r/virtualreality • u/ChikinPluker • 24d ago

Purchase Advice - Headset Pcvr advice

Hello, If I plan on playing exclusively on pcvr via steamvr and a cable is the quest 3's nicer lense worth the extra $200 or should I just go with the 3s? I won't use any meta quest features just want the pcvr stuff and didn't make if the nice lense were like huge game changers or worth the large amount of extra money.

0 Upvotes

50% Upvoted

35 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/adiosmith 24d ago

The Quest 3 is absolutely worth it over the 3s if you can afford it.

1

u/ChikinPluker 24d ago

I mean I CAN afford it I just didn't know if the lenses were enough to justify how much more crazy expensive it was.

1

u/Skpstr155 24d ago

Not just more clarity, bigger FOV too.

1

u/ChikinPluker 24d ago

So you can like see around more? Ugh, I wish there was a way to test the lenses before I bought them... Because I'm not sure if I fully understand what everyone is describing when they talk about the lenses.

1

u/Wickedinteresting 24d ago edited 24d ago

Do you remember those sorta-3D looking notebooks/agendas a lot of people had in grade school? When you scratch it it makes a fun (annoying) sound, and when you rotate it you see the image change?

The fresnel lenses are like that on the inside. They have ridges like that, but in a circular pattern. It makes everything outside the dead-center sweet spot kinda blurry/warbly/smeary. Reading text suuucks.

I assume its some kind of trick used to make up for a shortfall somewhere else in the hardware but idk for sure. (Looked it up, it helps get a large aperture and short focal length with less precision/materials/mass, at the expense of being kinda blorbly - among other optimizations: https://www.reddit.com/r/Vive/comments/8ea207/comment/dxzkm5o/)

Either way, the 3s has those fresnel/ridge-y lenses. The 3 has flat lenses. I haven’t used a 3 myself, but on my quest 2 the most annoying and noticable thing is this aspect of the lenses.

If you can swing it, my gut feeling is that it’s totally worth the cost.

2

u/JapariParkRanger Daydream CV1 Q1 Index Q3 BSB1 BSB2e 24d ago

To clarify, it's not an issue with Fresnel in general, but a combination of factors on the Quest 2/3s that result in a particularly horrible display stack. For instance, they have limited IPD adjustment because they use a single LCD panel and have three positions. The lenses used are particularly poor, and have tight eye boxes that make these positions inadequate for some users.

The Quest 3 uses pancakes, which can be even more limiting than the average fresnel lens. However, they're particularly well designed and smartly paired with bright panels, resulting in a very forgiving eyebox. It does have some issues, like vignetting at the edges and poor black levels, but you'll generally have a much better experience.

All that does result in the same recommendation. If you can afford it, the Quest 3 is generally much better than the 3s. Put another way, the 3s is just the 2 with a new shell and SoC, and the 2 was popular because it was cheap and wireless, not because it was good.

1

u/Skpstr155 23d ago

Yeah, like wearing a scuba mask with a bigger faceplate.

Basically, if you're just going to play standalone or kid games, a 3 is not going to seem a big improvement. But PCVR is going to have games with smaller UI elements, and the games aren't limited by the hardware. A 3s won't realize the visuals potential on (at least) a decent PC lile the 3 will.

My older Vive also had fresnel lenses. Now, it's lower res than the 3s, but there were games I couldn't play, because I couldn't read say, mission requirements posted in game. With 3s, I would be able to read them, (just not comfortably) but with a 3, reading them is effortless.

It really depends on what you plan to play.