with regards to the leap motion. I didnt realize it just dangles there held by the usb thats a little disappointing. I imagined it cliping on snug.
I also feel like somehow they completely managed not to talk about the FOV. no mentions of distortion so thats good.
These guys seem say the sweet spot is tinier than the vive which is complete opposite of what everyone has been saying. (Its Huge)
3 Likes
Man there were a lot of issues with this video. I donât even know where to start. They updated from .91 to .95 and magically perspectival distortions went away? These guys sound like they have no clue what they are doing. Itâs infuriating that so many reviewers these days use this âIt just worksâ mantra to override using your fucking brain. If you bought a VR headset, chances are you have a little more acumen beyond âpower on, put on face, all the games are perfectâ. For fucks sake. I hear Linus doing this more and more as well. People hear this shit, get cold feet and then they miss out on all the fun.
5 Likes
Guess he didnât use the screws or were missing.
1 Like
they have a point with the cheap plastic. Alot of people have been RMAâing because the plastic breaks.
3 Likes
At 21:10 they talk about games that didnât even work like pavlov fallout project carsâŚthey donât even know about parallel projections oh god 
pimax really need to make this clear for people like this who donât even bother going into the settings ffsâŚ
6 Likes
That seems to be because they are using the term the correct way; Designating that you are wearing the HMD correctly, so that the pupils of your eyes are in the focal point (or âsweet spotâ) of the lenses, whereas all too many incorrectly use it to label their impression of how large a portion of their FOV is in focus - an area, rather than a spot :P. The latter is to a great degree a function of the former, which would be why the misconception has come to be. :7
As for the plastic⌠Iâm a bit ambivalent there⌠The relatively low weight of the device can be directly attributed to the shell being that thin and flimsy â Sturdier HMD? -Oh yes please! âŚbut itâs not going to result in a weight increase, right? :7
2 Likes
SoâŚa tiny sweet spot is still a bad thing right?
the way most vr people interpret âsweet spotâ is the amount of leeway you have to get a focused image. Most have said that you have to fuss less with the pimax once its on your face to get a clear image.
As for the plastic, I agree, most say that they are shocked that the pimax is as light as or lighter than the rift, and much lighter than vive. I own all headsets and recently picked up a used vive (in preparation for pimax) and vive is the first headset ive worn that actually gives my neck a work out, its crazy how heavy the vive is. So yes its a trade-off for sure
Well, yes⌠and noâŚ
Apparently one of the main reasons we got the (rightly so) much maligned fresnel lenses in generation 1 HMDs, is that with the thinner lenses, you get a little bit less distortion from not being exactly in the sweet spot (an effect often referred to as âpupil swimâ), which is good, because that means you can look around with your eyes, without the world warping around you too much (sidenote: you may instead notice that the whole world âshiftsâ or âjumpsâ in a sudden discrete step, at some point, when swivelling your eyeballs, as they cross a lens segment border).
However: It appears we can also allow this to fool us to a degree, as has often been demonstrated in the Oculus subreddit, and recently here as well, where people take an apparent clear view (âŚor âlarge sweet spotâ, as theyâll say) to mean that they are good, making them settle for where they are at, even though they still suffer from other effects of being off â noteably, around here, the extra (âŚon top of the usual) distortion in the periphery, when the 8k/5k is worn too low on the face.
EDIT: Generally Iâll be happy when there is no such thing as a sweet spot, and everything looks right no matter where our eyes are. 
1 Like
yeah, we only know this because weâve been glued to sweviver videos. But pimax should be automating this in software.
1 Like
i think we need foveated rendering for that.
What most reviewers seem to miss with the pimax is that its modular and we are getting eye tracking down the line as well as leap motion wireless etc
what you see now is really not what you get in the future.
(EDIT) this is definitely due to bad marketing.
2 Likes
Damn youtube noobs cant even tune it right, I mean how stupid can some people be.
Amazing how they can even boot the PC
4 Likes
Depends. Eye tracking would allow for adapting lens distortion for looking off-axis, but the lens is still what it is, and we can still not stray too far.
There is also a question of just how good (accuracy,precision,speed) the 8k/5k eyetracking module will be; Enough for foveated rendering/distortion, or not? For one thing: If nothing has changed since the kickstarter, only one eye will be tracked (confirmed at the time), which means we can have no convergence (EDIT2: âŚnor IPD) information, and have to infer the likely-ish position of the other eye by e.g. raycasting to the nearest in-game object (EDIT3: âŚwhilst assuming the userâs face is perfectly symmetrical).
A âtrueâ lightfield display should give quite a bit of leeway, but who knows if weâll ever get to displays that are dense enough to do that near-eye, at decent resolutions⌠:7
(EDIT: Another effect that one could try with eyetracking, but which a lightfield display wouldnât need since it would do it âproperlyâ, is that one could add artificial depth-of-field blur, based on vergence and z-buffer, but I must say I am somewhat dubious about that, even though the makers of the Fove HMD claim they had good results.)
(Avegant has a lightfield HMD prototype, but I believe thatâs rather low res, like NVidiaâs research experiments. As for Magic Leap, their device is a multifocal display (two planes), and I must opine that they are stretching definitions waaaaay beyond the breaking point, in hawking it under the âlightfieldâ monicker.) :7
1 Like
That is your average user, and it is certainly your average user with the tool as it stands today.
Given we donât really know the full extent of what changes in PiTool with the supersampling settings and Pimax wonât tell us we are in a bit of a position where understanding the full range of what PiTool does is actually impossible. The fact is this stuff is complicated and users are going to get it wrong and the existing tooling isnât helping explain the situation much or choose reasonable defaults for common games.
1 Like
btw. I prefer not to be in the absolute perfect sweetspot with my 5K+⌠less SDE, still very sharp image.