1.98 h ACA or 2.05 g PS

[Hafrica13]

Hi all,

I’ve been back and forth between these two. Any insight would help. I’m inclined to go w the 1.98 and have it on hold as I’m prioritizing cut but the G color is tempting and is very well cut as well. The 1.98 is also .01mm larger in diameter too ( not that that’s possible to see). And also just seems to edge out the 2.05 in fire when looking at the videos.

Thanks for your insights! Seems like there isn’t a wrong choice.

this WF ACA 1.98ct H vs2

Diamond | 1.980 ct H VS2 A CUT ABOVE® Hearts and Arrows Super Ideal Round Cut Loose Diamond AGS Certified | 4186468

This Whiteflash A CUT ABOVE® super ideal cut hearts and arrows 1.980 carat H color VS2 clarity loose diamond is graded by the American Gem Society (AGS) Laboratories. | 4186468

www.whiteflash.com

And this WF PS 2.05ct G vs2

Diamond | 2.05 ct G VS2 Premium Select Round Cut Loose Diamond GIA Certified | 3784278

This fabulous 2.05 carat Round Excellent cut diamond has a clarity grade of VS2 and color grade of G.It is an excellent choice for diamond engagement rings or other fine diamond jewelry. | 3784278

www.whiteflash.com

And here’s a side by side photo comparing color.

 

[SimoneDi]

Hand down the the 2.05 G VS2! It crosses the 2ct mark, it is whiter, beautifully cut, at the same price and with PS, you still get WF’s amazing upgrade policy, so you can always upgrade it in the future if you are not happy or want something else.

 

[mission1]

With the 40.7/34.4 and 61.6% depth, the 1.98 looks on paper to have the better dimensions I think (compared to 40.6/35.5 and 62.6).... and in the bigger stone the extra weight is hidden in the depth. However, the video does suggest that the 2.05 looks noticeably whiter, so maybe depends on how color sensitive you/the recipient are.

 

[Hafrica13]

With the 40.7/34.4 and 61.6% depth, the 1.98 looks on paper to have the better dimensions I think (compared to 40.6/35.5 and 62.6).... and in the bigger stone the extra weight is hidden in the depth. However, the video does suggest that the 2.05 looks noticeably whiter, so maybe depends on how color sensitive you/the recipient are.

Thanks for the feedback. Do either of you notice any haze around the perimeter of the table in the G photo? Or is that just relflections?

I’d say we’re fairly color sensitive. G wouldn’t be an issue but H could potentially. But if the 1.98 sparkles harder than the 2.05, I think that’s ultimately what we are going to see day to day and across the room. It would take a seriously close eye to differentiate the color.

 

[mission1]

Based on my own recent experience, if you're not sure about the H and think you're colour sensitive, I'd be wary - you may catch glimses of it....so it depends if this will annoy you. If you're ok with H, I think the 1.98 is nicer.

The plot on the GIA diamond does say 'additional clouds not shown', so it would be worth checking with the vendor....but very unlikely to be an issue given it's PS.

 

[AV_]

@Hafrica13 I'd say reflections, since there is no trace of texture in the many other shots. The little glare makes the H look nicer.

I am smiling at the ridiculous precission of the 1.98 !

 

[lovedogs]

For sure the G if you are color sensitive. Hands down.

 

[sledge]

You know I'm sweet on the 2.05 as I originally recommended. As already pointed out, G color for the same dollars and crosses the psychological barrier of being 2+ carats.

That said, no denying the 1.98 is a performer. Although the differences may be minimal, it's the better cut stone. And I think the video is a tad stronger as well.

You're in a great situation as there is no "loser" but just preference instead.

One thing I'd like to point out. I love the WF videos but let's be real, they are glamour videos to demonstrate the full capability of each stone.

IRL you aren't going to be walking around in that lighting conditions all the time, nor have that magnification. So while the video is important, we need to further assess two stones like these.

This is where WF is golden. They are honest to a fault and I think you need some human eye comparisons in various light conditions.

Call WF and ask them to pull both stones and analyze them closely for color, clarity and fire differences in an array of lighting conditions.

I'd even ask for a video of the ordeal. Or possibly a video call where you get first hand reactions and possibly some of the same viewing differences they detect.

As I mentioned before I almost bought my wife a WF PS with a 36/40.6 combo. They pulled and compared against several ACAs and seemed to prefer the PS and wondered why it wasn't ACA. I'm not saying all PS stones will garner such a response but it's plausible you have such a situation.

 

[flyingpig]

G VS2. Get it.

 

[Hafrica13]

@Hafrica13 I'd say reflections, since there is no trace of texture in the many other shots. The little glare makes the H look nicer.

I am smiling at the ridiculous precission of the 1.98 !

Thanks for the input. And yeah, as an engineer, the precision of the 1.98 has me grinning too.

My thinking is that extra rays of sparkle (even 0.1%) can be seen regularly from afar while color is something you can only really see in the rare case you’re examining for color. That’s what I’d like to think at least.

 

[Hafrica13]

Call WF and ask them to pull both stones and analyze them closely for color, clarity and fire differences in an array of lighting conditions.

I'd even ask for a video of the ordeal. Or possibly a video call where you get first hand reactions and possibly some of the same viewing differences they detect.

As I mentioned before I almost bought my wife a WF PS with a 36/40.6 combo. They pulled and compared against several ACAs and seemed to prefer the PS and wondered why it wasn't ACA. I'm not saying all PS stones will garner such a response but it's plausible you have such a situation.

Great info. Thank you. I’ve been in process with them and we’re working on a custom solitaire setting. We have the 1.98 on hold but I’ll ask them about doing that. I feel like I’ve been asking a lot of them already w pics and color comparison but that would be really helpful. I agree that crossing the physiological 2ct threshold with better color would be the ticket, so long as it’s not at the expense of too fire performance. And that 1.98 seems to do really well!

Thanks again for the time and feedback.

 

[AprilBaby]

I doubt in real life you would notice the difference between the two but there is something about the 1.98 in the photos I like better.

 

[Dancing Fire]

This is a tough choice. I'm a G/H guy. the G is too deep for me at 62.6, so I'll go with the 1.98 ct.

 

[msop04]

G/VS2.

 

[flyingpig]

The G VS2 is priced so well.
Top cut stone with WF service, QC/QA, and upgrade policy at virtual inventory pricing. It is a rare opportunity. A stone like this does not show up often.

 

[doberman]

That's a big color.difference. if color is important to you, get the G. For me, size is not as important as color, but color comes after cut. Therefore I'd pick the ACA. I'd rather have a little less diamond and know that I've got the best. Silly, but there it is. Either way is a great choice.

 

[headlight]

Thanks for the input. And yeah, as an engineer, the precision of the 1.98 has me grinning too.

My thinking is that extra rays of sparkle (even 0.1%) can be seen regularly from afar while color is something you can only really see in the rare case you’re examining for color. That’s what I’d like to think at least.

I actually feel the opposite of that sentiment!

 

[Hafrica13]

I actually feel the opposite of that sentiment!

Thanks. I get that too! For as much as I think I know through my research, this is still my first diamond purchase.

 

[headlight]

Thanks. I get that too! For as much as I think I know through my research, this is still my first diamond purchase.

... and I think sometimes it just has to do with the diamond

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I am not worried a bit about the G being 62.6 because the two stones face up almost exactly the same diameter! I love ACAs and ordinarily would choose one. However, in this case, the light return images on the G are excellent and you're getting a color grade higher and over the 2 ct mark. I'd choose that one for myself.

 

[AV_]

... as an engineer, the precision of the 1.98 has me grinning too.
My thinking is that extra rays of sparkle (even 0.1%) can be seen regularly from afar while color is something you can only really see in the rare case you’re examining for color.

I agree. Besides, the macro shot makes the two carat stones look as ten carat ones of the same color grades - not the same thing.

-

footnote: this 'flash from adistance' effect is all there is obviously beautiful to see from the simplest, oldest 'cut' models [not quite cut, but at most cleaved octahedral crystals - the point www & table 'cuts' www , www etc.] that look quite dissapointing close up - few ever happened to come close to critical angles [irredimably far from the cleavage directions; diamonds grow the wrong way ... ] for any semblance of brighteness; a sort fof minor magic, IMHO; rattling off obscure likes.

 

[CareBear]

G VS2 all the way!!! It is noticeably whiter than the H and those fat arrows are absolutely delish!!

 

[Hafrica13]

So here is a video of both. I may see a but more fire patterning coming from the 1.98, but I think the 2.05 keeps up enough to justify the color bump. Any second opinions? Thanks yall!

 

[SimoneDi]

So here is a video of both. I may see a but more fire patterning coming from the 1.98, but I think the 2.05 keeps up enough to justify the color bump. Any second opinions? Thanks yall!

I absolutely 100% would pick the 2.05 G VS2 - what a stunning diamond at a fantastic price and paired with WFs generous upgrade policy. This is a rare find, seriously don’t overthink it.

 

[flyingpig]

Cannot tell any difference in light performance.
But the difference in color is obvious.

 

[gm89uk]

So here is a video of both. I may see a but more fire patterning coming from the 1.98, but I think the 2.05 keeps up enough to justify the color bump. Any second opinions? Thanks yall!

The fire difference is negligible, the colour difference is stark.

Just spotted @flyingpig's response after I posted. Ditto.

 

[sledge]

2.05 G VS2 all day long.

The color is detectable. The difference in fire is negligible. Both are rock solid performers. Too many things going for the G to not buy it.

 

[distracts]

So here is a video of both. I may see a but more fire patterning coming from the 1.98, but I think the 2.05 keeps up enough to justify the color bump. Any second opinions? Thanks yall!

I can't tell a difference between them in terms of sparkle, tbh. But I can see the color difference.

 

[Hafrica13]

Thanks for all the help everyone. Landed on the 2.05 G! Seriously beautiful! Excited to get it in hand- and on hand for that matter!

 

[sledge]

Thanks for all the help everyone. Landed on the 2.05 G! Seriously beautiful! Excited to get it in hand- and on hand for that matter!