Let me restate. Yes, a 110 degree lens will always be 110 degrees. However when you look through the lens on a 110 degree headset you still see blank screen unused pixels within the 110 degrees because of the Distortion profile because you are splitting up one screen between two eyes.
If each eye has its own panel, the Distortion profile can be optimized better to fully utilize that 110 degrees. Does that make better sense?
Take for example dk1 and DK2. Both of these headsets have 110 degrees of field of view but if someone wears the dk1 and contrasted with DK2 or cv1 they would tell you that the fov looked noticeably higher on the dk1. Despite the fact that the fov is the exact same
this is getting my goat in some respects i wont lie. its like booking a flight to tokyo and half way there a bunch of passengers try to have a vote to go to Hawaii instead. Listen im sure hawaii is a very nice place but that’s not what it said on either of our tickets when we boarded the plane.
Anyway, to get back on topic, the more I think about it, I’m really starting to think that @Neoskynet is really underestimating what it takes to make a wide FoV lens. It’s really not about simply making a bigger (oculus Go like) lens to catch more panel surface, like Neo suggested. It’s about projecting that onto a wide virtual pane. This obviously is very complex.
@VoodooDE
…entschuldige Thomas, dann habe ich das 8K durcheinander gewürfelt. Wollte Dich auch nicht an den Pranger stellen, sondern war wirklich ein ‚wenig‘ besorgt… ich möchte halt nur ein Headset mit vielleicht etwas besser Auflösung als Vive/Rift und besserem FOV sowie SDE für mein Simracing mit iRacing, AC und Raceroom und war ob der (falsch von mir verstandenen) Aussage zu diesem Zeitpunkt der Entwicklung echt niedergeschlagen… also, nochmal entschuldige die falsche Interpretation!
It was a misinterpretation from me and the terminus ‚8k‘… so no offens against VoodooDE… im sorry, having brought this up due to misunderstanding!
What I think though, is that the 4K can render 1:1 on the panel and get a slightly more clear image because of this. While 8K is rendering differently. But I dont know… sometimes I wish I had the 4K to just compare
You can’t blow up 1440p to 4K (2 million pixels to 8 million of interpolated data at 80hz) spread over 210 degrees and call that a truly next gen experience.
If you have a turing GPU it will not yield a substantial difference as you will still be limited to 2K interpolated the entire time. Even if you super sample the image on the PC side it will always be 1440p.
The main issue is one of longevity. They don’t actually have to change anything. They don’t have to get rid of the default lenses they don’t have to get rid of the default distortion profile, they can make a change in some software, and make ease of access and allow their customers the choice.
I am genuinely curious if when you put the Vive lenses on did it make you ill? Did you notice less screen door effect? Did you try it with games?
Alles gut, passiert. Nur gerade hier im Pimax Forum muss man höllisch aufpassen was man sagt. In Sekunden landet sowas als Shitstorm auf Reddit
Everything fine, that happens. However we have to be careful what we write here. Every wrong or misunderstood word can result in a reddit shitstorm post xD
its difficult to mount a Vive lens on top of the large 8K “hole”, but after just a fwe seconds of trying just in SteamVR Dashboard, I clearly understood why these lenses wont work on a angled wide FOV headset.
I don’t know much about the Pimax 4K myself but isn’t that a flat panel like most other head set. If so you can’t just take the lens and same profile fix it to the Pimax 8k and call it a day. The 2 8K screen are not flat they are at an angle.
Thanks for the laugh mate!
