I watched that review by VR Flight Sim Guy - good stuff. He mentions also that yes one can use Open XR with the device for MSFS 2020 which would be a good thing if true.
1 Like
HP could throw in the ability to adjust brightness, gamma, colors tooā¦ just saying. Iāve got the G2 and will dispense with it upon receipt of the Varjo. The G2 is the only display device I own WITHOUT the ability to adjust brightness. Flying at night with most all cockpit displays cranked down is still too bright. I donāt even need to mention sunny cloudless daysā¦
3 Likes
I understand that the Varjo also requires additional base stations for head tracking. Where do you get these from? Does this HMD not have the ability to head track out of the box? There is a lot hype on the impressive display features but I am surprised to learn additional hardware is required for it to work with MSFS. Can someone confirm this. Thx
Yes it requires base stations and controllers ( can get by without controllers if flight sim only).
Lighthouse 2.0 base stations would be the best currently. Problem is being able to get them as they are in short supply. Vive base stations would probably work also.
2 base stations are ideal, for seated only flight sim could probably get by with one.
2 Likes
I ordered the Varjo Aero but then cancelled it, when i learnt Pimax is coming out with their Pimax Reality headset in the 4th quarter of 2022. So Iāve ordered a Pimax 8kX instead. From what Pimax is saying, you can trade your current pimax headset and just pay the difference for the new headset, which seems to have insane specs compared to anything else on the market including the Aero. (and its for about the same price as the Aero, US $2K
Always wanted to see how the large FOV in the Pimax is like! Will be coming this Saturday.
Thankfully, though Varjo Customer service was a bit slow, there were no issues canceling the order via email and getting my refund back on my credit card
1 Like
I wish the best for you. I just have never had much good thoughts regarding Pimax and the way they do business so I stay away from them. Just a personal thing. Very anxious to get my new Varjo Aero though.
1 Like
Which base stations and how many will you be using with your Varjo Aero? So tempted to pull the trigger myself on ordering but holding back because of these darn extra base stations that are needed which just add to the already hefty price tag of the Aero.
This will be my first foray into outside-in tracking VR having previously only used the Quest-1 and Reverb G2. I ordered a single Lighthouse 2 base station as itās my understanding that should be sufficient for seated VR flight.
1 base station is enough for simming, and vive base stations 1.0 will do the job and are in stock (in my country the UK, at Scan) for Ā£134.99 or you could get one used on ebay for about Ā£90. Base station 2.0ās are harder to get hold of.
I bet Varjo is pretty mad at Pimax right now. Itās one thing to compete with existing products, itās another to steal customers away with a future product. They (Pimax) know they canāt preorder something this far away. So they come up with this trade-in tactic. Brilliant!
I do not think so. Varja was originally not interested in a consumer market, but gave in on request and only assembles the Aero to order. The components come mainly from the VR-3.
And small companies, for whom the VR-3 was too expensive, are now looking forward to an inexpensive alternative.
I myself already have the Lighthouse 2.0 base stations (2) and Index Controllers, so I will be using them with the new Aero. As already mentioned you can get by with just 1 for flight simming only.
In VR Flight Sim Guyās latest videos he made a very interesting claim/discovery.
He ran both the Aero and G2 at 100 OpenXR, 100 in sim render with ultra settings and the Aero got a higher fps and better performance.
It turned out it was because at 100 render the G2 compensates for barrel distortion and runs at 3100 x 3100 per eye appox rather than the panel resolution of 2160 x 2160 per eye.
The Varjo Aero by contrast just ran at its native panel resolution of 2880 x 2720 per eye.
He said that Mark from the Simhanger Youtube channel said this was because aspheric lenses have no curvature and therefore do not need to be corrected for barrel distortion, thus meaning that even though the Aero has a higher pixel display, it wonāt be any harder to run as weāll only need to hit the panel resolution to get a pure, undistorted image.
This news is huge if so, and Iām left wondering why Varjo and other reviewers havenāt hyped this up as a major feature? Itās literally a game changer, which leaves me wondering if its actually true?
false, every lens in vr need correction.
Aspheric is actually a little bit tricky to avoid chromatic aberrations
Yes finally somebody who agrees! Haha. This was my interpretation of sweetspot as the second definition of sweetspot many people use had no meaning to me as my original Oculus Rift had pretty much edge to edge clarity.
However since the G2 Iāve seen many reviewers use the term sweetspot to mean BOTH eye position and visuals looking off centre - although to be fair they usually differentiate between the two. I believe the Aero improves this massively in both counts.
1 Like
Iām not sure. Fresnel lenses have a curvature, leading to a pin cushion effect in the centre, so that the centre is lower resolution requiring barrel distortion correction. if an aspheric lense is flat then I guess the central view is not distorted by a pin cushion effect so that you donāt need to render at a much higher than panel resolution to correct it.
I get that aspheric lenses suffer their own problems with chromatic abberation but Iām not sure that requires extra resolution to correct?
I donāt know the answer but I might email Varjo for an explanation.
Yep true. I think thatās the same for freszel lenses too. Iām thinking back to all the software updates for the G2 which have massively improved chromatic aberrations over the months since its release. I think it just takes time to calibrate. Iām expecting the visuals in the Aero to get a lot better from a chromatic aberrations and distortion standpoint and Iām expecting that to be entirely done in s/w.
1 Like
Yes, yes. You always need correction.
The values for the 100% Steam SS are often generous.
For the G1 it was slightly above native. Correction is also made below.
Iāve just found this on Varjoās website. It looks like it needs to be rendered at 3882 x 3475 to achieve full resolution and 35 PPD.
| Setting | Resolution (pixels per eye) | PPD (pixels per degree) |
|---|---|---|
| Highest | 3882 x 3475 | 35 |
| Very high | 3376 x 3024 | 30 |
| High (default) | 2938 x 2630 | 27 |
| Medium | 2556 x 2288 | 23 |
| Low | 2224 x 1992 | 20 |
| Very low | 1934 x 1732 | 18 |
2 Likes
Medium will also be sharper than anything before, due to the clear lenses.