This seems to be a 'condensation' of why not to buy Pimax.

[Panzerlang]

Tin foil hat? The hundreds/thousands of people who have had a dreadful Pimax experience since the first headset came out might beg to differ. It's hugely above the average for a PC peripheral. When the Crystal came out it was accompanied by a "We're a changed company, from now on things are going to be awesome" campaign. That went completely south but here we are again, now for the Super. I wonder how many people will roll the loaded die for a third punt at the golden pot.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

This is crazy. Meta sucks too, but glad I have a Quest 3 over this racket.

[Dagwoodyt]

17 hours ago, Panzerlang said:

Tin foil hat? The hundreds/thousands of people who have had a dreadful Pimax experience since the first headset came out might beg to differ. It's hugely above the average for a PC peripheral. When the Crystal came out it was accompanied by a "We're a changed company, from now on things are going to be awesome" campaign. That went completely south but here we are again, now for the Super. I wonder how many people will roll the loaded die for a third punt at the golden pot.

Looks like an abusive relationship with customers. As long as the behavior benefits the abuser it is unlikely to self-correct.

[Panzerlang]

7 hours ago, Dagwoodyt said:

Looks like an abusive relationship with customers. As long as the behavior benefits the abuser it is unlikely to self-correct.

I think it's gone beyond that now (benefitting Pimax). Human condition 101, when it's the odd customer here and there being screwed over not many others give a toss; however, when it's reached a point where getting a properly functional and reliable item is akin to a lottery AND the support is a major effort too, most people will steer away.
People need to find out it's a thing though but, in this case, Pimax are lit up like a xmas tree. There's only one thing that'll turn it around for them and that's the huge majority of Supers going out to customers and not giving issues. I really hope they finally manage that, because need want. I'm not holding my breath though.

Edited December 14, 2024 by Panzerlang

[DBCOOPER011]

I've had the OG headset since September of last year and it has worked great! Yes, I had to configure my USB ports differently several times on a couple different motherboards in order to make it work correctly. I also had to make sure the head gasket had the correct spacers/distance and adjusted it to my face correctly in it to get the best sight picture. Other then that, the headset was very reliable and has had the best visuals I've seen so far with any HMD I have owned. I believe that a certain portion of the negative reviews we've seen so far were probably due to user error. People may not have had their computer configured correctly, or had other possible conflicts they were unable to resolve. No one knows for sure, but its a distinct possibility. I also believe that since Pimax is a Chinese company, there is somewhat of a cultural issue in regards to customer service verses western beliefs in effect. That is a Pimax problem.

 

For sure, Pimax had non-functional headsets sent out that didn't work appropriately. People who have received those malfunctioning headsets should be compensated, or have had those headsets replaced in an expeditious manner. But these headsets are not a plug and play and I tend to believe Pimax is trying to solve this issue. I know Pimax has had bad customer service in the past, and I'm not trying to advocate for them,  but I truely believe this current management team is at least trying to correct that image that was developed previously.

 

The only comparable headsets for the sim market out now, or realtively soon, are the Somnium VR1. That is substantially higher priced and has lower resolution then what the super will have and the MeganeX 8K, which is unknown at this moment and it appears pre-orders doesnt have an option for a refund. The flightsim community doesn't really have a lot options to choose from at this time in regard to high resolution display port headsets. I would just hold tight and see how this Pimax Super turns out..

 

It's not like you have to buy it...

Edited December 15, 2024 by DBCOOPER011

[Charlo-VRde]

My Crystal OG and current Crystal Light both worked well after much the same experience @DBCOOPER011 describes above. With Studioform additions, I really enjoy my Crystal Light, and sold my OG Crystal to no longer think about the battery.
 

I’m tempted by the 50ppd Super but will likely wait until some reviews come out, since Jaap recently posted the 50ppd may be having some design issues with the weight and composition of the lenses.
 

I don’t know that the increased clarity of either Super will be truly noticeable in an engine as old as IL-2 Great Battles, but if the 50ppd stated FOV of 135° is proven to be true or close to true, then so long as the vertical FOV remains as high as the 103° or so I enjoy in the Crystal Light, the 50ppd Super is intriguing to me if I can also afford a 5090 GPU to replace my current 4090.

[Varibraun]

Don't think this is enough of a full review to start another "Super" thread but it probably fits the title here.  The short of their initial impressions was that the Pimax Crystal Super is NOT ready yet (having issues that would not have been expected in a public demo unveiling) and other than field of view and color brightness, not a big leap above the OG Crystal and the Crystal Light for the price:

 

 

[Panzerlang]

Biggest takeaway for me was them saying the image quality/clarity isn't much noticeably better than the OG or light. WTF?! I thought the various iterations of the Super were supposed to be 'retina level'. Was the test model being run with big down sampling? They don't say.

Lots of people in the comments saying they have or will cancel their pre-order. I'm considering the same, with my mind also on getting that done before Pimax folds.

[[CPT]Crunch]

I'm wondering if most games are even capable of rendering anything close to retinal levels of any sort.  Got this nagging feeling we are already at peak where the current crop of HMD's are already at in relations to game rendering quality. 

[Panzerlang]

2 hours ago, [CPT]Crunch said:

I'm wondering if most games are even capable of rendering anything close to retinal levels of any sort.  Got this nagging feeling we are already at peak where the current crop of HMD's are already at in relations to game rendering quality. 

Good point, I didn't think of that.

Yeah, that might explain why I'm not sure I see any difference (in DCS) between 0.75 and 1.0 render in the Crystal headset. 

Edited January 9 by Panzerlang

[DBCOOPER011]

On 1/8/2025 at 8:23 AM, Varibraun said:

Don't think this is enough of a full review to start another "Super" thread but it probably fits the title here.  The short of their initial impressions was that the Pimax Crystal Super is NOT ready yet (having issues that would not have been expected in a public demo unveiling) and other than field of view and color brightness, not a big leap above the OG Crystal and the Crystal Light for the price:

 

 

MRTV went back to test the Pimax Super again today and posted more of a positive review on his discord. Apparently, there was a better distortion profile on the headset he used today, but he didnt really mention anything else about the vertical lines/mura discussed on the first video.

 

I'm guessing the vertical lines/mura are actually what the flightsim guy talked about in his video about the Varjo XR4 last year. I assume these "Tiger Stripes" were probably something wrong with the panels, since he couldnt see them when he received the new headset. From what I read, the Super and XR4 have the same panels. He mentions it at around the 4:25 mark..

 

 

 

[chiliwili69]

8 hours ago, Panzerlang said:

Yeah, that might explain why I'm not sure I see any difference (in DCS) between 0.75 and 1.0 render in the Crystal headset.

 

In the past we hit that a limit set in SteamVR called maxRecommendedResolution.

We realized that when we were increased the SteamVR SS% crazy values but still having good fps.

I don´t know if that parameter still plays a role.

 

 

[DBCOOPER011]

16 hours ago, Panzerlang said:

Good point, I didn't think of that.

Yeah, that might explain why I'm not sure I see any difference (in DCS) between 0.75 and 1.0 render in the Crystal headset. 

 

I would guess that because the panel resolution is 2880x2880. Any setting close to the default 1.0 render resolution (4312x5100) would see diminishing returns. I took a blown up screenshot of the P38 instrument panel at .75 (3240x3832), 1.0 (4312x5100), and 1.25 (5388x6376). The GPU frametimes were running at 6.0ms, 10.5ms, and 13.8ms respectively. I couldnt see a substantial increase or decrease resolution when looking in the headset. You can notice it, but its not a lot..

 

7 hours ago, chiliwili69 said:

 

In the past we hit that a limit set in SteamVR called maxRecommendedResolution.

We realized that when we were increased the SteamVR SS% crazy values but still having good fps.

I don´t know if that parameter still plays a role.

 

 

I dont think resolution is capped in steamvr anymore..

[chiliwili69]

On 1/10/2025 at 4:33 PM, DBCOOPER011 said:

I dont think resolution is capped in steamvr anymore..

 

Are you sure....?

 

[chiliwili69]

On 1/10/2025 at 4:33 PM, DBCOOPER011 said:

I would guess that because the panel resolution is 2880x2880. Any setting close to the default 1.0 render resolution (4312x5100) would see diminishing returns. I took a blown up screenshot of the P38 instrument panel at .75 (3240x3832), 1.0 (4312x5100), and 1.25 (5388x6376). The GPU frametimes were running at 6.0ms, 10.5ms, and 13.8ms respectively. I couldnt see a substantial increase or decrease resolution when looking in the headset. You can notice it, but its not a lot..

 

This is a very nice numbers and pictures about how the Pimax number works (0.75, 1.0, 1.25).

This number is equivalent to the "Pixel Density" number used by Oculus and it acts as a multiplier of each axis with respect the default resolution (4312x5100), it means 0.75*4312 is 3240 and 0.75*5100 is 3832.

But users need to be concious that 0.75 is not 25% less pixels, in fact it is 44% less.  And 1.25 is not 25% more, it is in fact 56% more pixels.

 

 

That´s why I always prefer to use the SteamVR convention about supersampling, since it tells you the % increase in terms of total pixels, and no % of each axis.

So leaving Pimax rendered resolution to 1.0 and using an SteamVR SS of 156% you achieve the same 5388x6376 rendered resolution and you are aware that are demanding 56% more load to the GPU (with respect to 4312*5100).

I know you know that, but it is just we all are aware about it.

 

Regarding the differences, it is true the are small but noticeable:

 

It would be better to compare that with plane ID around 500 meters distance. So, it could play a role.

[blitze]

Been happy with my 8K-X and not keen on giving up the FOV to the Crystals narrower FOV but, when it comes to pixel density and clarity in headsets at various SS settings, for me it is more so med to far distance clarity that is important rather than panel clarity. 

Panel clarity in the headset can be quite good but that is near view, hunting aircraft and ground targets at distance or even spotting ones airfield on return without aids, now that's another thing.

 

Will see what they bring out with the 12K and the subscription payment plan (not too dissimilar to a auto lease) would help in that but then again, I would be wanting a 12K Light in terms of spec.  Also expecting hardware warranty to be applicable over the duration of the subscription.  Should be standard full stop.  Communication experience with Pimax hasn't been bad for me though and the addition of an aftermarket face foam made a huge difference in fit and comfort.

 

Maybe brand Pimax - "Pimax, YMMV" 😁