Like the toning on the bottom dollar better. Also it looks to have a lot less bag marks, though that may just be the picture.
Bottom one and its not even close. I cannot believe they called #1 Unc !?!?!! The reverse of #1 must be pristine, full breast feathers and beaming luster. Im pretty curious to see what the reverse looks like now actually Edit: oops, i didnt even look at the cert #s. Night and day for sure. My comment still stands though. That reverse better blow me away to even consider an Unc grade
From my experience, NGC/PCGS grades of 60-62 are always AU coins. MS63 is half and half, either nice AU or impaired MS. MS64 and above are generally mint state. This coins is completely representative of an NGC?PCGS MS62 coin, lots of wear on the high points as can be seen in the first picture, it's also an example of why I do not value their opinion at all. You should lose a lot of credibility when you consistently call coins mint state that have significant wear and breaks in luster, other than the greater fool theory I don't get why people pay extra for these people's opinions.
No, your grading is not just conservative, as you admitted. It's downright out of step (and out of any sense of reality) with anything going on out there in the real world. Does the fact that they were the same coin give you any pause at all? It should. There is a huge difference in "digital sharpening" of the two pictures - an object lesson in my opinion.