I am not getting this to work.

With my triple screen setup I get a "realistic" FOV of 190° as per the calculator. This seems correct to me.

If I divide 190 by 57.3 I get 3.31.

FOV in Developer Mode Overlay goes from 1.29 (0% zoom) to 0.30 (100% zoom). It is not possible to reach 3.31 by zooming.

What am I doing wrong here?

 

30 minutes ago, LGKR said:

What am I doing wrong here?

It sounds as if you used the horizontal field of view (hFov) from the FOV calculator. You need to used the vertical field of view (vFov) instead. (This is further down on the page.)

18 hours ago, Gregg_Seipp said:

I just ran across this thread.  I'm flying the Fenix.  55" TV and 32" from the screen I get vFOV at 94 degrees.

Note that the unit for "distance from screen" in the calculator is centimeters. It sounds as if you input 32 centimeters (which is only about 13 inches, so very close to the screen) instead of 32 inches (which is about 80 centimeters). With 80 centimeters, I get a vFov of 46 degrees, which seems more plausible.

Edit: Even outside the US, screen size is usually given in inches, hence the mixture of units.

Edited October 22, 2025Oct 22 by martinboehme

9 hours ago, martinboehme said:

Note that the unit for "distance from screen" in the calculator is centimeters. It sounds as if you input 32 centimeters (which is only about 13 inches, so very close to the screen) instead of 32 inches (which is about 80 centimeters). With 80 centimeters, I get a vFov of 46 degrees, which seems more plausible.

Edit: Even outside the US, screen size is usually given in inches, hence the mixture of units.

That's what I did.  Thanks.  That gives a FOV of 0.8.  I have to say, though, there's a lot to like about the wide FOV.  Having looked at it, it gives me pause to think.

11 hours ago, LGKR said:

I am not getting this to work.

With my triple screen setup I get a "realistic" FOV of 190° as per the calculator. This seems correct to me.

If I divide 190 by 57.3 I get 3.31.

FOV in Developer Mode Overlay goes from 1.29 (0% zoom) to 0.30 (100% zoom). It is not possible to reach 3.31 by zooming.

What am I doing wrong here?

 

190 aounds like your horizontal FOV....not the vertical which i think this thread is talking about.

 

I tried following these instructions on my triple setup last night and found that it was reasonable accurate to what I had in place.

 

The biggest problem I find is that sometimes you need to translate the view rearwards to allow a zoom in and in aircraft that dont allow you to remove the pilot seat (or slide it backwards) that becomes difficult.

I dont know what I am doing wrong but its not working for me. I dont get the FOV value to save:

Zoom Level in general settings is set to 29. (calculated value)

I jump into the cockpit and adjust the Zoom Level via the Camera to 0.5 (29 as a FOV)-> I save the IFR view and the custom camera 1 with this value.

When I load custom camera 1, the view is comeplelty wrong. When I press the button again to load custom camera 1 again, the view itself is correct but the FOV is 0.6 and I high need to reduce the zoom level to reach the view I saved before.

What is happening when I press the button to load custom camera 1 twice and two different views are loading? Shouldnt it be the same view when pressing the button to load custom camera x.

Best regards

Thies

The problem for me, and why since the dawn of FS, I've used a well zoomed out view because it's impossible to have both an accurate FOV, AND also have a useful HUD in planes that sport a HUD.  If plane devs would incorporate a separate zoom capability for the graphics in the HUD, it would work.  But near as I can tell you can't have both a useful HUD and a more realistic FOV.  Anyone figured out a work around to make this work with both assets?  It's not all bad, being zoomed out as it effects sharpness in terrain textures and also gives a sense of speed while close to the ground.

Edited November 28, 2025Nov 28 by Noel

How important is that indicator shown below in the sim? 


I discovered that real pilots set their view in the sim same as in the real aircraft that the red and white ball are matching. I am not able for that when setting the realistic fov.

There are two ways to move closer or further from the panel. Zoom or translate. I found it much easier for me to modulate these distances if both are mapped to separate controller axis, not buttons or keys. 

Zoom will move both cockpit distance and outside scenery distance.

Translate will only move the cockpit distance and not affect the scenery at all. 

I use the two leftmost of the six axis on this old CH branded device for zoom and translate. By moving those two black lever axis I easily get things to look natural. (I took off those two projecting pieces on the bottom of the quad so it sits more flat on the desktop). I've been doing it this way since FSX.

I removed the zoom mapping from the mouse wheel on day 1 because it interfered with my tuning of radio knobs. All the mouse wheel does now is spin knobs or slide levers and such like.

On 12/14/2025 at 10:19 AM, CallsignBA said:

How important is that indicator shown below in the sim? 


I discovered that real pilots set their view in the sim same as in the real aircraft that the red and white ball are matching. I am not able for that when setting the realistic fov.

set your realistic FOV then move the seat position to get the balls lined up.

I tried it again and find it less than desirable.  Despite the fact things like mountains in the distance are more accurately sized I really don't like the fact the VC is so visually restricted, limited.  I would need to be constantly panning just about.  Plus, perceived motion is slower, textures less crisp.  All in all, a net loser for me.

I can see where if you used something like TrackIR it could work pretty well, at least compared to using mouse/keys.

Edited February 27Feb 27 by Noel

On 2/27/2026 at 4:53 PM, Noel said:

I tried it again and find it less than desirable.  Despite the fact things like mountains in the distance are more accurately sized I really don't like the fact the VC is so visually restricted, limited.  I would need to be constantly panning just about.  Plus, perceived motion is slower, textures less crisp.  All in all, a net loser for me.

I can see where if you used something like TrackIR it could work pretty well, at least compared to using mouse/keys.

TrackIR, or something similar, is essential if you want a simulator to present the world realistically through the frame of a monitor.

If your FOV is inaccurate, then size, distance, and speed will all be inaccurate too. Instrument size, your distance from the panel, text size, and even your apparent seating position will all be wrong.

Sharpness is affected as well. What looks “soft” at the correct FOV usually only seems soft because you’ve spent so long looking at an exaggerated view. Your perception adapts. After a while, the correct FOV stops looking soft and simply starts looking normal. Same with speed: if you are used to a widened view, the correct sense of motion will initially seem slow, but that is just re-adjustment.

I’m only saying this for people who want their simulator to represent the world at the correct size, distance, and speed. If someone prefers a less realistic FOV so they can fit more into the monitor frame, that is up to them.

11 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

If someone prefers a less realistic FOV so they can fit more into the monitor frame, that is up to them.

Makes me think of most simmers who are using their 27" monitor and have the whole ~1,5m wide main panel shown on it lol

14 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

If your FOV is inaccurate, then size, distance, and speed will all be inaccurate too

Of course, all of this is well understood but for me, again, it's a net loser.  Perhaps with TrackIR it might be useable.

About the initial zoom, in the camera.cfg of every aircraft, I found that the Asobo/Microsoft default planes are a very good starting point: "InitialZoom = 0.35" 

Other developers change this value giving a so much "fish eye" effect, that personally I don't like. Didn't had time to read all the thread and I don't know if was mentioned or taken into consideration. This is good for a 1:16 monitor.