I’m also dealing with this same issue with the UW vs. the standard 50ppd currently and while it is true that I can gain around 10 degrees of hfov without the gasket at all and I agree a very low profile facial interface for those of us with deeper set eyes due to brows or cheek bones seems very doable and should be explored, I can get the same gains from around 120 to 130 with the standard 50ppd module as I do with the UW module and with the standard 50ppd in lab wide mode I can get up to 140 doing that.
If it is the case that for people who can’t get within a certain distance to the lenses that the UW module provides no fov benefits to the standard 50ppd then that would at least be good to know so I don’t have to waste time testing a replacement UW module (I have yet to see someone say a replacement gave them a different result?) It does seem hard to believe if everything is working as it should that the UW doesn’t exceed the fov of the lab mode of the 50ppd or at least equal it with better stereo overlap, but the lab mode is for me in fact up to 10 degrees wider than the “ultra-wide” module? It’s such a wide difference that it has me thinking something isn’t working correctly or is that supposed to be the case and everyone should see a wider fov in lab mode on the 50 than they do with the UW? I keep asking this same question (reddit, support ticket) yet haven’t gotten an official response if that is to be expected or not? I’ll try again here.
The question:
Should everyone regardless of IPD or distance to the lenses expect to see a wider fov with the lab mode of the 50ppd than the normal mode of the UW module? Every which way I’ve tested has the lab wide mode of the 50ppd coming in the widest by a substantial margin. Thanks in advance to anyone official that can actually answer that!
I only have the UW and the inability to get to 140 degrees seems more like a physical limitation based on my face shape and the position of the lenses.
This makes me wonder if the Lab mode of the 50 PPD is truly 140 degrees or is it a distorted/compressed view? Have you done any distortion tests to see if that is the case?
The lab mode doesn’t look distorted to me in terms of any fish-eye effect or edge warping that I notice, just that there is significantly less stereo overlap as you can see in the middle of the 3 WIMFOV results I posted, the image for each eye is moved farther apart and it starts to look a touch like looking through actual binoculars vs a scuba mask oval view. The 140 measurement for the lab mode above is also with no gasket and ipd maxed at 72. Worn normally I get about 128 for the lab mode and 120 for the both the UW and the 50ppd in normal mode.
The issue I have is not that I expect to see a full 140 with the UW, I always expect to get less than advertised FOV’s due to my 62 IPD, It’s that the UW module is measuring the same as the standard 50ppd module when keeping everything the same in terms of facial interface and IPD settings. Even when wearing it in an impractical way with no facial interface and an intentionally wrong set IPD for maximizing the possible FOV the UW and standard 50ppd module measure at the same FOV. Worn normally for me with a 62 IPD they both measure around 120 and worn with no gasket to get as close as possible but still with a correct 62 IPD both are around 130. Here’s a video of someone else also discovering this while comparing the 3 QLED modules side by side: https://youtu.be/T7_VibUpMh8?t=1593
I’d expect that regardless of IPD or head shape the same person would always see a larger FOV with the UW than the standard 50ppd or why offer a separate module? I, as I expect most who ordered the UW, just want the option that gives me the widest possible FOV with the clarity of the QLED panels but right now for me that is the standard 50ppd in lab mode and it’s not even close no matter how I wear the UW so again I ask is this supposed to be the case or is the UW either bugged or still being worked on and maybe using the same distortion profile as the 50ppd as a place holder or something or is that to be expected, that the lab mode on the 50ppd is actually the widest view you can currently get with any super module? Hopefully that’s not the case but it seems like a simple question to answer. If I asked should I expect to see a wider FOV with the 50ppd than the 57ppd everyone would answer yes, there’s clearly a difference regardless of IPD and everyone can expect to see a wider FOV with the 50ppd than the 57ppd, those who have low IPD’s will see less of a difference but the 50ppd will always look noticeably wider to anyone with a 58-72 ipd comparing the two. When I ask should I expect to see a wider FOV with the UW than the 50ppd then officially I get only crickets or sidestepping of the question with generic suggestions on how to improve my FOV that work with any module.
So again I ask, is it supposed to be the case that the lab mode of the 50ppd is the widest FOV one can get of the super modules or should I expect to see a wider or at least equal FOV with the UW and maybe something is currently not working correctly with the UW module or the profile is still in development or could there have been a batch of incorrectly manufactured ones etc…? I’ve seen several posts/videos/comments about people encountering this issue over the past few months but notably not from when it first came out, then the reactions were all that it was clearly wider than the 50ppd module but at the expense of stereo overlap etc… people who have tested both modules side by side in the past 2 or 3 months all seem to be finding them to measure at about the same FOV?, so something seems odd about this whole situation and the fact that I still haven’t gotten any official response to my simple question of should the lab mode of the 50ppd or the normal mode of the UW have the wider FOV if everything is working correctly and the IPD and facial interface are the same makes me think something is not working as intended with the UW currently. If this is how it is supposed to be why not just confirm it and inform us of why this is the case? Can anyone actually see a wider FOV on the UW in normal mode than with the lab mode of the 50ppd? Seems like a pretty basic question to me. If anybody else happens to have both and could check on that that would be very helpful too. Thanks!
This looks like a limitation of how close you manage to get to the lens with your face shape. I had the same issue with the UW. I also could not max out the FOV of the mOLED.
Try removing the face mask altogether and get your eyes closer see if you manage to get the full 140 FOV.
FOR the lab mode, I am assuming it simulates a larger FOV (which explain why more strain on the eyes) but you still have a physical limitation that is less apparent.
Thanks, that’s what I did for the 3 measurements I posted above. ( I did read your original post which made me want to check that out as well, no interface at all, eyes as close as they can go, IPD maxed at 72.) You are correct in that the FOV is significantly affected by distance of the eyes to the lenses, I can gain about 10 degrees of FOV vs. wearing it normally but I also see those same gains with the standard 50ppd as I do with the UW. 120 for both worn normally and almost 130 for both with my eyes as close as possible. Shouldn’t the UW be wider though if I keep everything else the same? That’s what I’m trying to find out.
Then with lab mode on the 50 it goes from 128 worn normally to 140 with no gasket, 72 IPD, so I get an even slightly bigger gain for the 50 in lab mode doing that (+12) vs. the UW or 50ppd in their normal modes (both +10). Every test I’ve done has the lab mode of the 50ppd producing a wider FOV than the normal mode of UW module and the FOV of both the 50ppd and UW in their normal modes measuring almost the same.
So, is that to be expected? Does anyone get a wider FOV with the UW than they do with the 50ppd in the lab wide mode? Otherwise for me the UW and 50ppd are virtually the same FOV in every test and the lab mode is always at least 8 and up to 12 degrees wider than both so is that an indication of a problem with the UW module or is that as it should be by design?
I first asked this question in a ticket on Jan 28 and I still haven’t gotten an official answer to this? @PimaxQuorra can you help me out or if I sign an NDA will someone tell me lol… what’s going on with the UW? or is this as it should be and unlikely to change?
The UW module doesn’t have a hardware defect. As discussed earlier, everyone is using the same distortion profile implemented in Pimax Play, without any internal build involved.
Some users can max out the FoV, while others can’t.
There are a few contributing factors, such as IPD, face shape, and how the headset is worn.
If there’s anything to share, we’ll communicate it with our users—there’s no need to sign an NDA.
I also raised the UW distortion profiles in Friday’s meeting, but no ETA has been provided yet.
Here’s a disturbing question: How the heck did Pimax figure out UW is 140 degrees? Who measure it? How did you measure them? Are you using the same requirements that you measure the 50ppd? IF you’re using the same parameters to measure the 50ppd and get 126 degrees, surely the 140 degrees should not be hard to obtain under the same scenaro for any users. BUT IT IS HARD to obtain…therefore I am questioning how you measure and how Pimax come up with 140 degrees for UW.
Thanks for the reply but again the question is about comparing the UW to the standard 50ppd module. Every official answer I’ve gotten sidesteps this by only talking about the UW and the same “it varies what FOV people can get with the UW” sort of answer.
The question:Comparing the UW and 50ppd modules with the same facial interface and IPD settings which should deliver the widest FOV:
the standard 50ppd in normal mode
the UW in normal mode
the standard 50ppd in lab wide mode
For me currently it’s #3 by a wide margin (140 lab mode vs. about 130 for both the UW module and the standard 50ppd when both are worn with no interface to get as close as possible, eyelashes brushing the lenses and the IPD maxed at 72, when worn normally but with the thinnest pad and a slightly higher than actual 66 ipd I get 128 lab mode vs. 120 for both the UW and 50ppd in normal modes) and again I ask is that as it should be?
Should everyone expect to get a wider FOV with the 50ppd in lab mode than the UW in normal mode? or are you saying some people will actually see a wider FOV with the UW in normal mode than they will with the 50ppd in lab mode because I genuinely don’t understand how that would be possible given the results I’m getting.
@PimaxQuorra if you could let us know if the answer is 1,2 or 3 and a brief explanation why that is the case that would be very helpful. Thanks!
Yes, also wondering how they got to 140 for the UW and on the store page it says for the 50ppd:
50 PPD with 127° HFOV, 138° in Labs mode
and I can see how that is possible with a max FOV head shape and widest IPD but I don’t know what they were smoking to get 140 for the UW?
Whatever method they use I’d expect them to use the same for each module so we are given an accurate relative comparison at least.
According to what they say on the store page shouldn’t the UW be at least as wide as the lab mode on the 50ppd if not slightly wider??? It’s not even close in every test I’ve tried, lab mode is at least 8 degrees wider for me.
Exactly. This is a legit and fair question, I am not bashing Pimax here! It’s just not fair to sell a product that doesn’t live up to the specs. In fact, the users have the right to return the product if they wish and at ANY TIME and IF Pimax refuse, they can sue them in the court claiming false advertisement (at least under the US laws and I am absolutely certain the users will win the case).
