which shows more information;2d sonar or di…..bottom hardness,fish,structure,thurmacline,ect.

what im trying to say is that the pictures were taken by an expert,yet they are not showing all the detail.im am far from being an expert.i think that i would miss to much structure with this unit, useing di by its self.i would not trust what i was seeing on it.

yes i no what you are saying about the two different frequencys.i dont no how to copy the above pictures,but if you will look at them you will see that the structure in 800 is less visuable. to me they are for the most part pritty mutch useless,because they do not show all of the structure that is there.seeing the above pictures i would not feel comfortable useing the di by its self without 2d.the 800 is not showing all the structure in shallow or the deep water

2d pictures show bottom depht change while di pictures show a const.dept ??????

why does fhe 800hz seem to show less detail

heres another.they look a lot better on my computer.there a little small when i post

heres a picture using the new humviewer software

just a few picturers

heres some pictures from a 997 fr.455 amber2 factory defaults.pictures taken on 1-13-10.had to convert from png to jpeg to upload to this site. the program that i used left water spot because i didnt want to buy the program.no big deal