Hey guys, after seeing Sebastian’s video where he compared the FOV of various headsets using the ROV test tool, I decided to do my own comparison between the StarVR One and the Valve Index.
My optometrist measured my IPD at 63, but StarVR’s eye tracking suggested my IPD is actually 64 and it has many times measured it at 65. So I’ll say my IPD is between 64 to 65.
For Valve Index test I put the lenses as close to my eyes as possible with ipd set to 65
At 170 degrees horizontal I could still see the colors of the bars in my peripheral. Between 172 to 176 I could see reflections on my screen but not the color of the bars.
For vertical FOV, what’s interesting is for both the Valve Index and StarVR One, I started noticing the dot at the top disappearing at around the 94 degrees mark. The point at which the bottom dot disappeared from my view was 116 degrees on StarVR and 130 degrees on Index.
However, in terms of my VR experience, seeing more from below my eyes is not as important as above my eyes. I could not tell much difference between vertical FOV of both headsets until I actually did the measurement.
So in comparison:
Valve Index Max 106°/130° Pimax 8KX 140°/124° (from Sebastian’s measurement) StarVR One 172°/116°
StarVR has roughly 32 degrees wider horizontal FOV than the 8KX.
Well to be fair the large FOV of pimax is definitely not 140, as it has been measured numerous times in the past and has been shown to be around 160. There was just a mistake in Seb’s measurement. The difference in reality is around 12 degrees but the big thing with your StarVR is not having any distortion at all for that 172 which has to be a big plus.
Do you have some examples of it being measured at around 160? Those were probably calculated by automatic tools. Sebastian and I physically saw what we measured.
The horizonal advertized measurements are probably under “ideal” conditions, so as thin foam as is possible, and IPD at minimum setting. In the Index for example, that means narrow IPD and lenses as far back and close to the eye as possible.
There’s got to be someone with a minimal IPD who is getting an 8KX and can do another real world perception test! If we could get a dozen real world impressions, we could start to make out a distribution for actual perceived FoV, correlated even across other settings, like IPD, and eye to lens distance and such…
Actually I just realized. The HMD manufacturer FOV measurements may be based off the distance between both lenses entirely separately. But it could be due to binocular overlap that we have a lower perceived FOV.
Why would You trust StarVR’s measurement (which isn’t even the same every time) over a manual measurement performed by a professional (using professional equipment)?
She didn’t use professional equipment. She just looked at my eyes and used some kind of simple tool. But she sounded uncertain when she told me my ipd was 63. I had asked her to measure my ipd at the end of the eye appointment.
StarVR has consistently measured me at 65 for the past few weeks now so they must’ve fixed their eye tracking software.
I made a picture to illustrate what I see in the StarVR One. I don’t see any borders at the top of my view. I see a little bit of border on the sides and some black where the bridge of my nose is. Farther out from my nose the vertical FOV gets much wider. The red dot is where I was looking at when I measured vertical FOV…
Question, How is the app measuring fov? I ask this because we know that with different memory and other settings you can get steam vr to rendor different views. And these rendored views don’t have to match the actual display view of the hardware in the headset.
My assumption is that pimax’s published angle is the physical measurement of the angle presented from the eye to the lenses. Which is not necessarily the same as the image rendered on the screen. It should be but we’ve all seen odd behavior / choices made in rendering pipelines.
all clear. Seb said that he stated “usable” fov. and that is in his opinion only 140 degrees. even so the total measureable fov is 160 degrees… i have no words…
more even so this introduce even more subjectivity in the measurement. If usable FOV determination was the objective he should have introduce the method in the beginning of the video
. So the experience is like looking at a wide screen…
