Regrets?

[JT Bagwell]

I am just curious how many of you have purchased Side Imaging units only to realize that most of the time
you don't even know for sure what you are seeing on the screen?

I've seen tons of posts online where people are trying to figure out what it is that they are looking at and in many
cases it ends up being several people going back and forth and not agreeing on what they are looking at.

Do any of you wish now that you wouldn't have spent the extra cash on Side Imaging?

 

 

[Team9nine]

Never - one of the two best electronics upgrade I've ever made. I was a "late adopter" because I needed to be convinced, but now that I am, I would hate to be without.

-T9

[Robeng]

This may be interesting JT.  Though, I believe it is a learning curve like sonar on DI for most of us.  

Still, I would like to see a large cross section of answers.  Now, that I think of it, this probably belongs in Electronics.

Thanks

 

[bassguytom]

Regrets I've had a few but then again  definitely not my SI. It took a season to learn but now I am a hunter of fish. It takes a lot less time finding those productive rock piles also. 

[slonezp]

Nope.

[everythingthatswims]

Lol I'm still learning what I'm looking at on the black and white Lowrance X-4 Pro on my kayak that I've been using for 3 years. I've messed with some nice units on bass boats as well and it's incredibly complex stuff (not just the side scan), it really makes you appreciate what tournament anglers do when they just idle around for hours during practice. 

[Fish the Mitt]

Side imaging just always had a goofy presentation to me. My biggest problem with SI was re-visualizing the screen in a way that made sense to me - so I could understand what I was actually seeing. I found a super easy explanation once that made it 1000% better to understand. (I'll try to find it in the a.m).

[geo g]

The places in South Florida that I fish are either canals with constant depths or flats that are 3 or 4 feet deep and full of heavy weeds.  A SI unit would be a total waste of money for me.  If I was fishing deep reservoirs with points, old road, ledges, structures, and wood it might be worth it. 

[Fish the Mitt]

http://www.humminbird.com/Category/Technology/Side-Imaging/

That whole 'folding a piece of paper' statement made all the difference to me.

10 hours ago, SemperBass said:

Side imaging just always had a goofy presentation to me. My biggest problem with SI was re-visualizing the screen in a way that made sense to me - so I could understand what I was actually seeing. I found a super easy explanation once that made it 1000% better to understand. (I'll try to find it in the a.m).

 

[JT Bagwell]

11 minutes ago, SemperBass said:

http://www.humminbird.com/Category/Technology/Side-Imaging/

That whole 'folding a piece of paper' statement made all the difference to me.

 

I agree, that whole concept will help some people understand it better.

[Wayne P.]

10 hours ago, geo g said:

The places in South Florida that I fish are either canals with constant depths or flats that are 3 or 4 feet deep and full of heavy weeds.  A SI unit would be a total waste of money for me.  If I was fishing deep reservoirs with points, old road, ledges, structures, and wood it might be worth it. 

With Humminbird's Side Imaging you can see left and right as long as the transducer is not buried in the bottom. It won't see through heavy weeds, but open water-- no problem. This is 200' of coverage in less than 4'.. There are shoreline weeds on the right side and a bass at the lower left side:

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff167/WayneP_photos/Sonar%20Shots/100shallow_zps5d216a05.jpg[/IMG]

 

 

 

[JT Bagwell]

42 minutes ago, Wayne P. said:

With Humminbird's Side Imaging you can see left and right as long as the transducer is not buried in the bottom. It won't see through heavy weeds, but open water-- no problem. This is 200' of coverage in less than 4'.. There are shoreline weeds on the right side and a bass at the lower left side:

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff167/WayneP_photos/Sonar%20Shots/100shallow_zps5d216a05.jpg[/IMG]

 

 

 

Good Stuff Wayne

[desmobob]

I don't regret buying an SI unit for even an instant.  I still think it's one of the best pieces of fishing gear I've purchased in a long time!  I don't know if I could stand not having one from now on... 

Tight lines,

Bob

[OperationEagle]

Good topic. Suspect only two camps...yes love it ...or nope no idea what I am seeing.

I love technology and am looking forward to learning what si has to offer this season.

Always seems a work in progress for me.  Learned that DI is really only useful for me if split screened with sonar.  Now I suspect and my goal is to use it more with a helix 10 vs a 4 in screen.

In a similar fashion I suspect it takes time to learn the best hardware and settings to maximize si's potential.  

That being said, I'm always looking at the screen shots shared on forums and am only able to identify obvious objects like a bridge or a large tree.  I doubt if I will ever be able to see the small specks posters are identifying as a fish while on the water and take real action on the information....and maybe that's not the point anyways...as its a tool to find fishy areas not to find fish to hunt down?  

Nonetheless I appreciate the screenshots so I can maximize my learning off the water.  

One other worry I have is the limited usefulness of si once weeds start to grow.  If this renders si far less useful, then I assume then it is still useful for identifying weed lines?

 

 

[Wayne P.]

1 hour ago, OperationEagle said:

Good topic. Suspect only two camps...yes love it ...or nope no idea what I am seeing.

I love technology and am looking forward to learning what si has to offer this season.

Always seems a work in progress for me.  Learned that DI is really only useful for me if split screened with sonar.  Now I suspect and my goal is to use it more with a helix 10 vs a 4 in screen.

In a similar fashion I suspect it takes time to learn the best hardware and settings to maximize si's potential.  

That being said, I'm always looking at the screen shots shared on forums and am only able to identify obvious objects like a bridge or a large tree.  I doubt if I will ever be able to see the small specks posters are identifying as a fish while on the water and take real action on the information....and maybe that's not the point anyways...as its a tool to find fishy areas not to find fish to hunt down?  

Nonetheless I appreciate the screenshots so I can maximize my learning off the water.  

One other worry I have is the limited usefulness of si once weeds start to grow.  If this renders si far less useful, then I assume then it is still useful for identifying weed lines?

 

 

I use Side Imaging to find fish and then I try to catch them. Did you see the bass in the image in the 200' post above?

The main thing is how to set the SI Range. Use a longer range for general searching of bottom feature, and then rescan with a shorter range setting to get more detail and fish.

 

 

[OperationEagle]

Yes I saw it but also wondered how sure I would be on the water that its a fish and not some other object or surface irregularity.  Perhaps with time I will get there.

Also I have been thinking about my set up.  I have DI at the bow and SI only on the transom (SI FF unit on console).  Interestingly I can see myself at times controlling the electric steer from my remote while I remain at the console scouting with SI.  When I find a fishy area then spot lock the TM and fish the area.

We'll see how easy it is...

[Jeff H]

My regret is I don't have it yet.  I will soon though.