DI vs 2D sonar

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ibmack

how do you know if those are fish for catching or just bait fish?

---

The image is stretched as I was sitting still. I had an idea what they were so I threw out the marker and backed off and caught a bunch of crappie. I think a lot of us as we get used to the views can give a fair guess as to the kind of fish. They're obviously schooling fish but the only real way to know is to catch them and see. I am very fortunate to live close to a TWRA lake that has thousands of crappie in it along with catfish...bluegill, hybrids and largemouth. I go to that lake just to get experience in trying to tell what kind of fish I am seeing. Catfish give off a somewhat unique signature as do crappie. Bluegill will just be small specs on the di.

Regards

2D sonar is better for seeing fish especially at speed.

Di is better for seeing structure.

If moving a lil faster, you might not even see fish on Di or they will be a tiny dot. The pics above the boat is moving slow (drifting) so the Di images are stretched a bit

I use both togeter in a split screen. Mainly look at the 2d and use to Di to see if that blob is fish or brush.

http://i453.photobucket.com/albums/q...ps93fdxeja.png

Some Crappie and smaller fish
http://i453.photobucket.com/albums/q...psza1ycg29.png

Crappie with a big fish next to a log.
http://i453.photobucket.com/albums/q...psdrggthfi.png

Nice school of Crappie
http://i453.photobucket.com/albums/q...ps2vfqrfrr.png

For a few dollars more you can have 2d, Down or Side image and not be upgrading later. I would even go with a smaller screen if need be. With the smaller screen you can reduce the distance out to the sides to improve the image or use only out one side. Yes bigger is better just go with the best Side image you can afford. I put the HB down image on my trolling motor and wish I had spent the extra buck for Side image.

I have a lowrance hds7 gen 2 touch. it has it all, but I am new to the technology and haven't learned to read the graphs yet.

thanks for all the input and pictures. have been out of pocket and not fished again yet, but will post pictures for more input soon.

paul

Both. They made them for the unit for a reason. Each has it's own merits. Together they are formidable at finding structure and fish. I always refer to the DI and then when I see structure I watch my 2D for arches. Simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rnvinc

Post some of your 2d images and we will help you understand ...

Rickie

---

This is what I have so far.

Paul

I don't know about you, ibmack ... but, if it was me, I'd put the SI/DI on blue palette and run the DI on split screen and leave the 2d turned off. :Doh:

That 2d overlay just seems to gob up the DI screen to the point of chaos & confusion.

Just sayin :twocents

... cp :kewl

actually, that is kind of what I am leaning toward unless somebody really has some good reasons to do otherwise. one of my biggest concerns is to learn how to fine tune so both the SI and the DI are crisper. any suggestions are certainly welcome.

I agree with Pappy ...turn off the 2d overlay and run 2d in a separate panel ...

Then you can compare targets in each sonar format ... 2d - DI - SI ...

When a target enters the right edge of the 2d or the DI image ...that same target should enter the top of the SI image ...

Lots of jumbled echo masses on the 2d or DI image can be masses of fish, baitballs, or brush ... This is where the SI image should help distinguish what the 2d and DI are showing ...

Anytime you see a target that looks like an individual smear ... It's a target that happened to get "pinged" multiple times ...either by the boat and the target not moving ... Or by the target moving with the boat ...

Either way that target was in the beam long enough to get "pinged" multiple times ...

Rickie

thanks all. I hope to go out tomorrow and am going to set up a SI/ DI blue and run that and ditch the 2D sonar and see what I find.