"Augenweide" isn't one of the most well-known German compound words, but it's certainly one of the most poetic. The noun is a combination of "Augen" (eyes) and "Weide" (pasture, or field), and while the translation "eye candy" or "a feast for the eyes" will satisfy most any English teacher, they're not complete equivalents.
All three terms have in common that they try to describe the beauty of a person or a thing by making a somewhat synesthetic comparison to the joy of eating. Yet the differences lie in the object that is eaten: "Eye candy" is a sugar rush that, while delivering great pleasure for a moment, won't make you less hungry. And even if it does, it will probably make you sick - that doesn't seem like a nice compliment at second glance. "A feast for the eyes" on the other hand will not just be a delight, it will certainly also satisfy your (aesthetic) hunger for some time.
An Augenweide, a "pasture for the eyes", obviously lacks the association with something that tastes good. But is that necessary? The idea of satisfying a hunger for aesthetic pleasure is implicit in the analogy of "eating with your eyes" alone. It is a strong image, and adding a quantification for the taste seems superfluous. When you explicitly clarify that it (also) tastes good, the analogy gets somewhat bloated. "Augenweide" modestly lacks this quantification. However, compared to the English words, "Augenweide" has a different quality: It is lasting. It won't just satisfy the hunger for beauty once - you can return to it anytime, and what's eaten off one day will grow back overnight.