The eye tracking addon must NOT lower fov. Pimax IS FOV

Hey sorry maybe this is a given, but I figure it cant hurt to articulate this.

What is the single biggest feature that defines pimax and distinguishes it from 99 percent of other hmd out there?

You could argue the resolution, but it’s mostly on par with the index except maybe the x model.

It’s the field of view. It’s very large, and pimax IS fov.
So I wanted to put it out there that they need to remember what they stand for. While other companies are doing this slow drip spoon fed incremental upgrades to things like fov, pimax said to hell with that, give them what they want!
To see the whole picture. Not horse blinders. Not some weird claustrophobic feeling sort of “cave-like” dark space around the virtual. World.

Also, with star vr going on sale, isn’t it time pimax made a comparable uncompromising fov at the fov scale and non warping?
I’m not saying its terrible now, with my 5k+, but immersion is in the details, sometimes ones which we don’t directly notice, but our brains still subliminally process.
Not to get technical, although I think there are a lot of techies here lol.
Have a great day!


The ET was refined 6 or 7 times to decrease the occlusion and increase the range of eye movement that could be detected. The extra FOV dramatically increased the engineering (and the fact we wanted to allow customer supplied 3rd party lenses to be installed). The final version also upgraded the USB interface from 2.0 to 3.0 which greatly improved the DFR response time.

IMHO the final version turned out great. Everybody will benefit from DFR instantly but developers and partners will have a field day with this.


Can’t wait to tell people who parrot, “eye tracking and foveated rendering are the future and will save VR,” etc, that it’s already here.

1 Like

I’m the opposite I think it’ll take forever to catch on. By forever I mean over 2 years.

1 Like

Ultra Wide FOV VR headsets: 2020


XTAL 8K $6,998.
180 FOV.
LCD (was OLED on 1st gen model).
Resolution: 3840 x 2160 per eye.
Eye tracking.
UltraLeap Hand tracking.

Star VR One: $3,200.
210 FOV
Resolution: 1830 x 1864 per eye.
Eye Tracking.


Pimax Vision Series 8K–X: $1,299 (+ $500 cost of Valve Basestations & Index controllers = $1,799).
200 FOV
Resolution: 3840 x 2160 per eye.
UltraLeap Hand Tracking (Module option)*
7invensum Hand Tracking (Module option)*

  • All newer generation Pimax headsets support for fitting optional Eyetracking and Hand tracking modules, including the base $449 model Artisan.

I don’t think at the current complete lack of competition (at a commercial product level) and price difference with enterprise headsets, Pimax needs to worry what the competition are up to regarding Eye Tracking, as in 2020 there is no competition.

It’s also known the next generation of Pimax flagship headsets will have ‘built-in’ Eye Tracking and not require a clip on external module. This may arrive sooner than we think.

What’s more important at the moment is to deliver all Kickstarter backers headsets and pre orders too, then focus on 2021 mass production volumes and wider market exposure once mass production exists.


Sooner than we think is not soon.

Think about it eye tracking cost MONEY. Until prices actually go down will most people pay over 800$ for a VR Headset?

1 Like

From reviews, the StarVR doesn’t even seem to be a competitor… I’ve heard comparisons to CV1 for resolution and SDE :confused:

The second iRacing supports eye-tracked foveated rendering, I’ll be putting down for an eye tracker unit :wink:


Could you please elaborate on this, Kevin?


Bells and whistles but like I said I mean the cornerstone of pimax, it’s fov (responding to Addons).

Pimax vision x is 175 fov. As Star vr one’s 220 is not diagonal- it’s heir horizontal.

It’s not about worrying about competition. It’s about marketability of leveraging a perspective of having a commercial product that accomplishes what starvr has. It’s not all defensive competition, where you design your products around preventing loss of market share.
Take initiative (pimax) and make star vr one worry about Pimax’s next big vr hmd.

Pimax is community driven, so in turn perhaps more people should be vocal about getting that whole fov experience star vr one has.

High fov is Pimax’s domain. Nobody is going to tell them no to doing a full fov hmd.

My concept of this hypothetical pimax model:

-Pimax revises the physical shell of this new full fov model to use less plastics and be dramatically less wide, same way the starvr one is.

-Everyone thought the starvr one was using dynamic lens unwrapping via eye tracking to fix warping, but apparently according to Sebastian it’s just good lens design. Pimax needs to buy a star vr one and 3D scan the lenses or use laser trajectories to understand what works with their lens iteration.

That’s pretty much it lol

It’s most likely 160.29 degrees horizontal (unless You know something the rest of us don’t) like the 8K+:

It’s 172.82 though EDIT - It is indeed 210 degrees - see below:

EDIT: Apparently, there’s a bug in hmdq that makes it present the FOV wrongly, so it is indeed 210 degrees:


You might as well fix what you originally wrote instead of appending an edit with the correct horizontal fov for the sake of not confusing people who have to translate posts into other languages :wink:
It’s def far wider than pimax and is 220 degrees horizontal.
Also you can hear Sebastian talk about it, I mean, it’s your whole vision :slight_smile:


I believe Risa2000 just wrote that the initial reading of the StarVR of 172 is wrong. The raw FOV is indeed 210. He is currently looking further to it


Did that… :+1:

Yeah. I already linked to it… :slightly_smiling_face:


@VR-TECH, @DrWilken I can (well, already did) confirm that there is a bug in hmdq calculation, but even if the calculation was right, the horizontal FOV, while taking into account the reduction by the HAM, will still be a tad bit smaller than 180 degrees as I mentioned in my post in the other thread.

The 210 value is only hypothetical as it relates to the “raw” frustum values. It would be 210 degrees, if you could disable the HAM on StarVR, which you cannot, but even if you could, it would not be advisable as the HAM is supposed to mask what is otherwise not visible anyway.


My personally anecdotal experience is I dont think is 210 FOV. To me it feels more like 180FOV. Because I can still see the peripheral borders.


Star vr one ? Or are you talking about pimax?

Well then what does the Pimax feel like in comparison? Similar FOV or lower?

The Pimax to me feels like 150-160 FOV on large mode

Skyrim is Eye opening between the two headsets. StarVR is much wider on that game.


How would it matter what game your playing? The fov is a fixed metric, no?

Given what Risa said earlier, about the frustum and the hidden area mask (EDIT: …and assuming hdmq plots the HAM correctly), I came to wonder what difference one may get with the StarVR, depending on whether the mask is being used or not.

I believe somebody said something about Compass not having an on/off switch for it, but maybe it inherits the value of SteamVR’s one… Just ran Skyrim briefly, to check if maybe it does not use the mask, regardless of one’s setting, but it does use it, so no ascribing anything to that. :7

1 Like