Which of these 2.0 I VS2 H&A would you pick?

[BuddyBoy]

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2645109.htm

http://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-2649048.htm

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8078/

http://www.goodoldgold.com/diamond/8079/

http://www.jamesallen.com/diamonds/I-VS2-Ideal-Cut-Round-Diamond-1307972.asp

The one from James Allen seems to have more visible flaws than the others, and more clearly visible than I had expected at VS2. It is also significantly less expensive than the stones from WF and GOG. What is going on here?

Thanks.

 

[Dreamer_D]

They are all very nice choices!

I don't think the inclusions are a concern in any of them being VS2, but you can ask the vendors if they are eye clean.

The JA stone costs less because JA has a different business model and charges less in general for their stones. Lower overhead, less information about the diamonds , different upgrade policies and buyback. It is up to you how much value you place in the extras that WF and GOG offer and whether you want to pay for those policies.

The JA stone differs a little in its style of cut than the others too. Notice how fat its arrows are compared to the GOG and WF stones? This is because the JA stone has very short lgf ratio. A stone like the JA stone will have a tonne of contrast scintillation, so it will be very lively in that type of light return. But the stone *might* suffer a little in pure white light return, particularly in lower lighting conditions. This is not a "bad cut" issue, but a matter of taste in diamonds. The WF and GOG stones are more traditional in their proportions and will have more balanced light performance.

This video actually includes an RB with 73% lgf versus 78$ lgf, which is about the same as the JA stone you are considering compared to the ones from GOG and WF (around the 8 minute mark): http://www.vimeo.com/15208943