Interviewee: Peng Huajun, Founder of Shenzhen NED Optics Co., Ltd., Ph.D. in Display Technology from the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST)
Insights
In most of their daily lives, people are constantly facing a screen, whether it be a smartphone, a computer, or other smart devices. Given this reality, the idea arose years ago to simply “enlarge” the screen and turn it into a direct extension of the “real” world — the fundamental concept behind the early wave of VR (Virtual Reality) enthusiasm. However, the process of “enlarging” is not as simple as it might seem.
Later, as the VR boom subsided, a number of related companies failed. Nevertheless, the impact of the VR concept persisted, and the pursuit of an “immersive” experience did not diminish. More recently, the term “metaverse” has surfaced frequently. According to Peng Huajun, founder of Shenzhen NED Optics Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “NED Optics”), whether it’s VR or the metaverse, it’s hard to sustain if you’re just following the trend without truly understanding the technology.
Peng came to HKUST in 1999 to pursue his Ph.D. in display technology. After graduation, he worked in Hong Kong for a while, then moved to Foshan to assist his advisor with projects — all related to display technology. Eventually, he ventured into entrepreneurship in the display technology field.
NED Optics was established in 2015 as Peng’s third entrepreneurial venture, and it has continued to this day, navigating through the industry’s peaks and troughs. NED Optics’ product is a high-definition head-mounted display, which the company describes as a “head-mounted cinema,” emphasizing that it is “non-VR.”
Typical VR products are characterized by a large field of view (FOV) and stereoscopic presentation to create an “immersive” experience. However, in optical display technology, constrained by the law of “etendue conservation,” achieving a compact size, a large FOV, and high resolution simultaneously is impossible. VR products prioritize portability and a large FOV, making high resolution difficult to achieve due to physical limitations.
As it turns out, clarity is crucial. Prolonged exposure to unclear images can cause discomfort and dizziness. Peng noted that a balance must be struck: choosing a relatively smaller FOV, sacrificing some immersion, and using ultra-high-definition microdisplays and designing high-quality optical systems to ensure clarity — this is the technological path for high-definition head-mounted displays.
Defining the general technological route involves trade-offs, but enhancing clarity involves more complex optical technology. At university, Peng focused on display screens — converting electricity into light, which falls under optoelectronics. However, projecting light at a close range to the human eye (known as “near-eye display”) involves optics, a field many display manufacturers do not consider.
Unlike the fast-paced iterations of display technology, optics requires a longer period of maturation. The world’s top optical companies, many of which have been around for over a century, hail from countries like Germany and Japan, including Zeiss, Leica, Nikon, and Olympus. Many of NED Optics’ core R&D members have previously worked at Olympus.
Having witnessed multiple industry cycles, Peng adopts a more cautious approach to product strategy. “Slow down, focus on fundamentals” is his guiding principle. From a user perspective, it’s essential to ask, “Would I use this product myself?” This should be the starting point for any development.
From basic research to end products, it’s a long journey, but NED Optics has successfully navigated it. In the highly competitive display market, NED Optics carved out a niche and built its technological moat. However, beyond technology, maintaining this market segment comes with many challenges. “Every day feels like walking on a tightrope, treading carefully,” Peng said.
In 2023, NED Optics completed its B+ round of financing. When asked if the company had emerged from the “valley of death” of startups, Peng replied that the term “valley of death” is a concept coined by “people not swimming in the water,” suggesting that after passing this stage, the company’s future would be smooth sailing. However, even listed companies still face numerous challenges; there is no such thing as a one-time solution.
In 2020, NED Optics moved into the Blue Bay Incubator, an incubator affiliated with the Shenzhen-Hong Kong Collaborative Innovation Institute at HKUST. The company has since relocated to the Changfu Jinzhao Building in the Shenzhen-Hong Kong Innovation Cooperation Zone in Futian District, where Peng was interviewed by the Greater Bay Area Technology Review.

Conversation with Peng Huajun: Learning to Make Trade-offs
Q: Did you choose to start your business in Shenzhen because of the booming VR industry at the time?
Peng Huajun: I chose the head-mounted display as my entrepreneurial direction not because it was trendy at the time, but because, from the perspective of display technology, this direction, as a new form of display, has characteristics and functions that traditional displays do not possess, and I believed it had great potential. My background is in display technology.
In 1999, I joined the Display Technology Research Center at HKUST and was exposed to various displays. Later, the project in Foshan was also display-related, so I have a deep understanding of displays, including their underlying technology, materials, devices, systems, electronics, drive, image processing, and even marketing.
Our company’s product is “near-eye display.” Now, people understand what near-eye display means; it’s a term that has even appeared in policy documents. But in the early days, people didn’t understand near-eye displays and used terms like “VR” and “AR” as substitutes, especially “VR.”
Q: Can you explain what near-eye display is and how it differs from traditional screen displays?
Peng Huajun: Our company is called “NED Optics,” where NED stands for Near Eye Display. From the outset, the company has focused on creating near-eye display products. The principle of near-eye display is actually quite simple: think of it as looking at a screen through a magnifying glass.
Near-eye displays are worn on the head, so they can’t be too bulky, and the screen needs to be relatively small. Previously, screens tended to get bigger; for example, some pre-2013 smartphones had large screens but low resolutions, which would not work for near-eye displays.
In 2013, Google Glass used silicon-based liquid crystal technology combined with some optical technology, allowing it to remain relatively compact. At the time, people did not refer to it as a near-eye display but rather as “retinal projection,” a term that was more of a marketing ploy.
In reality, all kinds of AR and VR headsets that have emerged over the years are essentially “retinal projection.” Google Glass was simply silicon-based LCD with optical technology using some optical prisms to project an enlarged virtual image directly into the human eye — a form of near-eye display. Many subsequent VR headsets were just LCD screens with two magnifying glasses, like Facebook’s Oculus. So, near-eye display generally involves display screens and optical technology.
However, for the end user, regardless of the display technology used, it must be comfortable to view — clear and not tiring to the eyes. Clarity is straightforward to define: no noticeable pixelation or mosaic effect, and sufficient contrast, color, gradation, and response speed for a uniform picture.
Traditional displays like phone screens are rectangular, with uniform clarity across the entire screen. In contrast, near-eye displays often do not have uniform clarity between the center and the edges, which involves optical issues. For example, in photography, the image center is typically sharper than the edges. Therefore, quality optics are essential for near-eye displays.
Previously, manufacturing flat panel displays and imaging optics were two separate fields. My background is in screens, with little exposure to imaging optics, which is more concerned with cameras, lenses, magnifying glasses, telescopes, and microscopes and rarely intersects with display screens. But for near-eye displays, these two must come together.
Near-eye displays magnify the screen display using optical technology. This means that a very small screen can display a large image, resolving the traditional display dilemma of portability versus screen size — a small phone screen is portable, while a large TV screen is not. If you want both a large display and portability, you need new display formats and technologies. The principle is simple, but no one did it before because the supply chain didn’t support it. For instance, the screen must be small but also clear enough when magnified, requiring extremely high resolution. A traditional phone screen may appear clear, but under magnification, many pixels are still visible, making it unsuitable for near-eye displays.
So, why was it possible in 2014? Because the supply chain matured enough that these screens, once used only for military purposes, became commercially available. Another critical factor was that tech giants Google and Facebook entered the head-mounted near-eye display market. Regardless of how well they did, they educated the market and introduced the concept: wearing a device on your head can create a different visual experience.
Given this backdrop, I felt the opportunity had come. When starting the company, I first had to consider leveraging my expertise in display technology. Second, I needed to determine the product’s value — a “portable large screen.” Another value lies in freeing up hands when the device is worn on the head, such as in night-vision goggles for soldiers that require near-eye display.
Our journey so far has involved both chance and inevitability. There were very few companies with a formal background in near-eye display in China at the time. One such company came from Beijing Institute of Technology, which shared some of our principles and is also developing well now.
Q: With the recent hype around the metaverse, how can we learn from the lessons of VR products?
Peng Huajun: Many VR companies failed because they did not consider the essence of display technology. As mentioned, display technology must be easy on the eyes. Choosing the right screen and optical technology is crucial given the numerous factors related to clarity. If you do not understand the technology, the risk of making the wrong choice is high, and following the trend does not guarantee success. Even Facebook didn’t necessarily get it right.
The same goes for the “metaverse” — you can’t blindly follow trends. You need to understand the logic behind it, recognize your advantages, and know what you’re aiming to accomplish. From the beginning, we chose not to make VR products. At the time, most VR products were simply large smartphone screens with two magnifying glasses. The image seemed large and “immersive,” creating a “virtual reality” feel. However, the picture quality was poor, the clarity was low, and the experience was unpleasant, often causing dizziness and eye strain. This was because it was impossible to make the screens very detailed, and the optical technology wasn’t well developed.
So, our initial positioning was to make products that provide visual comfort. Our challenge lies in how to design the optics because we do not manufacture screens ourselves; instead, we source suitable screens from the global supply chain. Our core focus is on optical and overall design.
If we, like other VR companies, use an LCD screen, could we achieve a better effect? I found that it was not possible due to physical limitations; I could not make it compact, large-screened, and high-definition simultaneously. So I considered: what should be sacrificed?
When clarity, large screen size, and portability cannot all be achieved simultaneously, trade-offs must be made. Most VR companies chose to sacrifice clarity in favor of a larger screen. In contrast, we opted to sacrifice some of the “immersion” but ensure clarity. As a result, our screen and optical technology paths diverged from those of the VR companies. By sticking to our path and creating differentiation, we’ve been able to get where we are today.
Empathy Matters
Q: Your company’s display uses Sony’s Micro-OLED, and the optical lenses are self-designed. Could you share some thoughts on your design approach?
Peng Huajun: For high-definition head-mounted displays, the image must be very delicate, so only microdisplays like Micro-OLED are suitable. When the company was founded, only a few global manufacturers, apart from Sony, could supply Micro-OLED. Now, a few Chinese companies, such as SeeYA in Hefei and BOE, have started offering Micro-OLED, and we are exploring partnerships with some of them.
Based on Micro-OLED screens, we develop optics and create end products. Our product positioning is not about “VR immersion” but primarily about viewing experiences, as we focus on high-definition head-mounted displays. Many users might be unfamiliar with head-mounted displays since they have not experienced them, but they may have tried VR and found the experience lacking.
To help users quickly understand and form an impression, we use the term “head-mounted cinema” in our marketing: wearing this device feels like watching a movie in a cinema. In fact, our product can offer cinema-quality experiences and even outperform cinemas, particularly when watching 3D content.
Based on this, we have also introduced some unique designs. For example, there are many people with myopia; it would be uncomfortable to wear both glasses and a head-mounted display. So we added diopter adjustment functionality, which we achieved through optical design.
We considered these features from the very beginning when defining the product. Our goal was to provide an excellent experience for end users, including both visual and wearing comfort. Since all head-mounted displays are worn on the head, making them comfortable is a challenge. This involves ergonomics — not only should the weight be as light as possible, but the head’s pressure distribution should be even to allow for prolonged wear. We’ve considered these aspects for each product generation.
Q: Did any experiences or lessons from your first two ventures influence this thinking?
Peng Huajun: There’s some connection, but this way of thinking isn’t just from personal experience or lessons; it’s something many have heard before, like in books that say, “Everyone can be a product manager.” When you create something, its value is not defined by you but by whether users accept it.
So, when designing, you must put yourself in the user’s shoes and think more from their perspective. While this mindset may relate to my early entrepreneurial experiences, I think it’s more about my natural ability to empathize: Who is this product for? Which people or industries will it help? Then you need to think carefully: Why would what I’m creating help them? There must be some specific needs or pain points.
For a head-mounted display, you need to consider: Would you use it yourself? Would your family, including elderly parents and young children, accept it? Answering these questions gives you a clearer idea of the kind of product you should create. When we developed our product, we first had internal trials before deciding when to launch it. However, as the first product of a startup, there were still many uncertainties.
Thanks to previous entrepreneurial experiences, we’ve become more focused and cautious about controlling the pace when creating products. We don’t rush into things or follow trends just to attract attention with a new release every day. We focus on mastering the fundamentals and building a solid foundation. The product we’re creating is highly innovative; you may think it’s nothing special, but no one did it before, or no one did it well.
Take the example of myopia adjustment. It’s not hard to add this feature, but to make it accurate is extremely difficult. The adjustment must be precise, and image quality must remain stable after adjustment. We offer a 0-800 degree adjustment range, with separate adjustments for each eye. The structure used for adjustment must not occupy too much space and must be reliable and stable over the long term. All these require meticulous attention to detail and solving problems one by one.
Many challenges remain. For example, achieving a lightweight product may compromise durability, making it prone to breakage. This calls for a balanced approach — in simple terms, “wanting both, plus more.” These considerations test one’s resolve, as no one has succeeded before; there are only numerous lessons from failures. You can learn from them, but that doesn’t guarantee success.
If someone had succeeded before, everyone would just copy, like in Huaqiangbei, Shenzhen. Apple’s success set the industry standard, giving Huaqiangbei something to emulate. Without a standard, you have to think about what it should be. I believe the standard should be the user’s experience and needs — it’s that simple.
Shenzhen-Hong Kong Collaboration: Changes Over a Decade
Q: How did your doctoral studies at HKUST inspire you, and how have platforms like Lok Ma Chau Loop and HKUST supported your entrepreneurial journey?
Peng Huajun: My understanding of the industry and technology is closely related to the technical foundation I built during my doctoral studies. I was also fortunate to have been engaged in this research since my Ph.D. This background helps me avoid blindly following trends. HKUST also emphasizes independent thinking. Its academic level is world-class, and we often don’t blindly trust so-called authorities.
My lab, the Display Research Center, is now the National Key Laboratory for Advanced Optoelectronic Displays, positioning us at the forefront of the field. HKUST emphasizes applying learning in practical scenarios, particularly in engineering disciplines where hands-on skills are crucial. Whether as an undergraduate or a graduate student, you must produce tangible results. Many professors, including my supervisor, were involved in the industry.
In recent years, the entrepreneurial atmosphere in Hong Kong has become much stronger. It wasn’t like this before. Hong Kong, a business-oriented city, was primarily trade-focused. It values education, particularly higher education, and has nurtured many talented individuals.
However, due to its small size and lack of manufacturing, Hong Kong has relied on the service sector. For those of us in engineering, it’s challenging to start a business locally in Hong Kong; the mainland is more conducive to entrepreneurship. Hence, many have chosen to start businesses on the mainland, DJI being a prime example. The situation has improved recently, as Hong Kong has recognized its weaknesses in technological innovation and commercialization, and now provides substantial support to enterprises.
In terms of university entrepreneurship, the mechanisms differ between the two regions. Mainland schools encourage entrepreneurship, while Hong Kong has historically not opposed it. HKUST was among the earliest to support entrepreneurship; even when I was studying there, the university supported students and teachers in starting businesses. In recent years, the government has been supporting innovation and technology, including initiatives in areas like Lok Ma Chau Loop, which attract many Hong Kong university students.
The Lok Ma Chau Loop area has a conducive environment, housing cutting-edge research institutions from Shenzhen and Hong Kong, which benefits our brand development. HKUST’s incubator provides us with office space and helps connect us with various resources.
During the entrepreneurial process, collaborating with external resources and engaging with other companies and industries is essential. Alumni networks often facilitate this interaction. At HKUST, the platform brings together alumni enterprises, and tech innovation companies often rely on collaboration with universities. The incubator also connects you with the government and investors, helping in various ways.
Q: Having commuted between Shenzhen and Hong Kong for over a decade, what changes have you observed in Shenzhen-Hong Kong cooperation?
Peng Huajun: Shenzhen-Hong Kong cooperation began over a decade ago. I previously worked in Hong Kong, and at that time, there was collaboration between Shenzhen and Hong Kong, as well as between Hong Kong and other regions like Shanghai and Shandong. However, it was mostly Hong Kong institutions expanding their business in the mainland, unlike today’s government and national-level initiatives to promote cooperation.
At the individual level, exchanges and collaborations between Hong Kong enterprises, research institutions, or individuals and Shenzhen are much more frequent today. Ten years ago, it was rare for Hong Kong residents to come to the mainland to start businesses. I was one of the earlier ones, with relatively more from HKUST.
Now, many people are proactively coming over, and there are many alumni from our university in Shenzhen. However, a strong entrepreneurial atmosphere has yet to be formed. I went to Hong Kong from the mainland relatively early, but the number of Hong Kong-born individuals coming to the mainland to start businesses is still relatively low. Many members of the Hong Kong alumni community in Shenzhen are also from the mainland.
More local Hong Kong people are coming to Shenzhen than before, but it hasn’t reached a critical mass. I believe the integration of the Greater Bay Area is inevitable. Now, there are more interactions, and there are more opportunities in the mainland, so people are more willing to come over. At the same time, Hong Kong encourages mainlanders to visit.
At the government level, there were some Guangdong-Hong Kong and Shenzhen-Hong Kong tech projects before, where everyone would apply, and each side would do its own thing. Individually, those who couldn’t find work in Hong Kong would look for jobs in the mainland. Today, there is more integration and convergence at the government, corporate, and individual levels.
Technological Innovation: Striving for Excellence and Inclusivity
Q: As a tech entrepreneur, what kind of support do you hope to receive from the government?
Peng Huajun: I’ve been contemplating whether the government could provide some form of “safety net.” Support policies for tech innovation include encouragement, rewards, and a safety net. Currently, the encouragement aspect is well done, the rewards could be further explored, and the safety net is more challenging, but I think it’s necessary.
Entrepreneurship is high-risk, and tech entrepreneurship carries even higher risks. Most entrepreneurs lack risk awareness. If they reach a point where there’s no way back, it’s a serious problem. We often see encouragement and rewards but not the “bodies left along the way.”
Don’t assume that professors won’t become one of those “bodies” or that Ph.D. holders won’t go bankrupt. Entrepreneurship carries that risk. If one reaches that point, it’s unfortunate. Could a portion of the incentives and rewards be set aside to provide a bit of a safety net? This might give those who fail a chance to start over and create new value, which is an unavoidable issue.
Overseas, entrepreneurs, such as those in Silicon Valley, benefit from safety net mechanisms. Even if they fail, they have opportunities and social support. In China, there’s no such mechanism yet. Encouraging entrepreneurship looks glamorous, but what about the many failures? On the one hand, entrepreneurs need to learn to control risk; on the other hand, there should be some safety net, although it shouldn’t be unconditional.
Every entrepreneur faces the risk of failure. Saying, “We encouraged you to start a business, but if you mess up, it’s your bad luck,” is not fair. This is a significant social issue, and I’m just offering some personal reflections.
Entrepreneurship is a dynamic process, creating a funnel mechanism. The market does eliminate people, and I acknowledge that. However, our current market mechanism is imperfect, and society’s acceptance and handling of entrepreneurial failure are also lacking. Should the government have a corresponding mechanism to address this? It’s worth considering.
A safety net doesn’t mean preventing failure; that’s impossible since the market inherently promotes survival of the fittest. But just because someone is eliminated doesn’t mean their work is worthless. Many factors contribute to entrepreneurial failure. Through mechanisms like relief and supplementation, entrepreneurs might have a chance to rise again.
If all we do is encourage and reward, pouring money in without mechanisms to cope with failure leads to wasted social resources. Could part of the funds be reserved for a safety net? Of course, this requires new mechanisms, including evaluation mechanisms.
Q: Specifically for the high-definition head-mounted display sector, what else can the government do to promote this industry?
Peng Huajun: The government is already doing some things. The Electronics Division of the Shenzhen Bureau of Industry and Information Technology invited me to share my views on the industry and indicated that relevant industrial policies and special funds would be provided for support. Currently, Shenzhen has relatively fewer policies related to head-mounted displays compared to other regions in China.
I think we could specifically highlight high-definition head-mounted displays, especially emphasizing “high-definition.” Just as ultra-high-definition video is being pursued, talking about traditional displays is meaningless. Based on high-definition near-eye displays, many applications can be formed — upstream supply chains, downstream applications, and midstream software, hardware, and finished products. These areas can have corresponding guiding policies, such as launching research topics to guide social resources, which we would certainly participate in.
Apart from entertainment, our products are also used in medicine, training, and control scenarios, such as surgical robots and vision health. If the government recognizes its social value, it could launch guiding research projects for everyone to participate in. After completion, these could be converted into use in hospitals or taken up by medical device companies.
In vision health, we can assist people with low vision, such as those with glaucoma or macular degeneration, who may even be considered disabled. Our technology can help improve their vision, which has enormous social significance. Are there corresponding projects? We can provide hardware conversion, while professional medical institutions provide clinical guidance.
In remote control, we can work with colleagues in robotics and communications to find solutions. For example, in disaster relief, remote operation of machinery via virtual reality could allow rescuers to avoid risking their lives. This is something new head-mounted displays can achieve that traditional displays cannot.
However, policymakers deal with many things, and what we do is relatively new. We can make suggestions, but the government will decide on specific policies and their strength. I think it’s worth investing in, and we will pursue it regardless of policy support.
Currently, the policy details are somewhat lacking and tend to be too broad. This has its advantages — everyone can participate; however, the downside is that broad policies may set lower standards, making it harder for high-standard companies that produce quality products to stand out in competition. I believe that rather than spreading resources thinly, the government’s guiding policies should aim for excellence, even if on a smaller scale.
Shenzhen is a hub for optoelectronics and displays, home to companies like TCL, KONKA, Skyworth, and many LED companies. However, few have made significant progress in high-definition head-mounted displays. Huawei has entered this space, and although their product isn’t ideal yet, it shows they’re focused on this direction and may push the government to pay attention to this field.
The government takes a broad view when setting policies, which is understandable. But when further refining the selection, choices should be made carefully, and standards must be high. It shouldn’t be about tailoring support to a few large-scale companies, but rather about fostering true innovation.

Biography of Peng Huajun
Peng Huajun is the Chairman and CEO of Shenzhen NED Optics Co., Ltd., a company he founded in 2015 to focus on head-mounted displays for AR, VR, and MR applications. Peng holds a Ph.D. from the Center for Display Research (CDR) at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST), where he graduated in 2005. During his doctoral studies, he specialized in silicon-based liquid crystal devices, AMOLED materials and devices, TFT devices, and display optics.
Peng began his academic journey in electronics, graduating with a bachelor’s degree from Nankai University. He first encountered the field of optics during his master’s studies, and in 1999, he commenced his Ph.D. at HKUST, where he truly immersed himself in optical display technology, exploring various types of display technologies. Upon completing his Ph.D., Peng worked in Hong Kong on color management and display systems.
In 2009, an opportunity led him to return to mainland China as a core member of a project focused on the commercialization of display technology.
For over a decade, Dr. Peng has been engaged in cutting-edge research and development in the information display field, covering areas such as TV image color management, AMOLED production, micro-display chip design and manufacturing, and near-eye display optics for projection and AR/VR applications.
Dr. Peng has authored 20 papers published in international journals and applied for nearly 50 Chinese and U.S. invention patents. Of these, 11 U.S. patents and 21 Chinese invention patents have been granted.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the original authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of MiniMicroLED Insights . While we strive to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the information provided, the content on this website may include translations, re-edited versions of second-hand information, or information derived from unverifiable sources. MiniMicroLED Insights makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, regarding the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of such content. The information in this article is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice. Any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk. To the fullest extent permitted by law, MiniMicroLED Insights disclaims all liability for any direct, indirect, incidental, consequential, or punitive damages arising out of your use of, or reliance on, the information contained in this article.
Copyright Notice: This article may include translated and re-edited content derived from various online sources, including websites and social media platforms. While we strive to credit the original authors and sources to the best of our ability, we may not always be able to verify the original source of the content. All rights to the original content remain with the original author or source publication. Where applicable, this content is reproduced for educational and informational purposes under the fair use doctrine. If you believe any content on this site infringes upon your intellectual property rights, or if you are the copyright owner and believe we have not credited you correctly, please contact us at minimicroled.business@gmail.com. We will investigate and take corrective action, including removing or properly crediting the content if necessary.
Content sourced and adapted by MiniMicroLED Insights (Doris).