It is definitely still a thing now.
1 Like
*finds the big thread on this*
I retract my comment.
1 Like
Perhaps you could try placing the 8kx on a table or the floor, which is very different from wearing it on your head
When I just bought the 8kx, I didnāt realize the shake for the first two days either, just a slight dragging sensation when I turned my head quickly, and only when I was adjusting the configuration did I realize that the 8kx lens on the ground looked like it was in an earthquake
I was in China so pimax engineers came from Shanghai to Beijing to try to help me solve the problem, and finally through the attempts of several people (marketing and sales, after-sales service, technical engineers), they confirmed that the 1.0 shake is very slight, while the 2.0 has a significant shake, and recommended that I switch to the 1.0 ā¦ although I have 2 1.0 devices and 2 2.0 devices, I couldnāt accept a $1600 single helmet with such severe basic faults that I had to sell it for $1300 - after one week of purchase and less than 5 hours of useā¦ ā¦
Not that it means I hate pimax for it, but I havenāt seen a clear indication that the problem has been fixed
1 Like
Wowā¦
When did this happen ? because we have tried to get in touch with the engineering team for several months to help getting this tracking issue solved.
Would have been nice if they had officially made a statement about what you just wrote.
1 Like
About a year ago, we had new 8kx users in our community regularly discussing this issue, as well as the severe binocular competition black mask, cheap sound, poor pitools support, 8kx does have a special place, but is a poor choice for many people and holds a distrustful attitude towards pimax as a result
Also, I have to say that this community is much better than the official tech support in China, the firmware updates are even a few versions earlier than the Chinese tech support, not to mention the self-developed pihome (is that the name?)
2 Likes
That has been the case since the KS began. When you have thousands of enthusiasts as your customer base, the brain trust can be considerable.
1 Like
What does this mean? 
Similar to the right side of the left eye and the left side of the right eye, there is significant blackness outside of the fov, and the composite image of the two eyes has a large, annoyingly misaligned black mask in the center
Because of the physical adjustment range and lens curvature design of the pimax, a portion of people with specific IPD seem to have this problem extraordinarily pronounced, and for me, basically 40% of the image is disturbed by this black mask
1 Like
Hmm, not my experience. Maybe I got lucky or my eyes arenāt sensitive to it but to me my 8kx is uniform brightness.
Maybe my description is a bit vague, in fact, itās more like holding your hand in front of your nose (but not all the way) while your eyes look ahead at the screen, you can still see 100% of the screen content, but at the same time you can see a ghostly palm in the center of the screen
For the index, this only occurs when looking at objects within 30cm, while for the 8kx (for me) it is always there whenever
Ah I think I get what you mean now. Itās just not something Iāve experienced on either headset. The only thing that induces some geometric anomalies onscreen for me, is foveated rendering which is to be expected I guess.
I did have to run a slightly lower ipd offset on the pimax too, via pitool.
Sound could be better on the KDMAS but Iām not sure if this is due to the drivers used or the fact theyāre designed to not make contact - I bet placing earpads like the vive pro would make a positive difference to sound. They would probably also make the pimax more difficult to get on off your head (without being able to flip them up and away).
1 Like
And yet the 8kX and Index have, supposedly, almost the exact same amount of (ā¦rendered-, and as such: Maximum potentially possibleā¦) stereo overlap.
Does your physical realities allow you to get your eyes closer to the lenses in the 8kX (ā¦with corresponding reduction in lens spacing, to keep the lens axes lined up with your eyes, even if maybe not at the optically optimal distance) - perhaps by tearing off the facial interface (which pops right back in, with some pressing around the edges)?
(Of course - even when with things positioned for the same amount of medial FOV, between the two devices; For my particular eyes I get more out of what it there with the Index, because it is sharp almost all the way out to the edges, and barely distorted, which I can not say for the p8kX).
Obviously different in physical design ā¦8kx lenses have a very different angle than index and I found someone in this community about a year ago who mentioned that the 8kx has an internal lens that is tilted for fov, I think you mean the IPD range is the same?
I had already sold it a long time ago, but believe me, so all I could find and try (including what you said) I had tried, to no avail, and after a full week of tweaking, reworking, replacing, testing, when I picked up my index, it suddenly dawned on me that if I was paying $1600 in return for annoying me, it wasnāt worth it for that, so I sold an almost new and fully accessorized 8kx for 20% off and picked up my old index headset to go back to the wonderful vr world ā¦
1 Like
No, I meant the angle of game camera FOV that is rendered to the left for the right eye, and to the right for the left eye, is about the same for both devices, and that most people are supposed to be able to see wear the headset in such a way that they can see all the way to the edge of the rendered imagery (ā¦after which black nothing takes over) through the lenses, at projection angles that hopefully correspond 1:1 between the game camera, and the real world.
The Index, as you say, has its lenses canted 5Ā° (per lens), whereas with the whole 8k/5k series that cant is 10Ā°.
This āwrapping around your eyeballsā cant is enough on its own, for making a larger FOV possible, and for reducing how much you need to unnecessarily render for that wide FOV, so I donāt know what the āinternal lensā you recall being mentioned may be, but suppose it could relate to an observation I myself posted about, that the 8k/5k series screens are actually not parallel with the lenses, but canted a few degrees more than themā¦
Sorry you couldnāt find a good fit with the 8kX; Wish I could say may experience wasnāt the sameā¦ :7
I think weāre talking about something completely different ā¦ I mean, the right side of the left lens āoutsideā, not that the āright side of the left lensā has a rendering problem, itās not about the rendering, itās about the physical optical design that allows me to see the inside of the helmet outside of the lens, black, without the lens ā¦
Iāve used many different VR devices, Oculus rift, rifts, quest, quest2, index, htc vive, htc vive pro, Samsung MR+, Lenovo MR (I used to run a VR experience store in China) and the 8kx is the only one with this problem
1 Like
Try reducing the backlight brightness like 15% and the overall color values to -1 and see if this has any affect.
I could misread you completely, but I do not believe we speak of different things. -It is indeed about in physical reality having a view of the screen through the lens that is less than desired to the left of straight ahead for the right eye, and vice versa for the left one. Outside the lens aperture one see the inside of the HMD - maybe even over to the other lens, unless one have a pretty large nose.
Where the rendering comes into that context, is that it is in nobodyās interest to throw computing resources at rendering more FOV than the user can see anyway, so game cameras for any given HMD are usually defined with an FOV that closely matches the maximum real physical FOV a user can potentially get out of the HMD, if optimally fitted.
These game camera definitions, that the HMD drivers ask games to use, are also hard undisputable numbers which can be read. All this taken together, they are, generally an indication of the absolute maximum FOV a user can possibly see in the HMD if worn optimally (even were they to shift the position of the lens relative to their eye, to look through it at such an oblique angle that that angle crosses the regular view angle limitation from normal positioning, thereās nothing there to see anyway).
A manufacturer could pad some āfakeā FOV onto what it tells the VR runtime about its own capabilites, to make itself sound better than it is, but that would come at the penalty of that fake extra FOV, for-real being rendered, hurting performance, which would reflect right back on the reputation they just obfuscated numbers to inflate.
Looking at these numbers, the absolute maximum one can theoretically see any content to the left through the right lens, is about 41 degrees for the p8kX, and 42Ā° for the Index. Physical realities can give you less than these, but never more.
So back to physical reality: The obvious way to make a lens aperture fill more of oneās real-life FOV is of course to move it closer to oneās eye.
Now, canting lenses means one make their medial edges swivel away from the eyes (by 10Ā° each for the 8k/5k series), meeting up to form a peak in front of oneās nose - this reduces the angle from edge to pupil in two ways, and one would need to get even closer to get the lens to compensate for this (or use a larger lens to fill the vacated space between the lenses - they still meet up at the farthest point, though). Fortunately faces tend to be convexā¦ 
I donāt know about others, but I have the problem with āfound wantingā stereo overlap with every HMD I have owned - least worst being the original HTC Vive, and worst the Rift CV1, which really āboxed you inā; The lens aperture always ends way before my own IRL medial FOV does, and so I get this sense of a āghostly black stencilā hanging in front of me - one half of it provided by each eye and overlapping the otherās ātrue viewā, and worse the lower the HMDās stereo overlap is, as well as worse, as you say, the more your eyes converge to look at something close up, which moves the pupils medially, reducing the angle between them and the medial lens edge.
If I have, e.g, so wide a face, and so recessed eyes, that the canted lenses bump into my cheekbones before I can get to the optimal eye-to-lens distance, then the construction of the HMD is utterly incompatible with my face shape. I happen to have some problems of that ilk, that makes it hard for me to get close enough with any HMD, but thatās just one guy (maybe I should dust off the 8kX and take some subjective FOV readings)ā¦
I am really curious whether, and how, the p12k will live up to its superior stereo overlap claim. :7
I think many of these issues have been addressed before in this thread - https://community.openmr.ai/t/clarifying-near-ipd-x-distant-ipd-confusion/14809
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.