FishCam gives anglers an edge, purists irate

No, underwater cameras used to see precisely what that about-to-be-caught bass are doing underwater aren't new, but we'd guess the argument suggesting that it ruins all fun in the sport has been going on ever since someone originally conjured the idea. Nevertheless, the FishCam does what several other devices on the market already do, and aside from giving you a proverbial cheat code to nab unlimited sea creatures, it also allows anglers to "store the images on a DVD," which should prove useful in adding a dash of truthfulness (or eliminate the fibs) to those "ones that got away" tales. As expected, traditionalists don't seem to appreciate the device all that much, and while novices could very well get a bit more line action using this device, it'll cost you a stiff £185 ($365) in order to do so.

[Via Spluch, photo courtesy of Sun]

[(Unverified) Posted Feb 10th 2007 2:00PM]

Do Engadget writers get paid by the word? Or, barring that, do they bother to read their own product before clicking "post"? It took me forever to plow through just the first sentence of this entry. Click the "aren't new" link to see what Engadget posts used to be like: funny, succinct, readable. That was an era when the site didn't pad posts with purple prose and empty insight. Let's get back to that, please.

[(Unverified) Posted Feb 10th 2007 4:55PM]

I'm sorry, but I have to agree. That could possibly be the worst first sentence in the history of Engadget.

[JeanMichel Decombe Posted Feb 10th 2007 2:36PM]

Wow, how sad. People who use these tools might as well stay home to play Big Bass Fishing on their videogame console. I thought fishing was about spending time in nature and enjoying it. I don't see how a camera will help you catch fish anyway. If the fish don't know you, they won't care.

[(Unverified) Posted Feb 11th 2007 3:41PM]

This would be cool if you didn't use the screen; that way you can look at it afterwards, have proof, etc. Using the screen though is pretty lame.

[(Unverified) Posted Feb 10th 2007 3:04PM]

If this is sad or takes the fun out of fishing let me give you a scenario to think about. What if someone is just fishing for food and not for the "fun" of it? I never knew fishing was fun anyway. You basically sit on your ass waiting for a fish to bite and half the time they dont. So if you just want to catch some diner than this is very cool.

[(Unverified) Posted Feb 14th 2007 11:34AM]

If acquiring food is the purpose, perhaps £185 would be better spent at the supermarket buying fish! Fishing is the most participated sport in the world, I'm sure a few of these people are having fun...

[(Unverified) Posted Feb 10th 2007 3:07PM]

If you want a FishCam, to look at the fish in your aquarium and not for having an edge in catching them. You might like my DIY-project:

How-to make a cheap submersible webcam:

http://geektechnique.org/projectlab/694/how-to-make-a-cheap-submersible-webcam

[(Unverified) Posted Feb 10th 2007 3:47PM]

I haven't fished in over 20 years, but don't fishing lines get snapped all the time? Wouldn't this get broken rather quickly? Plus a big fish could make off with the camera.

[Yojimbo Posted Feb 11th 2007 12:09AM]

Wow... yeah... EDIT -> REVISE -> EDIT -> REVISE... for the love of God... and this isn't the first time. Writing quality needs to improve.

[hclewk Posted Feb 10th 2007 7:47PM]

Good lord, man. Learn how to write.