Interesting video. I have a Quest Pro that I bought intending to replace with a Quest Pro 2 in 2024, but that seems to have been put on the backburner by Meta now, as they have gone back to focusing on the cheaper market, with a more budget version of Quest 3 planned for next year instead. I then thought I'd get a highend PCVR headset and use the Pro for standalone but over the past few months the Quest Pro has grown on me so much I can't use anything else. The open design is the best quality of life improvement for me. I play in the dark with an IR illuminator and having nothing touch my face is a revelation. No lens fog, lighter, no ski mask type visual effect, can get closer to the lenses for a better FOV, when I try and put my Quest 2 or Reverb G2 on they just feel crap now. The pancake lenses are also so much better than anything I've used that my old headsets like the Vive Pro 2 and Reverb G2 are unusuable. I have very little interest in Quest 3 as I need the dual QLED displays and local dimming of the Pro too much, and eye tracking is now an essential feature. So I'm kind of stuck. What I really want is a Quest Pro 2, with the new XR2 gen 2 chip, a depth sensor and higher resolution displays, but Meta don't seem to be offering that any time soon. The main thing that holds me back on the Crystal is the size. It looks like it's out of a 1980's or early 90's sci fi movie, just ridiculous. I would love the display, but I just wish I could put the display into my Quest Pro.
Thanks! The T-shirt was a B-day present from my wife a few years ago. I use the Thrustmaster T.Flight HOTAS (the budget option) for Elite and MSFS. It does the job well enough for me, but I'd love to upgrade at some point in the future.
The t-flight hotas is a great starter option! I used to use one myself. Currently I'm using a Microsoft Sidewinder force feedback joystick and an X56 Rhino Throttle. The throttle is a smidge on the big side but I love the number of inputs it has.
With all of these you can feel the feedback of the atmosphere when flying the plane or the spaceship on a planet? Or you only feel feetback when firing and coliding?
Are you using plastic lenses with the Crystal? Asking because chromatic aberration was a criticism I've heard from people who received plastic lenses but that supposedly went away with upgrade to the glass lenses.
Gary, I'd wager you could probably talk PD into lending you the Quest Pro for a period of time for a proper A/B comparison. Although I've not used a Crystal, your conclusions are about what I'd expect. The raw resolution behind aspherics should be quite sharp. I'm now several months into Quest-Pro ownership and I have a hard time with the idea of leaving it behind for anything else currently on the market, including a Crystal, and the decision isn't so much money bound. For the first time, since the release of commercial VR I finally feel like I'm really not wanting more out of a headset hardware itself. That's not to say that I think the Quest-Pro is perfect, it isn't, but unlike earlier days I'm not seeing screen door, glare, god rays, muddy blacks, super tiny toilet paper roll FOV and thinking I wish the HMD did more. Sure a Quest Pro with more resolution would be, well, better, but it further excerbates what I think the current real bottleneck of PCVR is, and that is GPU horsepower (along with general software availability). At this point in time, even with my 4090 I cannot give the QuestPro enough horsepower in the software I want to play (PCVR). A Pimax Crystal would just further my feelings of wishing I had more GPU
Yes, I can certainly agree with your thoughts regarding raw power in PC VR. I knew I'd have to make compromises pairing a Crystal with a 3080, and was fully prepared to make those sacrifices in certain areas of the games I love to play. However, It's quite difficult to glimpse the amazing visuals/performance just over the horizon and never be able to quite dial things in enough to reach them. I also think a 4090 isn't enough to truly take advantage of the Crystal in some titles - certainly not MSFS (although I'm sure it's still incredible). I remember when I picked up my 3080 in 2020 and hoping it would be the magic bullet to make everything run flawlessly.... nope! Basically, this is a long-winded way of saying I very much agree. It either comes down to more raw horse-power at this point or miracle-like optimisation techniques being incorporated in the most demanding titles. A little side note on the hardware side however; the thing I'm looking for more than ever now is a small, lightweight device with integrated high-end audio that can deliver these types of visuals. Form factor is definitely becoming a bigger deal in some VR hardware going forward in my opinion. The Quest Pro is obviously taking those steps, but I think there is a huge amount of room for improvement in that area of hardware.
Hi. I've noticed for US I could get a Quest Pro on monthly payments, what you think of that of what we've heard for Quest 3? I have a Quest 2 now but would like something better for Elite Dangerous.
It’s possible the Pro would be better for Elite due to local dimming functionality on the displays, but it’s difficult to say for sure until all Quest 3 details have been officially confirmed. Quest 3 will probably have a higher resolution display than the Pro, but how big a difference that makes in practice is still a question.
Well my choice with this one was 'low cost', and I actually picked up this Thrustmaster T.Flight for only £39. new which was a bargain really. However, I'd love to get a more sturdy device one day. I know you can spend hundreds on a decent one so it might not happen soon, and the T.Flight has definitely served me well!
Not too much. My opinion is basically that it’s a great seated PC VR headset, really well suited to specific games and experiences. The eye tracking and DFR is a big win for systems like mine (RTX3080). But the Crystal still feels a little ‘beta’ right now. Some functions don’t work quite as well as I would like, and I’m yet to really dive into the AIO mode which I’ll be testing shortly. As a purely PC VR headset however, for the games I really want to play, the visuals are pretty much second to none.
in Elite Dangerous again :) so on the topic of hFoV there is imho a simple measure ur either into games or have a vision issues that means FoV is unimportant or your headset is greater than 120-130 degrees hFoV that's it that is the minimum MVP the borderline, the boundary, the mark in the sand.... I get it HP Reverb G2, Aero etc gave clarity and threw FoV under a bus but no more imho 120, go cheap or go home as much as SDE is unacceptable imho so to is sub 120degrees true in game FoV
@@robertpetrie2536 No math required mate. Just the fact that dual screens with IPD adjustment allows you to utilize the whole screen so you'll actually see better clarity, even with slightly lower res displays.
@@ThePape78 i just looked it up and some data leaks show that it should be about 30% higher resolution than the quest2/pro which are about the same. And that was from a listing on Best Buy
My only experience with pancake lenses is the Pico 4 and it doesn't show god rays but there is glare in certain scenes (high contrast) but that glare is different than the glare experienced with Fresnel lenses, very difficult to explain, the glare is minimal but it is there, like all other HMDs, after using the headset for a while, your brain adapts and the glare pretty much disappears.
@@driflysh4597 Glare would be like a light halo around any bright object on a darker background whereas god rays would be more like lines of glare heading off in different directions from the bright object on a darker background, god ray can be way different from HMD to HMD, the worst I've seen is the Valve Index, the index is a amazing HMD with horrible optics (at least for my eyes, most people love the Index, I hate mine).
I don't notice any glare or any stray light in my Quest Pro. There is some bloom with local diming in contrast areas but that's a function of the local dimming and not the lenses.
its really the only thing besides size of the crystal that makes me not daily drive the Crystal. The edge to edge Clarity isn't up to par with Quest Pro. So I always watch you tube or web browse in the Quest Pro.
Such a confusing video, I would have almost preferred if you this video was 30 seconds long where you just said, "Quest Pro not even close" 😅 The fact that you didnt seem 100% certain how much better the crystal is makes me really curious to try a Quest Pro now. I mean its obviously not night and day. That being said I'd probably trust your opinion on this topic alot more if you actually played ED and aircar in the Qpro. Because it seems your indecisiveness is based on lingering memories and feelings.
Yeah, I think I’d feel more decisive if I had a few hours or days with the Quest Pro and tried it in Elite or MSFS. The thing I didn’t mention, is of course compression artifacts in the Quest Pro, which even in ideal network situations can still occur in some scenes. I know there have been improvements with this over time in VD and Air Link, and I can generally get a great wireless experience in my Quest 2 for example. However, compression artifacts are never completely removed in specific circumstances. This in itself is a big win for the Crystal in PC VR titles for me.
I wish I could see this video before I bought Pimax Crystal because I am so so disappointed by this headset and I want to return it but support does not respond to me. Do not buy anything from Pimax, please, do yourself a favour.
But I don't think you need edge to edge clarity with a wide FOV headset. To do a fair comparison you would have to do 90 FOV clarity to 90 FOV clarity.
I think you have a fair point with that. Although, I do think that wide FOV can (sometimes) feel less impactful if the periphery is too blurry (or in a worst case scenario, distorted). This is especially true when considering the advantages of eye-tracking based features such as dynamic foveated rendering. Having said that, the edge to edge clarity in the Crystal is excellent regardless. My point was only to say that pancake lenses have an overall advantage in that aspect over certain types of aspheric lenses.
The Crystal isn't a wide FOV headset. Risa measurements put Quest Pro at H108.00° V95.57°, and Pimax Crystal at H103.31° V103.75°. For such a bulky headset the Crystal somehow has a lower horizontal fov than the Q Pro.
I tried the quest pro at the pimax event in orlando florida. It didn't stand out to me at all. I didn't like the FOV, I didn't like the comfort. Optically I just didn't think it was special. My pirate's crystal on the other hand gives you that wow factor with the visuals and sound. I added my ear cups from my 8KX, and the sound is even better using them. I am looking forward to the quest 3. I'll be grabbing one for myself and for my 2 kids.
The FOV felt ‘fine’ for me in the Quest Pro, but not to the level of the Crystal. I agree with you about the Quest Pro comfort, although having tried it a second time it didn’t feel quite as bad as I first thought. For PC VR, in the types of titles I enjoy the most, the Crystal would easily be my preference.
@ImmersedRobot Thankfully, i'm running a 4090, so I get to max it out for the most part. I have the aero. and it's beaten by the crystal. And I'm sure that the quest pro isn't as good as the aero.
@@ImmersedRobot Next time you get a chance to try a Q Pro, experiment with using the dial that adjusts lens distance to your eyes to get closer, and adjust the back rest higher on your head. The default way Meta recommends wearing it leaves a lot of FOV on the table. You can actually get about 5° more horizontal FOV on the Pro vs Crystal.
@@Chameleongoo Agreed, the Quest Pro has the best resolution of any HMD I've used when worn like that. It's a bit wider than the Index for me and about as wide as my Vive Pro 2 with much better vertical FOV, although not as good vertical FOV as the Index. The fact that the entire display is clear makes it shockingly better than my other headsets.
Watch out for Pimax all. My purchase experience so far has been horrible. I pre purchased my Crystal in June and immediately paid the balance on July 1 when I got the email telling me it was time to pay. Today is July 19th, and I’ve been lied to by Pimax twice now telling me my headset was shipping. Guess what? Still not shipped and now get yet another apology from Pimax now saying my headset MIGHT be shipped around July 26th. Can’t believe a company can be so disorganized that it can’t even keep orders straight. BIG FAIL PIMAX!!!
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #30 ДВА В ОДНОМ [Один человек]• Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nrXy15orKhY/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for you thoughtful and honest opinions on all this mate, cheers from Australia.
Interesting video. I have a Quest Pro that I bought intending to replace with a Quest Pro 2 in 2024, but that seems to have been put on the backburner by Meta now, as they have gone back to focusing on the cheaper market, with a more budget version of Quest 3 planned for next year instead.
I then thought I'd get a highend PCVR headset and use the Pro for standalone but over the past few months the Quest Pro has grown on me so much I can't use anything else.
The open design is the best quality of life improvement for me. I play in the dark with an IR illuminator and having nothing touch my face is a revelation. No lens fog, lighter, no ski mask type visual effect, can get closer to the lenses for a better FOV, when I try and put my Quest 2 or Reverb G2 on they just feel crap now.
The pancake lenses are also so much better than anything I've used that my old headsets like the Vive Pro 2 and Reverb G2 are unusuable.
I have very little interest in Quest 3 as I need the dual QLED displays and local dimming of the Pro too much, and eye tracking is now an essential feature.
So I'm kind of stuck. What I really want is a Quest Pro 2, with the new XR2 gen 2 chip, a depth sensor and higher resolution displays, but Meta don't seem to be offering that any time soon.
The main thing that holds me back on the Crystal is the size. It looks like it's out of a 1980's or early 90's sci fi movie, just ridiculous. I would love the display, but I just wish I could put the display into my Quest Pro.
Very interesting comparison!
Nice t-shirt 😂 What controllers do you use to play Elite?
Thanks! The T-shirt was a B-day present from my wife a few years ago. I use the Thrustmaster T.Flight HOTAS (the budget option) for Elite and MSFS. It does the job well enough for me, but I'd love to upgrade at some point in the future.
The t-flight hotas is a great starter option! I used to use one myself. Currently I'm using a Microsoft Sidewinder force feedback joystick and an X56 Rhino Throttle. The throttle is a smidge on the big side but I love the number of inputs it has.
With all of these you can feel the feedback of the atmosphere when flying the plane or the spaceship on a planet? Or you only feel feetback when firing and coliding?
Keep the Crystal videos coming 👍
Are you using plastic lenses with the Crystal? Asking because chromatic aberration was a criticism I've heard from people who received plastic lenses but that supposedly went away with upgrade to the glass lenses.
No, I do have the glass lenses. The chromatic aberration only becomes apparent in specific areas. But when they’re there, then they’re very apparent.
Gary, I'd wager you could probably talk PD into lending you the Quest Pro for a period of time for a proper A/B comparison.
Although I've not used a Crystal, your conclusions are about what I'd expect. The raw resolution behind aspherics should be quite sharp.
I'm now several months into Quest-Pro ownership and I have a hard time with the idea of leaving it behind for anything else currently on the market, including a Crystal, and the decision isn't so much money bound. For the first time, since the release of commercial VR I finally feel like I'm really not wanting more out of a headset hardware itself. That's not to say that I think the Quest-Pro is perfect, it isn't, but unlike earlier days I'm not seeing screen door, glare, god rays, muddy blacks, super tiny toilet paper roll FOV and thinking I wish the HMD did more. Sure a Quest Pro with more resolution would be, well, better, but it further excerbates what I think the current real bottleneck of PCVR is, and that is GPU horsepower (along with general software availability). At this point in time, even with my 4090 I cannot give the QuestPro enough horsepower in the software I want to play (PCVR). A Pimax Crystal would just further my feelings of wishing I had more GPU
Yes, I can certainly agree with your thoughts regarding raw power in PC VR. I knew I'd have to make compromises pairing a Crystal with a 3080, and was fully prepared to make those sacrifices in certain areas of the games I love to play. However, It's quite difficult to glimpse the amazing visuals/performance just over the horizon and never be able to quite dial things in enough to reach them.
I also think a 4090 isn't enough to truly take advantage of the Crystal in some titles - certainly not MSFS (although I'm sure it's still incredible). I remember when I picked up my 3080 in 2020 and hoping it would be the magic bullet to make everything run flawlessly.... nope!
Basically, this is a long-winded way of saying I very much agree. It either comes down to more raw horse-power at this point or miracle-like optimisation techniques being incorporated in the most demanding titles.
A little side note on the hardware side however; the thing I'm looking for more than ever now is a small, lightweight device with integrated high-end audio that can deliver these types of visuals. Form factor is definitely becoming a bigger deal in some VR hardware going forward in my opinion. The Quest Pro is obviously taking those steps, but I think there is a huge amount of room for improvement in that area of hardware.
Quest Pro uses some of that GPU and a bit of CPU horsepower to encode the stream...so there's that.
Hi. I've noticed for US I could get a Quest Pro on monthly payments, what you think of that of what we've heard for Quest 3? I have a Quest 2 now but would like something better for Elite Dangerous.
It’s possible the Pro would be better for Elite due to local dimming functionality on the displays, but it’s difficult to say for sure until all Quest 3 details have been officially confirmed. Quest 3 will probably have a higher resolution display than the Pro, but how big a difference that makes in practice is still a question.
@@ImmersedRobot thanks for the input
what's your hotas of choice?
Well my choice with this one was 'low cost', and I actually picked up this Thrustmaster T.Flight for only £39. new which was a bargain really. However, I'd love to get a more sturdy device one day. I know you can spend hundreds on a decent one so it might not happen soon, and the T.Flight has definitely served me well!
Does the Pimax Crystal have Local Dimming? because the Pro does and it looks incredible with Elite Dangerous out in the black.
Yup, Crystal has local dimming.
your voice has a very pleasant timbre
Thank you. Appreciated!
Have u changed your mind on the crystal?
Not too much. My opinion is basically that it’s a great seated PC VR headset, really well suited to specific games and experiences. The eye tracking and DFR is a big win for systems like mine (RTX3080).
But the Crystal still feels a little ‘beta’ right now. Some functions don’t work quite as well as I would like, and I’m yet to really dive into the AIO mode which I’ll be testing shortly.
As a purely PC VR headset however, for the games I really want to play, the visuals are pretty much second to none.
@@ImmersedRobot Ordered one to see the difference as my Quest Pro looks fantastic on a 4090 7800x3d, mainly msfs and xplane.
in Elite Dangerous again :) so on the topic of hFoV there is imho a simple measure ur either into games or have a vision issues that means FoV is unimportant or your headset is greater than 120-130 degrees hFoV that's it that is the minimum MVP the borderline, the boundary, the mark in the sand.... I get it HP Reverb G2, Aero etc gave clarity and threw FoV under a bus but no more imho 120, go cheap or go home as much as SDE is unacceptable imho so to is sub 120degrees true in game FoV
Makes you wonder how good the quest 3 is going to look with a bump in resolution with those some amazing lenses.
There is no bump in resolution, because the quest 3 will be have only one panel and not two like the pro
Its still tiny bit less than what pico4 has
@@ThePape78how do you do the math on that?
@@robertpetrie2536 No math required mate. Just the fact that dual screens with IPD adjustment allows you to utilize the whole screen so you'll actually see better clarity, even with slightly lower res displays.
@@ThePape78 i just looked it up and some data leaks show that it should be about 30% higher resolution than the quest2/pro which are about the same. And that was from a listing on Best Buy
Don't pancake lenses have god rays?
I saw zero on the Quest Pro, and when I also tried the Pico 4. I believe that is another major advantage of pancake lenses.
My only experience with pancake lenses is the Pico 4 and it doesn't show god rays but there is glare in certain scenes (high contrast) but that glare is different than the glare experienced with Fresnel lenses, very difficult to explain, the glare is minimal but it is there, like all other HMDs, after using the headset for a while, your brain adapts and the glare pretty much disappears.
@@jackr.749 Thanks for your explanations, I only experienced fresnel and aspheric so far. Maybe it's glare what I had in mind and not god rays. 👍
@@driflysh4597 Glare would be like a light halo around any bright object on a darker background whereas god rays would be more like lines of glare heading off in different directions from the bright object on a darker background, god ray can be way different from HMD to HMD, the worst I've seen is the Valve Index, the index is a amazing HMD with horrible optics (at least for my eyes, most people love the Index, I hate mine).
I don't notice any glare or any stray light in my Quest Pro. There is some bloom with local diming in contrast areas but that's a function of the local dimming and not the lenses.
I definitely notice blurriness on the edges in the Crystal.
its really the only thing besides size of the crystal that makes me not daily drive the Crystal. The edge to edge Clarity isn't up to par with Quest Pro. So I always watch you tube or web browse in the Quest Pro.
Quest Pro actually has a lower resolution than Quest 2.
Quest Pro has two panels where Quest 2 has one panel so the Quest Pro will have more dense packed pixels.
Such a confusing video, I would have almost preferred if you this video was 30 seconds long where you just said, "Quest Pro not even close" 😅
The fact that you didnt seem 100% certain how much better the crystal is makes me really curious to try a Quest Pro now.
I mean its obviously not night and day.
That being said I'd probably trust your opinion on this topic alot more if you actually played ED and aircar in the Qpro.
Because it seems your indecisiveness is based on lingering memories and feelings.
Yeah, I think I’d feel more decisive if I had a few hours or days with the Quest Pro and tried it in Elite or MSFS.
The thing I didn’t mention, is of course compression artifacts in the Quest Pro, which even in ideal network situations can still occur in some scenes. I know there have been improvements with this over time in VD and Air Link, and I can generally get a great wireless experience in my Quest 2 for example. However, compression artifacts are never completely removed in specific circumstances.
This in itself is a big win for the Crystal in PC VR titles for me.
I wish I could see this video before I bought Pimax Crystal because I am so so disappointed by this headset and I want to return it but support does not respond to me. Do not buy anything from Pimax, please, do yourself a favour.
Why are you disappointed? Did you have a qpro as well?
But I don't think you need edge to edge clarity with a wide FOV headset. To do a fair comparison you would have to do 90 FOV clarity to 90 FOV clarity.
I think you have a fair point with that. Although, I do think that wide FOV can (sometimes) feel less impactful if the periphery is too blurry (or in a worst case scenario, distorted). This is especially true when considering the advantages of eye-tracking based features such as dynamic foveated rendering. Having said that, the edge to edge clarity in the Crystal is excellent regardless. My point was only to say that pancake lenses have an overall advantage in that aspect over certain types of aspheric lenses.
The Crystal isn't a wide FOV headset. Risa measurements put Quest Pro at H108.00° V95.57°, and Pimax Crystal at H103.31° V103.75°. For such a bulky headset the Crystal somehow has a lower horizontal fov than the Q Pro.
I tried the quest pro at the pimax event in orlando florida. It didn't stand out to me at all. I didn't like the FOV, I didn't like the comfort. Optically I just didn't think it was special. My pirate's crystal on the other hand gives you that wow factor with the visuals and sound. I added my ear cups from my 8KX, and the sound is even better using them. I am looking forward to the quest 3. I'll be grabbing one for myself and for my 2 kids.
The FOV felt ‘fine’ for me in the Quest Pro, but not to the level of the Crystal. I agree with you about the Quest Pro comfort, although having tried it a second time it didn’t feel quite as bad as I first thought.
For PC VR, in the types of titles I enjoy the most, the Crystal would easily be my preference.
I would bet that my Quest pro settings as an end user are certainly better than Pimax's on a competitive device.
@ImmersedRobot Thankfully, i'm running a 4090, so I get to max it out for the most part. I have the aero. and it's beaten by the crystal. And I'm sure that the quest pro isn't as good as the aero.
@@ImmersedRobot Next time you get a chance to try a Q Pro, experiment with using the dial that adjusts lens distance to your eyes to get closer, and adjust the back rest higher on your head. The default way Meta recommends wearing it leaves a lot of FOV on the table. You can actually get about 5° more horizontal FOV on the Pro vs Crystal.
@@Chameleongoo Agreed, the Quest Pro has the best resolution of any HMD I've used when worn like that. It's a bit wider than the Index for me and about as wide as my Vive Pro 2 with much better vertical FOV, although not as good vertical FOV as the Index. The fact that the entire display is clear makes it shockingly better than my other headsets.
Watch out for Pimax all. My purchase experience so far has been horrible. I pre purchased my Crystal in June and immediately paid the balance on July 1 when I got the email telling me it was time to pay. Today is July 19th, and I’ve been lied to by Pimax twice now telling me my headset was shipping. Guess what? Still not shipped and now get yet another apology from Pimax now saying my headset MIGHT be shipped around July 26th. Can’t believe a company can be so disorganized that it can’t even keep orders straight. BIG FAIL PIMAX!!!
It can take up to 3 weeks for them to ship it should have been in the Email. They don't ship as soon as its paid.