2.45 G si1 or 2.09 F si1 - should I buy?

[Lenovo]

After months of searching and reading, I am seriously considering buying one of these two. Before I pull the trigger, I would love to hear feedback about each one from the experts. I have never seen a stone with very strong blue fluorescence so it would be great if the experts can chime in and give some feedback. From what I have read, it does not negatively impact the stone. These are the cheapest prices I have found on these stones of similar specs.




2.45 Ct G Si1

Polish - VG
Sym - Exc
Fluo - very strong blue
HCA - 0.8
Price - 22549







2.09 Ct F Si1

Pol - Exc
Sym - Exc
Fluo - Very Strong blue
HCA - 1.8
Price - 18415







Vendor does not provide ASET. I have asked for actual pics, and whether these are eye clean. I have asked them to take a look to see whether the blue has a a hazy/milky effect.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

I wouldn't personally buy without a magnified picture of the stone and an idealscope image, but I am also not wild about either of these as they aren't within the measurements I normally search for. Do you realize that the second stone is too deep? You didn't give us the diameter measurements and that is a very important thing to look at. It is good to look for depth of 60-62 but up to 62.3 is okay. I would have chosen the second one except I am betting it may not face up as large as it should. The first one is okay but I don't go below 34 on the crown angle (and 34.5 would be even better with that pavilions angle), and I'd have to see the magnified image to see if it is clean enough. Really, it is best to wait and post when you have all the information including the images. There's no way to really decide from just this.

If these are from a drop shipper, I am afraid you may not get meaningful info on the fluorescence. I have had a strong blue stone before, but I'd be slightly more cautious with very strong.

 

[Lenovo]

I wouldn't personally buy without a magnified picture of the stone and an idealscope image, but I am also not wild about either of these as they aren't within the measurements I normally search for. Do you realize that the second stone is too deep? You didn't give us the diameter measurements and that is a very important thing to look at. It is good to look for depth of 60-62 but up to 62.3 is okay. I would have chosen the second one except I am betting it may not face up as large as it should. The first one is okay but I don't go below 34 on the crown angle (and 34.5 would be even better with that pavilions angle), and I'd have to see the magnified image to see if it is clean enough. Really, it is best to wait and post when you have all the information including the images. There's no way to really decide from just this.

If these are from a drop shipper, I am afraid you may not get meaningful info on the fluorescence. I have had a strong blue stone before, but I'd be slightly more cautious with very strong.

2.45 carat measurements
8.71 x 8.74 x 5.24

2.09 measurements
8.09 x 8.14 x 5.08


I am not too certain how the depth or other individual measurements affect the diamond, hence I posted. I just thought the HCA score would weed out the bad ones. I was told they would look at the stones and comment on fluorescence. I, too, am a bit cautious about the very strong blue fluorescence. They will be sending magnified images soon, no ASET though.

 

[tweeter8177]

Fluorescence is a personal choice in my opinion. There are a number of PSers that love the affect it has on a stone, but there are some that don’t care for it. You will need to decide that yourself. If you can’t see a stone first hand that has it, just google it and maybe the images will help you decide. I was at a jeweler store recently and saw 2 stones side by side with no information on them. The very first thing I noticed was that one had a bluish tone to it. The jeweler was surprised when I asked if it had fluorescence. They confirmed it did and went on to say how much whiter it looked. I didn’t think it looked whiter, I thought it looked blue. I suspect it had very strong blue fluorescence but did not confirm. This was on a cloudy day and the store had natural light from the windows. This might have been an anomaly, but a stone with strong blue fluorescence will take on a bluish tone in certain lighting conditions (UV light).

One of your comments really stuck out to me: “These are the cheapest prices I have found on these stones of similar specs”. That would be an immediate red flag to me and make me wonder why the diamond is the cheapest in its specs. Could be the fluorescence is having a negative impact or it isn’t eye clean (the old “you get what you pay for”). I guess you could also get lucky too!

I am not sure if your price range has changed or who you decided to go with for the setting, but you had really nice stones suggested to you in your other threads from WF, ERD, etc. And a number of them were slightly bigger than the 2.09ct you just posted (diameter size means more than carat weight when comparing size of a diamond). What didn’t you like about them? Looks like you are now going for higher color? In my opinion, for a large purchase, I would want either a website that provides images (idealscope, etc.) of the diamond or a concierge type service (such as ERD or Perry) to help pick you a stone or see the stones in person. Last resort…a really good return policy!

 

[Lenovo]

Fluorescence is a personal choice in my opinion. There are a number of PSers that love the affect it has on a stone, but there are some that don’t care for it. You will need to decide that yourself. If you can’t see a stone first hand that has it, just google it and maybe the images will help you decide. I was at a jeweler store recently and saw 2 stones side by side with no information on them. The very first thing I noticed was that one had a bluish tone to it. The jeweler was surprised when I asked if it had fluorescence. They confirmed it did and went on to say how much whiter it looked. I didn’t think it looked whiter, I thought it looked blue. I suspect it had very strong blue fluorescence but did not confirm. This was on a cloudy day and the store had natural light from the windows. This might have been an anomaly, but a stone with strong blue fluorescence will take on a bluish tone in certain lighting conditions (UV light).

One of your comments really stuck out to me: “These are the cheapest prices I have found on these stones of similar specs”. That would be an immediate red flag to me and make me wonder why the diamond is the cheapest in its specs. Could be the fluorescence is having a negative impact or it isn’t eye clean (the old “you get what you pay for”). I guess you could also get lucky too!

I am not sure if your price range has changed or who you decided to go with for the setting, but you had really nice stones suggested to you in your other threads from WF, ERD, etc. And a number of them were slightly bigger than the 2.09ct you just posted (diameter size means more than carat weight when comparing size of a diamond). What didn’t you like about them? Looks like you are now going for higher color? In my opinion, for a large purchase, I would want either a website that provides images (idealscope, etc.) of the diamond or a concierge type service (such as ERD or Perry) to help pick you a stone or see the stones in person. Last resort…a really good return policy!

Thanks for the info tweeter.

I found these stones and they are indeed a better color and cheaper than from any of the others I saw. I recerntly went to the store and saw a J colored stone. I was able to see a yellowish hue even though it was ideal cut and that was big turnoff. Hence, I started looking for better colored stones and these two were the best I found in terms of price/color/clarity/carat. I think the industry views a blue fluorescence as a negative, and that is why these stones are priced the way they are (or at least me thinks!). I have not seen a 2.45 ideal cut priced even near this, so it is a bit enticing. I figured with HCA score of 0.8 I had a winner for sure (but guess not haha)

The vendor did get back to me about the 2.45 G si1 and stated that the stone is eye clean and their definition "means that an average layperson viewing the diamond face-up from a distance of six to eight inches would not be able to see any inclusions". furthermore they also stated that the diamond is not "milky"

The other thread did have nice stones, but most were lower color. I think after seeing a J, I would rather have something that doesn't have that yellowish hue. Good point you bring up about the diameter...I will keep that in mind as well when comparing. I am just putting feelers out for these two and will not put the trigger unless I get a green light from most of you experts here!

Attached is a 10x mag pic of 2.45 G Si1 -

 

[heididdl]

Yes the crown angle is a little off on the first stone and the second is a bit deep. If your going to spend a good penny then you should select an ideal cut stone.,

 

[ame]

Neither of those looks particularly well cut, frankly. I think you can find better. Don't search for stones that are "a deal," there's a reason they're priced lower. It might not always be because of fluorescence. Search for what's the best in your budget.

I personally love fluorescence and seek it out on purpose. But make sure you get photos, idealscopes, asets, etc. and not just rely on numbers and plots.

 

[tweeter8177]

I totally understand your concern with a J color. When I bought my 2 ct+ I originally bought a J. I returned it within a week, because I wasn't comfortable with the yellowish tone (mostly from the side view). I ended up with an I color (3K more than planned of course!) and was perfectly happy with the color. To me there was a huge difference between I and J!! I have since upgraded and still went with an I color and it is very white to me!

When you looked at the J, was it ideally cut and a GIA/AGS? (If not, that wouldn't be a fair comparison.) Did you look at an I or an H? Unless you are extremely color sensitive, It would be very hard to tell the difference between and G and H. It just seems like you could do much better than your current choices if you drop in color a bit.

I hope others chime in with opinions!