunky bracelet of the 45.5mm. But I think I'll hang on to it now and maybe stick it on one of those NATO straps. If I ever get out from behind my comfy desk and go operational again, I might wear it as my working watch :007)
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
I'd like to know where the myth of Rolex not being as good a timekeeper comes from.
I can only offer my own experience...
Some years ago I purchased the original model of Sea Dweller direct from the Bond Street Rolex store. Within a month I noticed no matter what I did to set the watch correctly, when the Seconds Hand hit the 12 marker, the Minutes Hand was at the position of showing either 15 seconds before, or 15 seconds after the minute it should have been pointing directly at.
I took the watch to the Rolex Service Centre at St. James Square and after an inspection, was told by the head service engineer in person, and I quote, "I thought we had worked out that problem with those particular watch model movements". I was advised to take the watch back and have the Rolex store provide me with a replacement watch. Not exactly instilled with confidence in the product, I opted for a refund.
I cannot comment on the reliability of the SD Deep Sea movement, because having ordered one of those I ditched it because despite being the same size case as my PO 45.5mm, Rolex were providing them then with a stupidly small and flimsy metal strap compared to the Omega PO watch strap. Plus they would not supply another half link to customise the strap to my fit satisfaction. Omega on the other hand provided the extra half link for free.
Interestingly, reading this thread has highlighted to me just what affection the original CR and QoS PO watches are held in. I agreed the blingy looking current offerings of Omega are not to my taste. I'm not a fan of the new SMP 300, with its white coloured Seconds Hand and polished centre bracelet links. I have both the CR 45.5mm and QoS 42mm PO, and was intending on letting the latter go, as I prefer the big chunky bracelet of the 45.5mm. But I think I'll hang on to it now and maybe stick it on one of those NATO straps. If I ever get out from behind my comfy desk and go operational again, I might wear it as my working watch :007)
Quite frankly this post baffles me. The hand setting is down to you, not the movement, and it's impossible for them to run independently of each other as the way the movement is built prevents this.
I can safely say (I was employed by Rolex for 10 years) that the service centre comment was utter BS. I don't know if you misheard, or if he was winding you up, or you are making it up, but it's utter bullswipe and it certainly wouldn't be said by the Service Centre head. Why would anyone in Rolex talk about a movement fault that has never existed? And to a customer too. It just wouldn't happen. And the head of the Service Centre resides at the Bexley Service Centre too and he would never ever say that to a customer in his wildest dreams. Furthermore no one at Rolex would tell you to go back to the AD and get a replacement either. That would lead to a severe dressing down and your cards marked at Rolex. No question. You'd be out. That's not the way anyone at Rolex behaves. It's very strict in this regard. You certainly wouldn't talk about a known movement fault that never existed whether you were joking or not. I can't even begin to think of the implications.
And why would you need a half link for your Rolex, you can adjust them more finely than half link lengths on the clasp itself with a pin within seconds. A half link isn't needed. If you'd have gone to order a half link, anyone would have told you why they don't do them and shown you how you finely adjust the clasp or done it for you.
And your comment on the Deepsea bracelet is even more odd. It's got the new Rolex Glidelock clasp and is built sturdier than an Omega PO. It's one of the best made bracelets and clasps you can get now. Sure the old pre 2008 clasps were thin, but you certainly can't say that of the DeepSea.
Sorry, but your post stinks of trolling and BS. None of it rings true in the slightest. I was going to point out more of this in your other posts, but it seems you've deleted them.
The Deepsea glide lock is the dogs bollocks, you can slide adjust it to exact fit perfection without taking it off the wrist - amazing (the subs should get this upgrade).
Sorry Skipster, but there are so many things wrong in your last posts imo.
The old "flimsy" bracelet like you say what life-proven for decades, there was nothing better ever imo.
Compare it with the SMP bracelet which was heavier, had these silly friction pins and the springs from the clasp buttons where defective all the time. and did you ever had fine sand in that "piece of art"?
I like the new Oyster bracelets but there are too many welding spots which can fail over the time and the result is then a lost watch.
What you say about half links does not make sense because Rolex never made them for gents steel Oyster bracelets. There is a much finer adjustment option in the clasp - which Omega does not have. Again - The Oyster bracelet - flimsy and new style beat the Omega stuff in real life by a mile!
What you say the Rolex Engineer has told you sounds also strange.
1. This sounds so un-engineer-ish
2. It would be totally against Rolex company policy and I doubt that someone would ruin his job by that kind of info.
I also can't follow on what you say that the hands are back and forth 15 seconds.
Like Asp9mm rightly said, it's up to YOU to set the hands.
You can see a mechanical movement like a geartrain and between every gearwheel - there must be some "air". Otherwise with the low powers in a watch movement, the geartrain would stick.
So if you knock your watch hardly on a desk, you can move the minute hands forth or back for an amount of around 15 seconds. That will happen with almost every mechanical watch.
If you are speaking about the minute hand being "late" or "early" compared to the secondhand, this is just a matter of propering adjusting the watch.
I do as follows: I set the secondhand to 50 seconds
Then I FORWARD the minute hand exactly to the index and wait for the time signal.
When the time signal is 50 seconds before the full minute, I push the crown and let the watch run.
That way, the geartrain can catch up 10 seconds of "gear air" and your minute hand will be exactly to the point when the second hand is at zero.
One last comment: Deleting most of your previous posts leaves a sour taste in the mouth.
You are basically ruining the entire thread. I understand your reasons why you decided to do it and agree that a professional career must be protected.
But in the first place a real Pro would not put sensible infos on a public forum at all
I would love to rip Asp9mm into pieces here but he seems to be right to the spot with most facts that he gave - contrary to many things in your last posts.
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
One last comment: Deleting most of your previous posts leaves a sour taste in the mouth.
You are basically ruining the entire thread. I understand your reasons why you decided to do it and agree that a professional career must be protected.
But in the first place a real Pro would not put sensible infos on a public forum at all
You should see the passive aggressive PM I just got. Asking me to go down to New Scotland Yard to call him out face to face. Is this a regular occurrence down there now? Not very professional is it.
Having made my comments about the movement issue, which I stick by, I cannot account for the difference in my experience on the day and the knowledge that you and Asp9mm provide. All I know is what happened and being so may years ago I unfortunately have means to prove what I say now and exonerate myself where I have been challenged on the issue.
You are correct on the notched guide clasp on the DS and that was pointed out to me by the retailer as a fitting solution. At the time I would have prefered a couple of half links in the bracelet like I had put in on my Omega, but was told I could not have them. Again I can't remember if they pointed out they don't make them, but what you and Asp9mm say both makes sense. My main disappointment with the DS bracelet was that with both the DS and PO being such chunky watches, the Rolex watch bracelet on the DS is quite thin width wise aesthetically compared to the PO bracelet. I'm sure it's up to the job, just asthetically it wasn't for me. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear in my first post.
All of my posts on this thread are present and correct. So nothing ruined in terms of this thread.
I have deleted my posts on other threads, prior to the creation of this thread, for the reasons I have stated. I apologise if that has damaged those threads in any way. Some of my posts still exist quoted in other peoples and I hope they show me to have posted in an honest and open way, only hoping to offer my knowledge and experience, for what it has been worth.
I have not posted here intending to trash Rolex or anything else. If I have then again it was unintentional.
But then quite apart from my misgivings about posting on a publicly viewable form, I am not here to be trashed either. I have sent Asp9mm my details seeing as he appears to be in London and will quite happily meet up with him and take him for a coffee and then he can decide in person if I am a troll full of BS.
Otherwise I'll bow out and not trouble the forum again.
In my country's tradition to do everything to keep the peace may I take you up on that offer the next time that I am in London? But only if you promise to leave that Bremont at home... {:)
And how's the coffee in the NSY canteen? Is it as awful as it sounds?
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Higgins you would be most welcome :007) I will PM you my contact details.
As I said to Asp9mm in a second PM, if people weren't prepared to meet up in the real world, then I would have one of my best friends from over in the US, who I met through chatting on a prop message board. Plus then you get to really know if someone is an arse! )
But Higgins you will have to meet my Bremont. It will only confirm all your fears!!
I can tell you that you don't really want to meet him in person.
Living in shitty caves for years does no good to people - I actually regret having suggested to meet up but I was blinded by the meeting with kewee some years ago which went pretty well
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
I have several VERY nice watches, my my Submariner is my favorite. To me it's the perfect watch in that it looks good with both a suit, or a bathing suit. Omegas........? Eh, some are very nice, but some have that 2nd winder at the 10o'clock position which to me just looks weird. To each his own...
Also, there's the great Bond pedigree wwith the Submariners
I was lucky enough to get a decent bonus last year and decided to treat myself to a nice dive watch. So after much deliberation between Rolex and Omega and after trying both on I plumped for a black SMP 300. I think at that price the law of diminishing returns applies and you should get the watch you will love. Now I have one I love it but find myself looking with envious eyes at Speedmaster Professionals (original moon watch) that's the watch I would like to see Bond in. Timeless, classy yet understated. A watch that will be as desirable in 40 years as it is now, only reason I didn't get one was an easily scratched hesalite crystal rather than a more robust sapphire.
Rolex is pratically synonymous with the word "watch" and has arguably contributed more to the Swiss watch industry than any other brand. I used to dislike Rolex but I get it now. The 5512/5513/5517 Submariner, 1675 GMT Master and Paul Newman Daytona are really special watches. Rolex is iconic.
Omega is iconic in its own right. The Speedmaster's place in history as the Moonwatch is undeniable. Omega has been enjoying a renaissance of sorts recently, moving the brand and its watches up market to better complete against Rolex. In my collection, I own more watches from Omega than any other brand. I love Omega.
I associate yesterday's Bond with Rolex, when Rolex was more of a tool watch, while today's modern Bond with Omega, although I would argue that the Planet Ocean is more of a tool watch than the new Seamaster 300 with its polished lugs and shiny ceramic bezel. All that said, I would think if Bond was a real super secret agent in the real world, he could be issued something like the Tudor Pelagos or Black Bay, which are more practical, modern tool watches than most of the current offerings from Rolex and Omega.
Asp9mmOver the Hills and Far Away.Posts: 7,535MI6 Agent
All that said, I would think if Bond was a real super secret agent in the real world, he could be issued something like the Tudor Pelagos or Black Bay, which are more practical, modern tool watches than most of the current offerings from Rolex and Omega.
If Bond was a real secret agent, he wouldn't be issued with anything, he'd be buying his own.
Comments
Bond’s Beretta
The Handguns of Ian Fleming's James Bond
I love both watches but am no fan of the amount of dreadful other watches they churn out, I certainly don't believe that Rolex has more integrity as a company in terms of marketing strategy and Bond, but you'd know better than most.
A great thread regardless.
I don't mind Bond wearing Omega, as I don't mind him driving an Aston. But as a Fleming purist, I'd love to see Rolex and Bentley back. I wish they'd use Omega's that didn't look visually similar to the Sub though. Even moreso with this new Seamaster without crown guards and on a striped Nato too. I liked the Aqua terra, that stood out as being slightly different.
Is that swedish or just your silly accent? :v
So, the SMP bracelets don't have friction pins anymore?
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Yes and you and Dell Deaton where the only ones who felt that way
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
No...I liked it too...certainly better than a pair of green trainers :v
Despite my my heart telling me Rolex might be slightly better my main problem with them is that they are "common". I dont mean that everyone has one but everyone knows the brand and its the first thing they buy when they win the lottery. Maybe it's just the part of Saaaaaf East London that I live in but everyone seems to wear them around here (although I suspect over half are probably fake). I am yet to see another person wearing the same PO or normal Seamaster as me (Jeremy Clarkson aside) which is why I like them. I do agree that they bring out to many models though and it does cheapen them.
As for the bond connection, Goldeneye was the first one I saw in the cinema so the Omega is kind of normal to me.
I have my eye on an IWC for my next purchase but that it another discussion.......
No the 'new' Ceramic SMP has a bracelet with small screws that works very well.
+1 Totally agree {[]
I can only offer my own experience...
Some years ago I purchased the original model of Sea Dweller direct from the Bond Street Rolex store. Within a month I noticed no matter what I did to set the watch correctly, when the Seconds Hand hit the 12 marker, the Minutes Hand was at the position of showing either 15 seconds before, or 15 seconds after the minute it should have been pointing directly at.
I took the watch to the Rolex Service Centre at St. James Square and after an inspection, was told by the head service engineer in person, and I quote, "I thought we had worked out that problem with those particular watch model movements". I was advised to take the watch back and have the Rolex store provide me with a replacement watch. Not exactly instilled with confidence in the product, I opted for a refund.
I cannot comment on the reliability of the SD Deep Sea movement, because having ordered one of those I ditched it because despite being the same size case as my PO 45.5mm, Rolex were providing them then with a stupidly small and flimsy metal strap compared to the Omega PO watch strap. Plus they would not supply another half link to customise the strap to my fit satisfaction. Omega on the other hand provided the extra half link for free.
Interestingly, reading this thread has highlighted to me just what affection the original CR and QoS PO watches are held in. I agreed the blingy looking current offerings of Omega are not to my taste. I'm not a fan of the new SMP 300, with its white coloured Seconds Hand and polished centre bracelet links. I have both the CR 45.5mm and QoS 42mm PO, and was intending on letting the latter go, as I prefer the big chunky bracelet of the 45.5mm. But I think I'll hang on to it now and maybe stick it on one of those NATO straps. If I ever get out from behind my comfy desk and go operational again, I might wear it as my working watch :007)
Quite frankly this post baffles me. The hand setting is down to you, not the movement, and it's impossible for them to run independently of each other as the way the movement is built prevents this.
I can safely say (I was employed by Rolex for 10 years) that the service centre comment was utter BS. I don't know if you misheard, or if he was winding you up, or you are making it up, but it's utter bullswipe and it certainly wouldn't be said by the Service Centre head. Why would anyone in Rolex talk about a movement fault that has never existed? And to a customer too. It just wouldn't happen. And the head of the Service Centre resides at the Bexley Service Centre too and he would never ever say that to a customer in his wildest dreams. Furthermore no one at Rolex would tell you to go back to the AD and get a replacement either. That would lead to a severe dressing down and your cards marked at Rolex. No question. You'd be out. That's not the way anyone at Rolex behaves. It's very strict in this regard. You certainly wouldn't talk about a known movement fault that never existed whether you were joking or not. I can't even begin to think of the implications.
And why would you need a half link for your Rolex, you can adjust them more finely than half link lengths on the clasp itself with a pin within seconds. A half link isn't needed. If you'd have gone to order a half link, anyone would have told you why they don't do them and shown you how you finely adjust the clasp or done it for you.
And your comment on the Deepsea bracelet is even more odd. It's got the new Rolex Glidelock clasp and is built sturdier than an Omega PO. It's one of the best made bracelets and clasps you can get now. Sure the old pre 2008 clasps were thin, but you certainly can't say that of the DeepSea.
Sorry, but your post stinks of trolling and BS. None of it rings true in the slightest. I was going to point out more of this in your other posts, but it seems you've deleted them.
The old "flimsy" bracelet like you say what life-proven for decades, there was nothing better ever imo.
Compare it with the SMP bracelet which was heavier, had these silly friction pins and the springs from the clasp buttons where defective all the time. and did you ever had fine sand in that "piece of art"?
I like the new Oyster bracelets but there are too many welding spots which can fail over the time and the result is then a lost watch.
What you say about half links does not make sense because Rolex never made them for gents steel Oyster bracelets. There is a much finer adjustment option in the clasp - which Omega does not have. Again - The Oyster bracelet - flimsy and new style beat the Omega stuff in real life by a mile!
What you say the Rolex Engineer has told you sounds also strange.
1. This sounds so un-engineer-ish
2. It would be totally against Rolex company policy and I doubt that someone would ruin his job by that kind of info.
I also can't follow on what you say that the hands are back and forth 15 seconds.
Like Asp9mm rightly said, it's up to YOU to set the hands.
You can see a mechanical movement like a geartrain and between every gearwheel - there must be some "air". Otherwise with the low powers in a watch movement, the geartrain would stick.
So if you knock your watch hardly on a desk, you can move the minute hands forth or back for an amount of around 15 seconds. That will happen with almost every mechanical watch.
If you are speaking about the minute hand being "late" or "early" compared to the secondhand, this is just a matter of propering adjusting the watch.
I do as follows: I set the secondhand to 50 seconds
Then I FORWARD the minute hand exactly to the index and wait for the time signal.
When the time signal is 50 seconds before the full minute, I push the crown and let the watch run.
That way, the geartrain can catch up 10 seconds of "gear air" and your minute hand will be exactly to the point when the second hand is at zero.
One last comment: Deleting most of your previous posts leaves a sour taste in the mouth.
You are basically ruining the entire thread. I understand your reasons why you decided to do it and agree that a professional career must be protected.
But in the first place a real Pro would not put sensible infos on a public forum at all
I would love to rip Asp9mm into pieces here but he seems to be right to the spot with most facts that he gave - contrary to many things in your last posts.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
You should see the passive aggressive PM I just got. Asking me to go down to New Scotland Yard to call him out face to face. Is this a regular occurrence down there now? Not very professional is it.
Having made my comments about the movement issue, which I stick by, I cannot account for the difference in my experience on the day and the knowledge that you and Asp9mm provide. All I know is what happened and being so may years ago I unfortunately have means to prove what I say now and exonerate myself where I have been challenged on the issue.
You are correct on the notched guide clasp on the DS and that was pointed out to me by the retailer as a fitting solution. At the time I would have prefered a couple of half links in the bracelet like I had put in on my Omega, but was told I could not have them. Again I can't remember if they pointed out they don't make them, but what you and Asp9mm say both makes sense. My main disappointment with the DS bracelet was that with both the DS and PO being such chunky watches, the Rolex watch bracelet on the DS is quite thin width wise aesthetically compared to the PO bracelet. I'm sure it's up to the job, just asthetically it wasn't for me. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear in my first post.
All of my posts on this thread are present and correct. So nothing ruined in terms of this thread.
I have deleted my posts on other threads, prior to the creation of this thread, for the reasons I have stated. I apologise if that has damaged those threads in any way. Some of my posts still exist quoted in other peoples and I hope they show me to have posted in an honest and open way, only hoping to offer my knowledge and experience, for what it has been worth.
I have not posted here intending to trash Rolex or anything else. If I have then again it was unintentional.
But then quite apart from my misgivings about posting on a publicly viewable form, I am not here to be trashed either. I have sent Asp9mm my details seeing as he appears to be in London and will quite happily meet up with him and take him for a coffee and then he can decide in person if I am a troll full of BS.
Otherwise I'll bow out and not trouble the forum again.
Perhaps meeting someone in person will show I am not the troll you accuse me of being.
And how's the coffee in the NSY canteen? Is it as awful as it sounds?
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
As I said to Asp9mm in a second PM, if people weren't prepared to meet up in the real world, then I would have one of my best friends from over in the US, who I met through chatting on a prop message board. Plus then you get to really know if someone is an arse!
But Higgins you will have to meet my Bremont. It will only confirm all your fears!!
Living in shitty caves for years does no good to people - I actually regret having suggested to meet up but I was blinded by the meeting with kewee some years ago which went pretty well
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Welcome back Oh Grandaddymaster of the Plug...AJB has missed you :x
Also, there's the great Bond pedigree wwith the Submariners
No good for Mr Bond underwater!!
Perfect excuse for Moonraker 2!
It's fine if you put it in a freezer bag and tie a good knot.
Omega is iconic in its own right. The Speedmaster's place in history as the Moonwatch is undeniable. Omega has been enjoying a renaissance of sorts recently, moving the brand and its watches up market to better complete against Rolex. In my collection, I own more watches from Omega than any other brand. I love Omega.
I associate yesterday's Bond with Rolex, when Rolex was more of a tool watch, while today's modern Bond with Omega, although I would argue that the Planet Ocean is more of a tool watch than the new Seamaster 300 with its polished lugs and shiny ceramic bezel. All that said, I would think if Bond was a real super secret agent in the real world, he could be issued something like the Tudor Pelagos or Black Bay, which are more practical, modern tool watches than most of the current offerings from Rolex and Omega.
If Bond was a real secret agent, he wouldn't be issued with anything, he'd be buying his own.