Read more carefully please. At 50% panel in the main view area it could be equal to the 4k (though looked much better imho in the v2). At 40% it would have less in the main viewing area. Not to be considered peripheral view area.
Your claim the lense only "sees" 50% of the screen would decrease the FoV to 1 4k panel as the aspect ratio per eye at half of the panel horizontally would be 8:9(just like the 4k).
Now at 50% main view 1980*2160 peripheral 1092*2160 (using 80% overal screen utilization) per eye.
Now at 40%(50% of 80%) main area 1536*2160 peripheral area would equal 1536*2160.
The First would be equal to the 4k in theory. The 2nd scenario would be less and not likely look that good.
But your right the backer meet will make things clear & be based on facts instead of speculations that may have no foundation on facts on either side.
If census say it's bad then it's not equal to the v2 I experienced. But I do have an actual baseline to guage upon with what I have read by personal experience. Though I haven't personally tried the m1 & no one generally speaking has experienced the m2(save maybe 1; but is quite honorable imo & will not reveal anything). How about yourself; any hands on experience with the 8k?