Is side imaging a must for finding eyes?

[Texcl2]

I work the shallows quite a bit at devils lake. I think this thread has convinced me I need SI, lol.

[2sac]

Originally Posted by kzoofisher

RJR said it well.

DI is useful. 2D is really useful, too. How useful each one is depends on the kind of water you fish and how you fish it.

I think SI is indispensable for finding structure and cover quickly on new water. This can cut the learning curve down to just a trip or two instead of many trips to get a good feel for a lake. Down looking sonar is really nice for going over those spots and getting added detail.

SI is great for searching areas you know and looking for fish or for setting up to the side of something your going to cast at. Especially in clear water.

DI (and 2D) are great in more stained water or at greater depths where you aren't going to spook fish.

DI (and 2D) give me a much better idea of how tall weeds are, how high a rock pile or hump is or how deep a hole is. Those are all things you see with SI but, you see the vertical dimension much better from above.

For the way I fish and the water I fish my priorities for quality are 1. SI 2. 2D 3. DI. Many of the newer units have high quality of all three. We'll see if getting all three is in my budget next time I'm shopping

Good post.

[Twins_dad]

I have asked myself that same question. My situation is a bit different. Our group is based out of NC, so our walleye fishing is usually an annual trip to Ontario for 6 days of fishing. Even though we are familiar with the lake, thanks to sonar, a lot of driving around, and GPS, it is always nice when someone in our group stumbles across a "new" spot....a rock pile....a hump, anything that might hold fish. I can see where SI would be useful to see 100 feet on either side of the boat to find that structure that we have not found with traditional sonar and down imaging. I can see using SI to find the structure, then down imaging to see if it holds fish. But, to your question....is SI necessary? Nope. But it is a nice tool to have. Check out some Tom Boley videos on YouTube. He has great info on how to use SI to find walleye.

[REW]

A person can do just fine with a lead weight and a string if you like.

Folks have used such a technique for hundreds of years before electronics and caught plenty of fish.

To each his own.

Take care

[Gary Korsgaden]

Well said

Originally Posted by kzoofisher

A must? No. A useful tool? Yes.

More useful imo if you like to cast at specific structure or jig it vertically. Less so if you have a spread of planer boards.

I keep an eye on the SI while I work my way around structure and it isn't unusual to see a pod laying off in a resting position. I work them specifically with some success.

I'm able to locate weeds and fish them from a known distance.

In fairly featureless lakes I can easily locate the exact position of those small points or turns on the main break that don't show up on depth charts. This saves me having a thousand waypoints outlining the edges of structures and the time it takes to motor over them with 2D laying down the waypoints.

Extremely useful on unfamiliar water for locating structure.

I've learned quite a bit about some structures even on familiar water. Finding the spot on the spot as masterchither said. Not by fishing it many times for many hours to learn that this 30' section is best but by seeing that there's a deeper patch of weeds or a bit of mud that runs up the gravel slope and that's where the fish are.

And I really enjoy seeing those things and tailoring my approach to them.

[Sh0ckwave]

I do want SI but I'm not rushing out to get it just yet. I feel like getting better at finding walleye without SI would then make finding them with SI even easier. I suck at finding them right now so I'm working on that.

[Colowallo]

I had never used Si or Di until this year. 0n Missouri River this past weekend with 2 foot chop, Si was completely worthless due to rolling and rocking drifting. Likewise, 2d was not as good under the conditions. Di was great in this circumstance as it gave a better and more consistent picture under the conditions.
Si was very beneficial without the wave action though we couldn't make out specific fish, it allowed us to see underwater stumps and trees that we knew the eyes were holding up against so we could get as close in as possible.
I have a lot to learn yet about Si but I think it has been a pretty good tool so far.

[thump55]

Being able to drive around, see a brushpile on SI, cursor over to hit, make a waypoint, hit the GOTO button and have my bowmount drive me to the pile and then spotlock on the pile is just crazy cool to me.

[FishManDan]

Twins_dad was down at lake Hartwell in SC and the down scan really showed fish loaded in the trees. Also some schools of big cats suspended. Side scan showed fish on the points.

[Texcl2]

I just got a unit with DI and used it for the first time on Saturday in my new boat. I spent half the day driving over my favorite spots looking at the structure that makes them good. I literally just stumbled across my spots over years fishing at Devils lake, it was really cool to see why the fish like these spots. I’m gonna get a better Garmin with SI this winter when everything goes on sale. If I had known I was going to buy this new boat I would have bought a unit with SI, it seemed like over kill to put a $1200 fish finder on a 14’ boat , lol.