Fish Explorer Logo
Colorado Fishing
Colorado Fishing  
Login Usr:Psd:
Don't have an account? Register now...
spacer spacer
Go back to Main FxR Forum listings
Lake: Granby Lake
Fish: Lake Trout
Colorado Cabin Adventures is the perfect mix of comfortable and rustic.

Aqua Vu

Post By: Bryan87      Posted: 11/26/2018 11:24:34 AM     Points: 443    
I've never used an under water camera, but I'm considering it. I have a few questions:

1) I just found a 60' model, can you really see much that far down in a place like Granby?

2) Do the cameras have lights? How do the fish respond to that if so?

3) Assuming it works well @ 60' down, what's the scenario like when you hook up a fish at that depth with the camera down there too? Seems like a recipe for disaster.
 Reply by: Goosehunter82      Posted: 11/26/2018 1:00:06 PM     Points: 44410    
Yes yes and yes. I've used one at depths like that fishing for lakers. Mine is a Marcum and it works that far down. I have IR and lights on mine. Probably is that far down a big laker will travel on its way up likely getting tangled in your camera cord. That's why I don't use it.
 Reply by: MAC ATTACK      Posted: 11/26/2018 1:16:52 PM     Points: 28462    
The camera I've had experience with at Granby was an older Aqua View. At 50 feet I could only see 1-2 feet away. It wasn't like using it in 10 feet of water, when you could see fish 20-30 feet away. It was only impressive watching shrimp cruise by. Or when all we saw was a white mouth and the cable being pulled into the hole. The fish let go of it after about five feet. So from experience, put hooks on your camera!! LOL

I couldn't see what or how the fish responded to different presentations. A quality fish finder would be better suited in deep water. IMO
 Reply by: oldblue156      Posted: 11/26/2018 6:28:27 PM     Points: 369    
I have an aqua vu HD700i model. I have used it at Granby, last season, and was able to see pretty well in 65' of water but that was about the lower limit. In 80+' all i got was black. I watched hundreds of lakers swim past throughout the day although I only landed a few and could also clearly see the rock structure down there. It was very exciting to watch all the flurries of activity even though the catching was slow. Also extremely fascinating and helpful to watch the fish react to your different lures and to WATCH THEM EAT!!!! Hard to judge size and depth perception when looking at the screen but I estimate I could see about 5-8 feet at Granby that day. My unit does have IR LEDs on it but I don't find that they help all that much. When I turn them on it just seems to brighten the screen image (like turning up the brightness on your phone screen) but they don't help me see any more than you would without them. At lakes with less visibility, I have sometimes not been able see even 1 or 2 feet which makes the camera kind of useless. As far as the cable thing goes, I've landed plenty of small fish without any tangle issues but have not hooked into a larger fish yet while using the camera. The camera cable hole is usually 5-10 feet from my fishing hole, depending on water clarity. I have considered the tangle risk and I think I am going to save the camera for shallower waters this season. I bought a garmin sonar unit with a flasher mode so I'll be trying that out for the deeper stuff and just using the camera to find fish/structure...and in shallower lakes. Always good to have a buddy with you who can pull up the cable while you fight in a monster! Both sonar and cameras have their merits. A flasher will show you the entire water column, has no cable and is easier to use but the camera shows you details of the fish behavior that a flasher cant. Cheers, happy fishing!
 Reply by: oldblue156      Posted: 11/26/2018 6:29:46 PM     Points: 369    
Also, somewhat surprisingly, I have not found any fish to be afraid of the camera once its down there and holding still. With or without the lights on....for what its worth
 Reply by: ParkerDude      Posted: 11/27/2018 8:52:13 AM     Points: 603    
I would like to try a camera for a few days to watch the bite and see how fish are reacting to my lures. If it went about 60 or 65 feet deep it would work. I don't want to spend the money on one though because I think I'd only use it a few times. Does anyone know where I can rent one for a few days?
 Reply by: Buho      Posted: 11/27/2018 2:05:37 PM     Points: 108    
I was in the same situation and those things are expensive. I decided to get mine this season mostly for my son to use it. I would recommend you look in Amazon for the eyoyo brand. It is not as expensive and it has pretty good reviews. They several options for that brand. I got mine with 50m deep camera for $230 plus tax a haven tried it yet, but it seems to be well made. Check it out!
 Reply by: ParkerDude      Posted: 11/28/2018 3:37:26 PM     Points: 603    
Thank Buho, I did check it out, Those are a lot more reasonable than what I was looking at. I might just go that way instead of paying to rent one. I hope they work at depths of around 60 feet. Please update us when you get a chance to try it out. The reviews are pretty good on that brand, I see there are some others out there for about the same price.
 Reply by: ParkerDude      Posted: Jan. 19, 3:41:58 PM     Points: 603    
I managed to get my hands on an Aqua Vu HD7i for a reasonable price. For those that might be thinking about a camera here is what I found at Granby, At about 45 feet I could see possibly 8 or 10 feet, at 60 feet I could see about 7 or 8 feet, at 70 feet I could see only about 4 feet and even that was very unclear so about 65 feet seems to be the practical limit. That might change as the snow gets deeper blocking more light. When I went in Rainbow Bay near where Willow Creek dumps in I could only see about 2 feet. I assume they must be pumping and stirring up the water but I am not sure about that. I managed to have two fish wrap around he cable and I lost both, one was a good sized fish that I never saw but it was big enough to strip my drag on a few runs. Watching them circle and bite is very interesting, some of the 15"ers just come right in and nail the jig but most are more cautious. It appears to me that some of the larger fish approach from the the front of the jig (I was using a metal jig head) and they appeared to bite it, realize it was not real, and they took off. Several fish picked up the jig and swam with it for several feet and I did not feel anything on my rod even though i knew they had it in the mouth. I would set the hook and I managed to catch some of them. A few times they just dropped the jig and I felt nothing. I did appear to spook the fish by jigging too hard a few times. It seems obvious to me a sonar is better than a camera if you can only own one. The camera is an interesting toy but the setup time is a considerably longer than the sonar and losing fish on the cord is a real concern. I was fishing alone, if there were two of us and one pulled up the cord that probably could have been eliminated. The fish do not seem to be bothered at all with the camera in the area. Turning on the IR lights doesn't really do much over the regular lighting. I found that I could jig in two holes maybe 3 feet apart and see most of the action. I was setting the camera about 4 feet from my jigging holes. Some of this has already been mentioned by Old Blue.
 Reply by: redleader      Posted: Jan. 19, 9:35:04 PM     Points: 557    
waste of time.
 Reply by: ParkerDude      Posted: Jan. 20, 8:40:27 AM     Points: 603    
I agree that it does time away from fishing to set it up making moving around a lot harder and, getting tangles on the cord is a real problem making it an undesirable long term tool but you don't think there is value in watching the fish react to various lures and jigging techniques, especially for fisherman with limited experience? I'm going to use a sonar side-by-side with the camera to learn as much as I can for as long as I think it's teaching me something then the camera will go. If nothing else it is helping me to interpret what I see on the sonar.
 Reply by: ParkerDude      Posted: Jan. 28, 9:41:26 AM     Points: 603    
Update. The last time I was out (1/23) I went to about 40 FOW in Arap Bay. I could see my jig about 3 or 4 feet away but barely. So as the snow and slush thickness on the surface increases it appears the light below decreases enough to make the camera fairly useless. Just an FYI. I'll try it a few more times this year and see what happens.
 Reply by: ParkerDude      Posted: Feb. 6, 8:00:02 PM     Points: 603    
I used the camera today in 66 FOW. I estimate I could see 7 feet reasonably well. I thought I should post this because I had thought the thickening snow cover was blocking too much light in using the camera but I don't think that was the problem, it was possibly just user error.

It was an interesting day. I caught 3 in the first 20 minutes but then it slowed down until 10:30. Some came right in and bit but most circled at least once before biting. After 10:30 it was like someone threw a switch and the bite was off. I still watched quite a few fish but most were just slowly cruising by, not even bothering to look at my jig. Some circled a time or two taking a look but decided they were not interested. I tried different color jigs and cadences, nothing worked except I did manage two reaction bites by waving it in their faces and pulling it away.
 Reply by: shmiley1      Posted: Feb. 6, 8:30:03 PM     Points: 2522    
Prolly has more to do with the currents in areas you are using the camera. IE , muddy bottoms with a current would have much more cloudy water. I notice a difference in clarity without a camera all the time. When they are pumping hard and/or when alot of melt is comming in can really stir things up down there.

Back to top...