turbomax

like for your girl friends, 1 for each category.😄

to 400 fps AND 50-80 fps in VR

and I would have got a DreamAir by now, if it wasn't for the poor build quality and comfort troubles, as you mentioned already. so the wait goes on for me for the next "perfect" VR upgrade. a real shame Pimax can't get their act together.

I asked chatgpt to compare the Pimax Dream Air SE to my Pimax Crystal Light: Pixel count comparisonDream Air SE: 6.55 million pixels per eye Crystal Light: 8.29 million pixels per eye So the Crystal Light has about 26% more pixels per eye than the Dream Air SE. Why many people still find the Dream Air SE attractiveThe Dream Air SE uses Micro-OLED panels, which provide: much deeper blacks, higher perceived contrast, a dramatically smaller and lighter headset. The Crystal Light counters with: higher native resolution, glass aspheric lenses, potentially more detail in flight sims and racing sims when driven by a powerful GPU. For sim racing / flight simulationIf your priority is maximum detail and instrument readability, the Crystal Light still has the resolution advantage. If your priority is comfort, weight, and OLED image quality, the Dream Air SE is compelling despite the lower resolution. .................... then I asked for the different lenses of both headsets: Dream Air SE lensesPimax describes the Dream Air SE as using ConcaveView pancake lenses optimized for Micro-OLED displays, with a large sweet spot and edge-to-edge clarity. The company specifically highlights wide stereo overlap and reduced glare compared with earlier designs. The advantage of pancake optics is that they allow the headset to be incredibly small and light (under 140 g headset-only). The downside is the same trade-off seen in most pancake headsets (Quest 3, Beyond, etc.): some level of internal reflections and glare, especially against bright objects on dark backgrounds. Community discussions around the Dream Air series suggest this remains a concern, although final production impressions are still limited. Crystal Light lensesThe Crystal Light inherits the Crystal family's glass aspheric lenses, which are one of its strongest features. Pimax has repeatedly emphasized these lenses for their clarity and low distortion. Compared with pancake lenses, glass aspherics generally provide: less glare and fewer reflections, higher light transmission, a very crisp central image, better perceived contrast in bright scenes. The trade-off is size and weight: the optical stack is much bulkier than a pancake design. Which is likely better?For flight simulation and sim racing, I'd still give the optical edge to the Crystal Light today because: It has higher native resolution (2880×2880 vs. 2560×2560 per eye). Glass aspheric lenses have an excellent reputation for cockpit readability. They avoid much of the glare associated with pancake optics. For comfort, portability, and long VR sessions, the Dream Air SE is in a different class. At under 140 g, it is dramatically lighter than the Crystal Light while still offering modern pancake optics and Micro-OLED image quality. Here’s how the **Pimax Dream Air SE vs Pimax Crystal Light lenses behave specifically in flight and racing sims like MSFS, DCS, X-Plane, and iRacing—focused on what you actually notice in the cockpit. Cockpit readability (gauges, MFDs, HUD text)Crystal Light (glass aspheric) Sharper “true center” clarity for small text Very stable focus when looking straight at instruments Slight falloff toward edges, but cockpit centers stay extremely crisp Better for reading distant instruments in MSFS / DCS Dream Air SE (pancake) More uniform sharpness across the view Slightly softer micro-detail compared to Crystal Light due to lower resolution + OLED subpixel structure Still very readable, but fine text (tiny MFD labels, distant runway signs) won’t be as crisp 👉 Winner for pure instrument clarity: Crystal Light 👁️ Sweet spot (where the image is sharp)Crystal Light Larger “perfect center zone” Edge clarity depends more on eye alignment You may naturally “look with your head” more in sims Dream Air SE Pancake lenses give a more even clarity across the lens Less need to hunt for the perfect eye position More “glasses-like” viewing experience 👉 Winner for ease of use: Dream Air SE 🔭 Stereo overlap (3D depth feeling in cockpits)Crystal Light Strong depth perception in cockpit layouts Slightly more pronounced “screen window” effect in high contrast scenes Dream Air SE Pancake optics + OLED give a more seamless “floating world” feeling Slightly more natural edge blending 👉 Winner for immersion feel: slight edge Dream Air SE 🌞 Glare, reflections, and night flyingCrystal Light Very low glare (big advantage of glass aspheric lenses) Excellent for: night approaches dark cockpits (DCS aircraft, space sims) Dream Air SE Pancake lenses introduce: mild internal reflections (“god rays”-like artifacts in some conditions) more noticeable in high-contrast HUD + dark sky scenes 👉 Winner for clean optics: Crystal Light ✈️ Simulator-specific behaviorMSFS (civil aviation, long-distance flying)Crystal Light: better runway signs, distant detail Dream Air SE: more comfortable for long sessions

thanks Transponder, not sure if that would improve my experience using a Pimax Crystal Light and NVidia SmoothMotion or if this mostly for Quest 3 users

ok, that wasnˋt clear to me from your 4000x4000 post. how do you benefit from 2 x render resolution when your Quest 3 can not display more than 2000x2000?

what? "The Meta Quest 3 features a hardware resolution of 2,064 × 2,208 pixels per eye (approximately 4.5 megapixels per eye"

just like with real humans, because: to err is human, as Socrates knew already 2.000 years ago: "I know I know nothing"

Thanks John, since I don't have time to watch a 3 hour youtube filled with t-shirt sales and what not.😁

Just another example of Pimax's incompetence as far as user comfort and build quality are concerned. As seen many times on Sebastian Ang's MRTV youtube channel. https://www.youtube.com/@mixedrealityTV

How, when FSLTL says: "- ALL existing sim issues continue to be an issue. We await Asobo fixes for those sim issues." 😄

but ...... "- ALL existing sim issues continue to be an issue. We await Asobo fixes for those sim issues." Asobo's fault. aha. 😅

BEST VALUE 12 months $107.99 .........................- funny.

Pilatus aircraft is named after the Pilatus mountain, 10 km west of the Pilatus airport of "Buochs"

to err is human

WE ? Me, myself and I

Eric That quote was from the supposedly "real" POH according to chatgpt, not from the SOH SimulatorOperatingHandbook , but after checking with chatgpt the exact same question again, this time the answer was: Can you adjust the spoilers? Yes — but only in a limited “open/close” way. On the Embraer Phenom 300, the spoilers act as: roll spoilers, speed brakes, and ground spoilers. The pilot can manually command the speed brake/spoiler system using the cockpit speed brake switch. However, unlike some larger jets, the Phenom 300 does not provide continuously variable manual spoiler positioning with a lever. The system essentially has two commanded positions: OPEN CLOSED (pdfcoffee.com) When selected OPEN in flight, the spoiler panels deploy symmetrically up to about 35°. (pdfcoffee.com) There are also automatic protections/interlocks: spoilers only function as speed brakes with flaps retracted, airspeed must be above roughly 125 KT, thrust levers must be below a certain power setting, and they auto-retract if those conditions are violated. (pdfcoffee.com) On landing, the ground spoilers deploy automatically when armed conditions are met (weight on wheels, low thrust, etc.). (smartcockpit.com) So the short answer is: Yes, pilots can manually command the spoilers/speed brakes. No, they cannot finely modulate spoiler angle like on many transport-category airliners with proportional spoiler levers.

From the official Phenom 300 Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH): The spoilers have multiple deployment modes: Flight spoilers (roll assist) – partially deployed to assist ailerons. Ground spoilers (lift dump) – fully deployed upon main landing gear compression and throttle retard to idle. Speed/brake function – can be deployed manually in-flight via the speed brake lever, from 0° (stowed) to 50° (fully deployed). So, in terms of positions: 0° – fully retracted (stowed) Intermediate positions – variable deployment controlled by the lever or automatic flight logic 50° – fully deployed (speed brake / lift dump) Effectively, the spoilers are continuously variable between 0° and 50°, so there isn’t a fixed number of discrete “positions” like on some older aircraft; it’s continuously adjustable within that range.

why? I am about to build my "next gen" pc as we post

I spent around 5k for my system incl. 64 GB DDR5 Ram, RTX 4090, Ryzen 7800X3D CPU and Pimax Crystal Light. I have uploaded numerous screenshots showing 60-80 fps with high-ultra settings, using DLSS in Quality mode. Can't imagine ever going back to 2D.

Why people prefer them: Much more comfortable (no glasses pressing into your face) Sharper image quality—you’re always looking through the “sweet spot” of the lenses No frames blocking your peripheral vision Protects the headset lenses from scratches Easy to install (often magnetic or snap-in) Downsides Extra cost Not ideal if multiple people share the headset (unless you remove them) very easy with magnetic lens inserts.

complex configuration (as per KT069) , unlike Pimax. just watch the 2 youtubers I have listed above, then you'll know all you need. coming from a HP G2, I tried the Quest 3, didn't like the META circus, loved the fantastic color pass through. but went with the Pimax Crystal Light instead. my next VR set could be the Steam Frame VR, Meganex MK2 or Pimax DreamAir.

vroptician.com very competent, lens manufactured by Zeiss

what has not been mentioned: there are special lens inserts for those who wear glasses: https://vroptician.com/

I suggest listening to those who have them all, like MRTV and VRFlightSimGuy https://www.youtube.com/@mixedrealityTV https://www.youtube.com/@VRFlightSimGuy