You cannot remove rings from fresnel lenses because thats how fresnel lenses are built. And thats what makes them thin and light. Without rings u cant do the FOV with such a thin lens. You can make more and smaller rings to make the rings less visible but that also introduces more Chromatic Abberation.
2 Likes
Yes, I’ve been in IT for a long time…it initially sounds like a favor you do for users when you give them something custom and ask for input but it just ends up being a curse and mess of information coming from everywhere, it causes the users to never accept the product and make it look worse than it is by perception. I’ve learned my lesson, never offer anything custom or looking for user feedback development…instead adopt the big company model and buy something that is a closed solution OR make it seem like it’s a closed solution to your user base so they just wait for the next new model to hopefully have 1/10 of the wishes they blasted out into the ether.
I think Pimax will get us better fresnels at the least that improve panel utilization and less magnification to make the pixels even finer! I don’t mind waiting till christmas to get the 8kX, that gives them six months to get it fully ready to ship. It might be cost effective though to simply buy xtal, reverse engineer the lenses and since the panels are the same size, make minor adjustments and put them in 5k+ and call it 5kX haha, bam budget xtal haha Clearly native 4K/eye is where things will need to go to make out things far off in the distance though and that is where the 8kX comes in.
2 Likes
The “jaggies” are the rings. Easy to understand you cant get rid of the rings.
2 Likes
Although im NOT calling for a new lens as i think the current ones are ok, i have to admit, my eyes dont fall into that spot as easily as my other hmds & the headset takes a bit of adjusting each time i put it on & several times throughout a long play session.
I think the problem some have with these lens are that the lens aren’t as universal for all faces.
A lot of people need to tweak the distance & angles individually & although i personally dont see distortion anymore, it seems some people always see distortion.
Some people seem to be lucky maybe with the correct headshape, eye distance etc… & get on better with them than others
3 Likes
@Sweviver What about a layered/stacked fresnel lens like Index is also something to suggest if its possible to test now (one layer refracts light and focuses colours reducing CA and God rays)?
And I totally agree with @Fabrizio 's suggedtion about a 2019 and 2020 Special Edition or Pro edition of the 8KX release, either with aspheric plastic or layered fresnel like Valve if aspheric can’t work, I think you should forward that suggestion to Pimax
1 Like
This is probably partly to do with the angled panels and the poor IPD adjustment problem. I think if they ever get a curved display instead of simply flat at an angle you would see some of this go away but to my knowledge no VR manufacturers are looking at curved displays besides a rumor about oculus half dome?
2 Likes
Apparently the stacked lenses Valve went for, didnt improve god rays at all… I cant say much before I get my Index but Im holding back my excitement. And remember Index is somewhere around 120 maybe up to 130 degrees FOV. If they COULD go wider with these lenses, they would have done that already.
3 Likes
I read that they simply did something that pimax did to get that fov increase too, it was basically moving the lenses right onto your eyes, super close, so it sounds like valve didn’t do any ninja magic on the lenses, they simply changed ergonomics to gain some of that fov.
3 Likes
Well lastly I thoight Id suggest if Pimax pursues a Special edition, maybe for it to be less confusing the 8KX with aspherics could be marketed as the 8KX RE.
I wouldn’t be opposed to having extra build quality if I was paying extra for aspherics and it keeps it less confusing so I’d call aspheric lens 8KX the 8KX RE, the Special Edition could work too though (just call the ruggedized version special edition or 8KX RSE)
Yes thats definitely the case. I agree. But thats also a common factor for all wide FOV lenses probably. The IPD adjustment was extremely important on xtal, just as it is on Pimax. With wrong ipd dialed in, the xtal was painful. We had to switch a lot when me, Sebastian and Thomas tested it.
And still today most people just “guess” the IPD, which is a problem…
2 Likes
Sure I would buy that. But how many are we really? How many of us are ready to shell out 2-3k on a headset? Its a niche within a niche. Its not profitable. The only reason why for example Xtal exists is because they aim for big companies such as US army, scientists and formula 1 teams. The amount of sold headsets to “enthusiast” is minimal and not profitable.
4 Likes
Not neccessarily. If 8KX release doesn’t get as much reception as we would want, then a 2020 release of the 8KX RSE (Ruggedized Special edition) or 8KX Universe (XRSE) marketing best resolution, fov, lenses would be a good idea?
The Index panels are angled/canted 5 degrees or so. Thats what makes the difference. Pimax has more panel angle, and so is xtal. But that also makes optics more complex.
1 Like
@SweViver yes i think that is true.
There seems to be more at play probably to do with the canted displays.
It seems lens distance & angle are important also
The whole near ipd thing due to the canting seems to be more problematic for some as if im correct from reading posts on here about it, it seems even the correct ipd is a compromise
2 Likes
@LoneTech The most straight forward solution is a mirror design as demonstrated by Leap Motion and Silicon Micro Display,
You are right @LoneTech The best example of this that I actually saw, which you can see on an early thread I posted was the expanse VR Cinema headset. But that optic was only good for 110 degrees. A mirror would be awesome, but even companies like DJI only get 85 degrees per eye.
Something like this done in software as a different rendering mode could allow us to get more out of the existing lenses on all models without costing us a dime.
2 Likes
Im not so sure about that. If 8KX dont get the reception Pimax hopes for, Im not sure if there is any point making it even more complex.
You need to remember the 8KX will not be a 699 headset… probably not 999 either. But thats my guess.
1 Like
@SweViver The bar needs to keep being pushed so far, even further in 2020 8K(XRSE) with aspheric lense, if we’re going to see any hope in the competition getting any better I think and not drip feeding improvements and for them to stop ignoring Pimax.
Sure and thats what Pimax is doing. Pushing the limits and keeping the price reasonable. But then we have that majority of poeple that wont spend a dime more than 399 for a VR headset 
This is the reason why nobody else is pushing the limits. The majority of poeple are cheaping out. If its too expensive, then its trash. People love to hate things they cant afford. Its a problem.
5 Likes
If cheap aspheric lenses (plastic) can be manufactured and added to the 8KX, in a Special Edition in 2020, and the price doesn’t significantly increase more than $50-$100 (in the $1000-$1600 range), then I think the competition will start taking Pimax seriously, and also start seriously imrpoving.
1 Like
You don’t hate what you can’t afford you love what you can’t afford, you just hate you can’t afford it lol
2 Likes