So seems like they aren’t denying the 103 horizontal and vertical numbers from Risa2000 or TestHMD etc but Pimax calculate their FOV in a different way which results in 125 horizontal.
I am glad we finally got some response. I’d like to get more information on how Pimax calculates FOV and why they choose to do it this way, along with whether it’s common practice. It doesn’t seem to match up with the rendered FOV vs advertised FOV that we see from other companies.
Anyway, personally I’m happy with 103 horizontal and vertical. Perhaps Pimax could consider advertising their FOV in both ways? Like how speakers have peak and rms wattage ratings (obviously not the same thing but I mean that sometimes a single commonly advertised number can be presented in more than one way on a spec sheet, while the best version of it is used for advertising).
Let’s just be clear on one tiny matter: Regardless of whether Pimax uses hmdq or not, they are the ones who (…arbitrarily, but one would hope more or less correctly…) set the numbers that hmdq reads. :7
However, yeah, to your point, it’d be nice to understand how they arrived at those numbers and how that translates into actual real-world experience/numbers. Esp. in comparison with other headsets and esp. their own PIMAX 8K
There is definitely someone, somewhere at Pimax, who can calculate the FOV correctly. Unfortunately, he/she is not able to communicate it to the marketing/PR people, neither he/she can point out the absurdity of the official communication.
Yeah, this statement is pretty daft - essentially it tells the prospective customers that Pimax sort of very deliberately choose to use their own measurement from technical drawings, which leaves it completely in the dark as to how this is done, meaning they could has claimed 150 or 200 degrees of FoV, doesn‘t matter, you have no clue how they measure it anyhow.
And they top it off by stating that they have not used any tool which would allow to compare Pimax FoV degrees ™ to any standard used elsewhere, which would enable us to come up with a formula, e.g. 1 Pimax degree equals 0.78 Risa, etc. degrees.
But nevermind, the pre-ordering customers will have their Crystal after the launch, i.e. in October/November 2022, January 2023, March 2023, May 2023. Then we will get more helpful answers.
To say something positive, at least Nordic has learned and for the 12K refused to give any date. Good on him.
Hopefully that will hold off his marketing dept. for once to continue their current approach which is to blast out a random ETA, when-ever they’re asked or feel the itch to hold another Pimax streaming event…
The good thing comes after all the FOV debates is that, now they are offering a new wide-fov lens.
I am pretty sure that with new lenses, Crystal can achieve 120 horizontal FOV easily. Isn’t that all of us wanted.
Food for thought:
What’s the Risa2000 numbers will be, when you use 35ppd, 45ppd and the new lenses?
It seems like it will be more along the lines of 110 horizontal, still great to have the option for those that want iti.
For 35 PPD it’s 103 horizontal and vertical. 42PPD (there’s no 45PPD) we don’t know yet as it’s still not locked down. The new lenses I guess would be 108-112, going by what we have heard so far. Only one we know for sure right now is the 35 PPD.
Not sure why they can’t make a tool that shows 180 degrees fov. In good old c64 basic it would be something like
10 PRINT “THE FOV IS 180” and then they can use that in their marketing campaign. “our own tool showed 180”
I got you ! It was a trick question. For all three different lenses, the Risa2000 numbers will all be 103 degrees. Yet you will see 3 different kind of FOVs.
I understand that the amount of the panel being used would be the same but the FOV being requested will be different for each lens. Why would the headset request 103deg from the game when it’s showing (as a hypothetical example) 90deg with the 42ppd?
I may be misunderstanding, maybe @risa2000 could provide some insight.
Similar to the pico, 104 rendered at a real 95 optical aperture angle. xD
For me personally, a large visual FOV is more important for immersion than a rendered number with 5 or 10% deviation, as long as the proportions are right.
It is my understanding, that each type of lens has its own distortion profile and also renders different FOVs, each to maximize either ppd as on the 42ppd lens (a smaller FOV is rendered across all pixels) or maximize FOV (a larger FOV is rendered across all pixels) as with that new ‘wide FOV’ lens, with the 35ppd lens and its software settings in the middle.
In my xp that is correct. Just consider pimax’s FoV settings. A lens that shows more needs to render s bigger FoV otherwise the image will have some kind of distortion. ie pan & scan 4:3 stretched to widescreen 16:9
If you change Crystal’s lenses without changing the profile, the Risa2000 number will always be the same. The change of lenses alone will not affect Risa2000 number, but if you watch the picture, you will see the space was distorted.
If you change the lenses AND the profile in pitool or Pimax client, the picture will look more or less “normal”, and the Risa2000 number most likely will be different.
From the Sebastian’s interview, Pimax Crystal so far will not change lens profile automatically. So that’s why my answer should be correct. When you change the lens (without changing the profile) All 3 lenses will have the same Risa2000 number.
