The guy is pro in all sorts of conventional video over the past few decades.

Introducing him to SLR tech efforts. His feedback was priceless:
I am new to VR and viewers so I came in with no visual expectations but also with no "built-up" tolerance for whatever issues, discomforts and problems there are. It also means that my experience is limited to the Quest Pro, the only viewer I have. But I have lots and lots of experience with the technical aspects of video and a little bit of experience with video production from a distant past.
I watched a few hours of content, and here are my thoughts:
First and foremost, the resolution of the Quest Pro is very low. It sucks. If this is the best in class right now, then there is a lot of ground to go before VR can take hold.
It also means that whatever is shot, edited and streamed needs to match only that resolution. Additional resolution will only have negative effects (extra store requirements, slow editing, more data needed to stream, etc) and no benefits as it gets scaled down at the viewer. Obviously some additional resolution is needed for future-proofing, etc, but this is a separate topic.
I don't really know the FPS that the Quest Pro drives. But most content, SLR originals and Czech included, feel like 15 fps. They may be shot at 60 fps or higher (I don't really know yet), but somehow the presentation is happening at a much lower frame rate. The good ones (I bumped into just a few) feel like 45 fps, the really bad ones (majority) feel like 15 or even lower.
There are visual issues, at least with how I see it. Maybe because I am new to headsets and my eyes still think it is the real world out there.
Often I get broken 3D. As soon as I look to the side or sometimes not even very far to the side.
The biggest problem that I see is that the Z position of parts of the image don't correspond to what the eye wants it to be. I am not sure how to describe it, but I think it has to do with the angle that the eyes expect to make to focus on close objects. It feels to me that the camera shoots with parallel "eyes", but my brain commands the eyes to converge. The result is discomfort, the sensation of "this is wrong", and break of reality and seeing things out of proportion.
I think that visual quality could improve a lot if, somehow, it was possible to make movies with the correct convergence for the point of attention.
Another big issue for me is focus. A lot of the time the focus is off the main subjects, on and off through the movie. Various scenes have the focus plane away from where the focus distance should be. Granted the depth of field is enormous with these fish eye lenses, but somehow it misses a lot.
This is an issue with most movies from everybody (that I watched), but this is something that the Czech guys either pay more attention to or get lucky with.
Lighting seems to be an issue too. Apparently shooting in VR requires a lot of light. Well lit scenes look much better than scenes with less light.
Distortion is a big problem too.
A lot of the POV have girls way too close. I understand that what is in the screen is the reality because the camera is where it should be and the math is right. But something goes really wrong when the main object is too close.
There is distortion. The body of the model gets wide-angle distortion - faces become like elves with long noses, arms bend in unlikely directions, stomachs become bigger, etc.
Things appear too close - somehow they look closer than reality. Maybe because if they were really close the eyes would be converging, but if the eyes converge (and many times I had to make an effort to focus on infinity in spite of the brain wanting to get an angle) then the object appears very big. Maybe the brain uses information about the eye angle to determine perceived scale.
Also it is more comfortable, cinematically, to have a little bit more distance so you can see more of the scene without having to move the neck back and forth. So maybe some people use the scale control on the viewer, and then distortion really kicks in.
The orientation of the camera during some parts of the shooting is not ideal.
I understand that is how we see things in real life. But many scenes call for not looking straight. But it sure is more comfortable if the action spot is moved a bit towards the center of view. A few movies do so, and in my opinion that makes for a much better experience. Even though my neck is not looking down as much, the feeling is much better because there is no fighting with problems of the virtual environment. So tilt the camera down a little bit on the cowboy.
The video compression of many of the movies is not too great. I have not really analyzed the bitstreams, but it seems to me that many of the pieces could benefit from higher bit rate and better quality encoders.
If the stream is 30 fps, then 30 Mbps yields an average of 125 KBytes per frame (half of that for a 60 fps stream). So encoding quality matters a lot.
Mono 4K 30 fps content need 20 to 25 Mbps or more look good on a big screen. So 30 Mbps for stereo VR content is probably not enough and/or the quality of the encoding is not optimal.
The result is visible as "pasty" details, quantization artifacts, blocking, smearing and solarization. It is all around.
Unless I am looking in the wrong place or doing something wrong, the passthru chroma keyer is horrible. makes everything unusable. Is it possible to actually encode and send alpha layers?
Thoughts, anybody?