metichemsi it is certainly 190°, with fisheye, we are projecting on 190 degrees dome, you do get a slight blue ring around due the lens optics, so you could say it has 189° of usable pixels if you want to be picky.
When you say that you can zoom in the fisheye to shrink the image/fov, that is simply not possible in VR180, you get bent walls if you do that.
The video will look correct only if you position the projection camera at exact same position as was the camera when it was shot.
Given that you applied lens profile to make the footage equidistant fisheye.

      spacepirate I manually placed the camera to align with the 190 line, you can do that with any camera, again I made this test with the assumption that it is a 190 lens by the placement and manual alignment of the lines. If you take a 180 lens setup you can simply scoot it back enough to also line it up with the 190 lines but it does not mean it is a 190. I need to build a different setup with at true zero mark to actually measure FOV down to the degree, I do plan on doing that in the future, just havent come of with the best way of doing so quite yet.

        Sandi_SLR interesting, glad to hear you guys tested on a dome, I was really hoping not to have to even attempt to build one of my own to try and test that. Did you by any chance test the FOV change after the canon software converted to 180? From my crude test it does seem to go slightly past 180, maybe 178 or 179 and that is accounting that in my test i probably started at 191 mark just to be able to make out the 190 line on the edges. I would be curious to see what FOV measurement the canon equirectangular conversation yielded you. Given that you already found that there is probably 189 of usable pixes and if the conversion process of the canon utility seems to be taking a little more than 10 degrees to convert, we may be seeing as little as 177-178 at the end?

            metichemsi Equi is exactly 180°. You can see the difference of how much lens do you see from opposing eye.
            Also you cannot compare it like this, since canon utility does a lens correction step to get to equidistant fisheye, its not much, but you could "measure" it as 1 degree difference.
            Also, again, there is no zooming, if the walls are straight in fisheye190 and straight in equi180 it means you are removing extra image.

                Sandi_SLR all valid points, and yes, I hadn't even accounted for the lens correction also taking up another degree or two. I guess i am confident in saying that the difference in FOV due to the usable pixels of the lens and the lens correction could probably end up with a 178 instead of 180, at worst, using the canon utility. This is still probably contributing a lot less towards the larger scaling in comparison to how much more the IPD is contributing to the scaling issue in the grand scheme of things. I will still keep some of my old footage rendered on its native resolution and scaling even though its not technically a correct projections science, the scaling looks just about spot on to me. But I have since moved on to only using the canon VR utility and can live with the slightly larger scaling on closeup subjects, my pimax headset has plenty of FOV anyways, and the scaling of further subjects actually looks better on the canon system than my old K2 pro footage. Further subjects on the k2 pro start to quickly look smaller in my opinion. Canon clearly did not build this lens for the porn industry haha Anyways, best of luck to your team finding your next camera system, im sure it will be great once you lock something in.

                    metichemsi Maybe everybody eyes are different so we see stuff differently. But you keep saying

                    metichemsi slightly larger scaling on closeup subjects

                    This is not true to my eyes. EVERYTHING looks bigger. It always feels like I'm standing way up in the air. The girl is gaint, I'm gaint, everything is gaint. Not just closeup subjects.

                    I hate this camera with a passion. IMO it has ruined so many good studios. If I see that it is 8K then I don't even try to watch the scene anymore.

                    I also have a Pimax 8kx so that is not the issue with the videos looking big for quest2 people. I know we are all different and see it diffenent but I could care less about a good looking sweet spot if it looks like a gaint is sucking my dick.

                          rerun119 This is an interesting topic btw, we had a discussion in our offices, that VR introduced something no one actually knew before. It is that peoples eyes IPD actually makes them perceive the world differently and that is exactly what you are noticing. It is the difference YOUR brain sees compared between real world and VR world.
                          Quite an exciting info I would say.

                              Sandi_SLR I have IPD of 60 and majority of scenes shot with Canon have good scale, one exception is FuckPassVR, funny thing is i don't have that problem withVRHush, their other studio.

                              For scenes shot with K2Pro and other cameras (POVR, WankzVR, CzechVR), scale is always little to big, but i easily fix it with HereSphere, there is a setting called "Camera Stereo Alignment Right" default is 6.5, i almost always have to decrease it to around 5.7.

                              I have one question there is setting called "Horizontal Offset" in DeoVR, is it the same thing as "Camera Stereo Alignment Right" on HereSphere, because i have tried it and no matter what i do it doesn't fix the scale for me, it only makes me cross eyed, while the HereSphere's "Camera Stereo Alignment Right" works great?

                                Sandi_SLR I agree we are all different. You see a lot of people say that the 8K camera makes things too big but you don't see many people saying the other cameras make things too small. So even if we are all different it still seems like the other cameras are better for the majority of people.

                                    rerun119 Yea its because the average IPD of humans is 64mm, thats what most cameras have, like k2pro, but canon is on the lower side at 60mm.
                                    I am still amazed thinking that what canon lens showed us, in regards to scale, is how people with smaller IPD actually perceive the real world.