First I would like to define reality and perception, so we don't run into issues later on.
Reality: the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them.
Perception: the way in which something is regarded, understood, or interpreted.
The argument that perception of reality=actual reality is logically incorrect. For perception of reality to equal actual reality, there would have to be many realities, as every person has a different perception. But from the definition of reality, we must conclude that there can only be one reality, as there can only be one state in which things exist. It's not possible for you to be bald and have 3-meter-long hair at the same time. That would defy logic, as something cannot be two absolutely different things at the same time. That's the first issue with the idea that there are many realities.
A second issue is with evidence for your claim. For a hypothesis be proven right/wrong, there must be three things:
Your claim, which is what you're trying to prove.
Your expectation, which is evidence that either supports or disproves your claim.
Your conclusion, in which you conclude if your claim was right or wrong.
By using this, you can determine if proving your claim is possible. If your claim is that rats can fly, your expectation would be to find a flying rat. But when you don't find any flying rats, you conclude that they can't fly. Without an expectation there can't be a conclusion.
You see the issue with your claim? You cannot pass from the expectation to the conclusion, because there is nothing to expect. There is no expectation, and therefore there cannot be any evidence for that perception=reality. To find the truth, you make a hypothesis and then see if events support it. How would anything support your hypothesis?