BY HARLAN CHAPMAN-GREEN
Late last year, we saw Omega release the latest update to one of its most popular models, the Seamaster Planet Ocean. As well as being one of Omega’s most popular models, I think we can also safely say that the Planet Ocean has become a modern-day icon since its launch in 2005. It was only when researching for this review that I remembered I had reviewed the Seamaster Planet Ocean before, a second-generation version made in 2015. I loved that generation of the Seamaster Planet Ocean, I loved the sweeping good looks and the rugged build quality, although it was a hefty beast. I had high hopes for the new Planet Ocean, yet, when the fourth-generation watch was unveiled back in November of 2025, I was disappointed. Now that I’ve had a chance to get my hands on a couple of the new Planet Oceans, have my feelings changed?
Well, I can start by saying that yes, my feelings have somewhat changed. When the fourth-generation Seamaster Planet Ocean was unveiled, I was underwhelmed by its appearance. I thought it was too angular, too chunky in a square-ish way – I thought it was too different. While it still is very different, it does wear well on the wrist. With one case size available right now for this generation of the Planet Ocean measuring 42mm x 13.79mm, and with a mass of 171 grams according to the VSS (Very Scientific [Kitchen] Scales), the Seamaster Planet Ocean is a lot more wearable for most people than the older generations.
In my review of the second-generation model, which was 42.5mm across, I recorded its thickness as 16.3mm, and its mass as 190 grams, and it only had a date window. The 45.5mm chronographs were even more enormous, ranging somewhere between 18mm and 19mm in thickness – you needed tree-trunk wrists to look convincing with one of those. So, yes, the fourth-generation Planet Ocean will appeal to a broader audience. And I think it looks good in person, especially in orange.
The bracelet is very good, too. In my view, Omega kicked the luxury watch market forward in the late 90s/early 2000s with the quality of its bracelets, such as those used on the ‘Bond’ Seamaster 300 Diver watches from that era. Their bracelets were far better than those used on contemporary Submariners back then, and they remained at the top for a long time. Of course, Rolex and nearly all the other competing brands caught up, but Omega’s still got chops when it comes to bracelets. Both of the Planet Oceans I had came equipped with the new stainless steel bracelet, which features a mixture of brushing and polishing to elevate their luxuriousness.
The clasp is a particular highlight. While, yes, the mirror-polished section in the middle will scratch if you so much as look at it, as it did for me, it looks classy. The clasp also features a micro-adjustment system, which is easy to use, and the necessary flip-out diver’s extension for when you need to resize it quickly to wear over a wetsuit or drysuit.
I know there will be at least one comment telling me I should’ve gotten a model with the rubber strap on, which is also an option Omega will sell you. Believe me, if I had the option to get one on a rubber strap, I would’ve, but when it comes to watches set aside for the press, you generally have to take what you can get. So, for now, I can’t comment on the rubber strap, but the bracelet is very good.
Of course, if all those changes are too much and you want a brand new Seamaster Planet Ocean that looks like the old one, they still have some variants kicking about on their website at the time of writing. So, if you fancy yourself a 43.5mm Seamaster Planet Ocean GMT in stainless steel, or one of their 45.5mm Planet Ocean Worldtimer watches, you might be in luck for a bit. There’s also the Seamaster Planet Ocean Ultra Deep 6000m watch, which is unlikely to go anywhere for a bit as one of the subdivisions of the Planet Ocean subdivision of Omega’s Seamaster collection. I do find their modus operandi baffling sometimes – this has left them with some of the old models sticking around when really they should have all been replaced with either a contemporary variant in the updated design, or, failing that, just ditched altogether until the replacement is ready. Leaving it like this is messy and blurs the identity of the Planet Ocean, which should be strong and bold.
While Omega’s model ranges might be a bit higgledy-piggledy, the Planet Ocean’s legibility is not. A fundamental requirement of a scuba diving watch is that it’s legible, so it can be read underwater at a glance by someone who’s got a lot on their plate already (scuba diving requires a lot of careful thought). This is the reason Omega kept its ‘Broadarrow’ style hands, which are a signature of the Planet Ocean. With a generous helping of Super-LumiNova, the Planet Ocean is clear and legible whether you’re viewing it in the sunshine or in pitch black.
The green-coloured lume applied to the minute hand and the lume pip on the unidirectional diving bezel make reading the time in the dark a doddle. So, props to Omega there. I did think that the dial seemed quite small in comparison to the case and bezel, which are wide, but I got used to it quickly, and it doesn’t diminish legibility. I didn’t notice a discernible difference in legibility between the black and orange variants. While I thought the black would be my go-to, as it’s more understated, I found myself wearing the orange model at every chance I got.
Inside the new Seamaster Planet Ocean sits the self-winding calibre 8912. This presents a point of contention for me for a couple of reasons. Firstly, it’s not by any stretch of the imagination a new movement. The calibre 8912 is the no-date variation of the calibre 8900, which was Omega’s first METAS-certified chronometer movement introduced way back in 2015. We’ve seen it in watches like the classic Seamaster 300 ‘Heritage’ watches with the lollipop seconds hands, the titanium Seamaster Ploprof and the Seamaster Planet Ocean Ultra Deep 6000m. So, yes, it’s a venerable calibre with proven service, but it’s not a new one. Still, it has a 3.5Hz beat rate and a 60-hour power reserve. It can also resist quite a lot, as thanks to non-magnetic componentry such as the silicon balance spring, it is resistant to magnetic fields of up to 15,000 Gauss. A free-sprung balance also means it’s very resistant to shocks and the beatings our mechanical watches get on a daily basis.
As well as the movement’s age being a point of contention, so too is the fact that it is covered by a titanium caseback. Omega said that it chose to use a titanium caseback as it could get a better seal than before. In traditional diving watches, helium can permeate the gaskets that keep the water out. When rising from the highly pressurised depths of the ocean, the helium molecules expand as the pressure reduces. Without an escape valve, they could pop the crystal out, totalling the watch. Using a new titanium caseback meant Omega could ditch the helium escape valve – a traditional part of most Seamaster watches from the last 30+ years.
The helium escape valve has always been a conversation point of the Seamaster – some say it’s a valid and useful feature that’s nice to have even if it doesn’t get much use, meanwhile others have said it’s an ugly addition, akin to those brain slug things from Futurama. I can see why people do and don’t like the helium escape valve. While I’m not too fussed either way, I lament that the way in which Omega has removed it means we cannot see the movement any longer.
I recently recorded an episode with Rikki for the Scottish Watches Podcast, where I talked a little about the new Seamaster Planet Ocean. I don’t know whether that’s been released by the time you’re reading this. In that episode, I talked a bit about my thoughts on the Planet Ocean (which I hadn’t gone hands-on with at the time), but I’m not sure I got my thoughts across properly. In my view, the Planet Ocean is meant to be the bigger and more technically advanced Seamaster, a watch where you should expect it to be a bit more brick-like on the wrist because it’s built to do more. It should have an open caseback, and a helium escape valve, and a date window would be nice.
The new Planet Ocean should bring forward the next generation of movements for the Seamaster range, movements that are even more accurate and with longer power reserves (70 hours at a minimum to compete with Rolex and Tudor). Movements that bring new innovations to the Co-Axial escapement. You’re paying for that innovation. While the fourth generation of the Planet Ocean does have its strengths, I can’t help but feel that we’re being shortchanged. With the black variant priced at $9,200 and the orange (which is apparently more complex to manufacture) at $9,500, the prices have risen quite significantly. WatchCharts lists the retail price of a 43.5mm third-generation Planet Ocean ref 215.30.44.21.01.002 as $8,000 in October 2025. I don’t think you’re getting as much for your money as you used to.
Having given it some deep thought, I feel that the fourth-generation Seamaster Planet Ocean isn’t a particularly inspiring Planet Ocean. In many ways, it feels more like the next step in the Seamaster 300m Diver’s range and less like an evolution of the Planet Ocean. If Omega was looking to move away from the ‘Bond’ design, which, let’s face it, has been around forever now, then this would’ve been the way to do it convincingly. And they could’ve stepped down the water resistance from 600m to 300m to match the current Seamaster 300m Diver watches and ditched the closed titanium caseback in favour of a solid steel one to shave a few more pennies off the retail price. I think these new watches are excellent in isolation, but they’re in the wrong collection.
Explore more at Omega
