Roy, do you mean cameras further apart, or smaller mm lens for a wider shot?
I like the opinion. Was hoping for a way to test it. I guess it comes down to the goggles right?
OK, verbose mode (sorry).
Since the cataract surgery, I've switched to more protective eyewear when riding the motorcycle. These goggle infringe on my peripheral vision somewhat. So I find that instead of shifting my eyes to the left or right, I have to turn my head when making turns. With FPV, we are restricted to an even narrower field of view. I don't think that using a shorter focal length lens will do the trick because although you increase the field of view, it also distorts the image. Which can actually make flying accuracy more difficult.
What would be more ideal, would be a camera setup that would provide a semi-panoramic view, undistorted, that we could scan with eye movements. Less ideal, but perhaps workable would be head-tracking, which sort of mimics what I have to do now while riding my motorcycle.
The most ideal would be a method of mimicking natural vision. Wide field of vision, undistorted, peripheral vision. Of course there is nothing out there right now that will do that. So of the technologies that do exist right now, I would guess that head-tracking (if responsive enough) would increase flying accuracy more than depth of field (stereo vision).
I am hoping that with the HD technology coming to FatSharks, that they don't simply increase the resolution while maintaining a 4:3 aspect ratio. If they went to a 16:9 aspect ratio, we might have something that provides a wider field of view that will actually enhance our flying ability.