Looking for advice on which one I should buy. Only purpose would be for ice fishing to locate bottom hugging walleye and perch. I’ve done a ton of research and just can’t decide. I like the idea of mega being able to make maps and I think it is better at finding bottom hugging fish. I just don’t know if the price difference is worth it. Thanks for any advice.
Panoptix vs 360 or livescope vs 360?
Making a map through the ice seems daunting and pointless to me.
Your not going to see fish tight to bottom at distance with any of these new technologies ( mega live, livescope, active target). Unless it’s shallow water and your in perspective mode.
Garmin is easier to auto chart maps no need for a zero line card like you need for the bird. This is open water not sure how you map for ice fishing.
I have livescope but I think 360 may be better for your application. 360 is great on the ice.
Searching v seeing. My vexilar FL8 can “see” fish belly to the bottom.
The issue with the vexilar is that you’re only looking down. I want to look forward in all directions.
The mega 360 says it will make a map in each hold if you want it too.
I wasn’t thinking about livescope but after watching a video I’m not opposed to it.
Thanks all for the info
I cannot compare the Livescope to the Hummingbird products, but after using Livescope for the past three years I have no trouble seeing bottom hugging fish as long as they move just a little bit. Turn on trails and make a few other adjustments they show up clear. Perspective mode would somewhat compare to 360, but definitely not as clear. Only use that in winter to locate structure and my location in relation to it. The built in maps on the Garmin have been good enough to get me close to the structure I’m looking for so never found a need to make maps under the ice. Had to decide with using each product in question.
I cannot compare the Livescope to the Hummingbird products, but after using Livescope for the past three years I have no trouble seeing bottom hugging fish as long as they move just a little bit. Turn on trails and make a few other adjustments they show up clear. Perspective mode would somewhat compare to 360, but definitely not as clear. Only use that in winter to locate structure and my location in relation to it. The built in maps on the Garmin have been good enough to get me close to the structure I’m looking for so never found a need to make maps under the ice. Had to decide with using each product in question.
and that right there is the beauty of Livescope while sitting in your shack! 
With Livescope you can rotate the ‘ducer at your speed. Is the sweep on the 360 fixed? I think you could find fish faster with the Livescope. Then actually fish with it in down view, if you’d like.
Live Scope has down for ice fishing.
I started using both this year, but I only use in a boat not ice fishing. Have had a few PM’s this year asking which one I prefer and why, might post something, but again from a soft water perspective.
My opinion is that I would think Livescope would be superior to 360 for ice fishing. You can see when fish swim into view, their specific depth and if they move toward the bait, or away from it.
His only purpose was to locate bottom hugging walleye and perch. Not fish with it.
I took locate to mean rip around all
over the lake, and find them like SI
Then set up and fish for them.
If your advertising that you can drop livescope down and locate walleye and perch tight to bottom at distance in forward view in rocks, gravel, weeds, etc. livescope just won’t do that—-when fish are tight to bottom—-in any timeframe considered quick.
If your just set-up in a spot and just fishing away for a period of time, and the livescope transducer is stationary. You can see movements, the same way you see deer in a deer stand move through the woods. The back ground changes a bit and you see shapes. That’s in downview though. But that isn’t quick and you’ll spend hours just drilling and staring at your screen instead of fishing.
Let’s be honest with him. There are definitely dead zones with livescope depending on bottom composition.
Now suspended fish are a whole different story…
Hey –
That’s a good and fair assessment.
i told myself I only needed panoptix for finding fish, but I found I actually fished with it more than I thought I would.
Hey was accurate on what I want to do with it. Locate fish, bottom hugging fish mainly (suspended fish too), as quickly as possible. I will use every other feature the product has to offer but those are secondary as I have a vexilar.
The mapping portion intrigued me because most of the lakes I fish do not have any maps associated with them.
Netguy, I believe I have seen a video on mega 360 that they said you can change the time it takes to make a “sweep”. I think the preset is 8 seconds but they said the faster or slower you make the sweep the different picture you’ll get.
Love all the advice and comments you guys have. Greatly appreciate it.
For locating fish hard to beat the Mega 360. Bottom hugging fish IF they are moving and you pay attention you will see them on 360. If stationary not as likely unless they are suspended off the bottom.
For locating fish hard to beat the Mega 360. Bottom hugging fish IF they are moving and you pay attention you will see them on 360. If stationary not as likely unless they are suspended off the bottom.
So is there anything out there that is great at finding bottom hugging fish that may not be moving that can be used to cover lots of ground in a reasonable time frame?
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Tom P. wrote:</div>
For locating fish hard to beat the Mega 360. Bottom hugging fish IF they are moving and you pay attention you will see them on 360. If stationary not as likely unless they are suspended off the bottom.So is there anything out there that is great at finding bottom hugging fish that may not be moving that can be used to cover lots of ground in a reasonable time frame?
Not to sound ugly but I’m curious why you would want $3k technology to find super negative fish? Why waste time on them?
Walleye spook so easy especially early ice. You would be surprised how many fish you will scatter by drilling a hole near their face.
Walking over the top of them with ice cleats can send them bolting away.
I don’t know much about 360 but I fished all last ice season with livescope. If you want to use livescope on ice like you use SI on open water. You will be very disappointed.
Searching v seeing. My vexilar FL8 can “see” fish belly to the bottom.
Yes with my vex i can see fish on the bottom too. I want to find the fish that are not directly under my vex
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Blackcats06 wrote:</div>
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Tom P. wrote:</div>
For locating fish hard to beat the Mega 360. Bottom hugging fish IF they are moving and you pay attention you will see them on 360. If stationary not as likely unless they are suspended off the bottom.So is there anything out there that is great at finding bottom hugging fish that may not be moving that can be used to cover lots of ground in a reasonable time frame?
Not to sound ugly but I’m curious why you would want $3k technology to find super negative fish? Why waste time on them?
Walleye spook so easy especially early ice. You would be surprised how many fish you will scatter by drilling a hole near their face.
Walking over the top of them with ice cleats can send them bolting away.
I don’t know much about 360 but I fished all last ice season with livescope. If you want to use livescope on ice like you use SI on open water. You will be very disappointed.
Where I fish, just because they are on the bottom and maybe not moving does not mean they are negative. I get to ice fish one week a year and for the most part struggle to find fish. Once I find them I can always get them to bite, thats not the problem. So being that I struggle to find fish and I only have a week I want to cut down the time I use to find fish, so I’m on top of them more than just wasting time cutting holes and not locating fish. The week I get is usually in February and not early or late ice.
I have never used either in a boat, heck I don’t even own a boat.
Can you explain to me why I would be disappointed with livescope on the ice? Can you really not locate fish with it?
Thanks
I’ll give one example out of 100’s for the limitations of live imaging.
I hope you can see the picture I attached. Saw the bait pile at 50-60 feet. Could not pick up the walleye feeding on it till I was almost on top of it.
At distance the bait pile blocked the image of the walleye.
So it depends on depth and bottom composition.
If your really interested pm me and I can call you and talk. It’s just to much to type about.
My best open water days are when my daughter wants to fish with me. We fish perch so she doesn’t get bored.
I scan and scan for 5 minutes plus with livescope and just see perch and bait. Then all of a sudden a walleye just appears on down imaging…
B8228C52-3EBB-4F96-B31A-83C8AEA85816-scaled.jpeg
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
