# Garmin Mapping



## redfish5 (Jun 28, 2011)

Anyone have experience with the New Garmin mapping? Looks like they might be releasing a new chip with high res imagery. Just curious if it will be something that competes with FMT. At a quick glance, quality doesn’t seem to be there like FMT—but time will tell I guess. 

https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/p/664454


----------



## Backwater (Dec 14, 2014)

The 2 have no relation. The FMT is not about the mapping as it is about the trails they run that shows on the maps. I think FMT also uses Bing satellite map overlays.


----------



## DBStoots (Jul 9, 2011)

I understand that the new Garmin chip will be available in January. But I don't anticipate it will be anywhere near as good as the FMT software.


----------



## Egrets Landing (Feb 11, 2016)

Backwater said:


> The 2 have no relation. The FMT is not about the mapping as it is about the trails they run that shows on the maps. I think FMT also uses Bing satellite map overlays.


I don't know who told you that or where you got that impression but other than the lack of connection to Garmin, those comments are completely inaccurate. FMT is totally about the mapping. In fact, it is so much about the mapping it is in a totally different mapping league all together providing thousands of individual map features that are completely missing on Garmin and that does not include any of the thousands of miles of detailed tracks. There are dozens of key examples of this including some major shortcomings on Garmin that FMT corrected. You wont find any poll and troll zones, ENP directional posts, pvc stakes, signs, local buoys, manatee zones, slow zones on Garmin. They are all on FMT. In addition to that you won't find any of the navigational markers they do provide corrected for accuracy. They are all corrected on FMT. Garmin's mapping (other than the blue water and deeper water) is a glorified NOAA cartoon compared to FMT. With respect to the imagery, FMT has nothing to do with Bing or Google either. Although some of the images may be acquired from the same sources, if the source image may be the same, it won't look the same as every image is further processed for brightness, color and contrast for best display on a gps.


----------



## TheAdamsProject (Oct 29, 2007)

Had a Garmin on the last boat and there is literally nothing they could do to make me come back to them. Nothing. Went back to a Navico unit with North and South FMT and could not be happier.


----------



## Half Shell (Jul 19, 2016)

Egrets Landing said:


> Garmin's mapping (other than the blue water and deeper water) is a glorified NOAA cartoon compared to FMT.


Not that they are better than FMT for the microskiff crowd, but he is likely referring to Garmin's new LIDAR maps, which look great for offshore but I'm afraid won't be much use inshore.

https://www.thehulltruth.com/marine-electronics-forum/974934-new-mapping-garmin-lidar.html


----------



## Backwater (Dec 14, 2014)

Egrets Landing said:


> I don't know who told you that ....


Glenn.

The maps I'm referring to is the satellite imagery and according to Glenn, from what I remember, it was something like Bing. What you are calling a map really is the routes, trails, cookie crumbs (what have you) and GPS waypoints that overlay over the satellite imagery mapping, run on a Navico system.


----------



## Egrets Landing (Feb 11, 2016)

Half Shell said:


> Not that they are better than FMT for the microskiff crowd, but he is likely referring to Garmin's new LIDAR maps, which look great for offshore but I'm afraid won't be much use inshore.
> 
> https://www.thehulltruth.com/marine-electronics-forum/974934-new-mapping-garmin-lidar.html


That is new to Garmin but its not new data. That is just NOAA multibeam data off of LA. FMT has had the same data out but processed to its full resolution for about 6 months and without the dull blue grey shading famous to the people who apparently put this together. There is another company that has that data out as well. If it was done as good as it could be it would look more like this.


----------



## Egrets Landing (Feb 11, 2016)

Backwater said:


> Glenn.
> 
> The maps I'm referring to is the satellite imagery and according to Glenn, from what I remember, it was something like Bing. What you are calling a map really is the routes, trails, cookie crumbs (what have you) and GPS waypoints that overlay over the satellite imagery mapping, run on a Navico system.


GPS maps can be just lines, areas and points that look like a regular noaa map or a cartoon looking map or it can include all of that along with imagery. Good imagery is much better than a drawn created area for land masses to use a base layer because its exactly what is there. The best inshore maps will have clear imagery with a native resolution of 3 inches to 1 foot and processed to no worse than 1 meter and preferably 1/2 meter. With that as a base, the map features can then be displayed on top of the imagery and be as detailed as you want to create them. Routes and trails created by the user along with any waypoints have nothing to do with the map. They are just displayed on top of it.


----------



## Backwater (Dec 14, 2014)

I'm familiar with mapping.

The imagery, along with the charting of the imagery is the map. The imagery is mostly provided to them by aeronautical (aerial photos) photos and some of the lower rez stuff comes from satellite sources (thinking GOES satellites and the like) like what is provided to sites like Bing. The charting data doesn't come from FMT, but is provided from another source. That is what makes up the general mapping. What you are referring to as maps are additional overlays that FMT has created with people participation in their tracking system, which includes, trails and such, and other items that are not clearly defined by the map/chart system provided to FMT. That may include, PVC poles, inaccurate markers in the charts, obstacles and danger items, photos and such. So ok, it's a map of sorts, but more of a charting process. Then what you add are overlays onto that overlay. Of course, you can select or turn off what ever you want to keep it from looking so busy.

I think we are getting "off-track" from the OP. What he is asking is the imagery between what Garmin is doing and and how that relates to what FMT provides, which is way more than the imagery that FMT provides (which, no doubt, is better quality of what Garmin use to have (or any other system)), but the tracking trails and such that are overlays that FMT provides, which is by far, the value of what they really do. In a sense, they have no relations (imagery mapping vs tracking overlays), even tho they can work together. But his OP questions is referring to the imagery. Ok, then talk imagery/charting mapping and compare those items. But the real separation is the FMT tracking overlay.

In other words, My original statement relating to the benefits of what FMT provides vs what Garmin is bringing out with it's new imagery, is like the analogy of _"a blind monkey can run a boat around the 10K at midnight on a new moon and still find his way around without hitting anything!"

Ted_


----------



## Egrets Landing (Feb 11, 2016)

Backwater said:


> I'm familiar with mapping.
> 
> But his OP questions is referring to the imagery. Ok, then talk imagery/charting mapping and compare those items. But the real separation is the FMT tracking overlay.
> 
> ...


Whatever this is above makes zero sense to me. If you don't run ISLA, you really shouldn't be commenting on how it compares because you really don't know first hand. I have run ISLA fmt for years and I have run Garmin as well. I know them both as well as anyone. There is no comparison between the two products other than they are both advertised as charts.

ISLA fmt is in a totally different league in terms of the quality and the detail and accuracy of everything including all of the raster and all of the vector except for deep water depth contours. There is so much missing chart data and inaccurate data on Garmin its an embarrassment. I haven't seen the soon to be released garmin product whatever that is supposed to be but it's more than likely just the Navionics imagery since they acquired them. The navionics photos were a little better than the G2 but both are overall very poor quality and low res. You can tell just by the size of the chips they use which would never be able to hold much truly hi res data. The entire 906P+ chip is only 9.7gb of data. That is a total joke for the large area it covers and obvious evidence of the low res data. It is not possible to create a chart that large with hi res data (using the real definition) on 32 gb let alone 9.7 gb. The ISLA south FL chart alone is nearly 3x that with almost 32 gb.

As far as running around the 10k islands, anyone unfamiliar with it would likely fail badly trying to do it on a perfect day with a Garmin map let alone with moonlight. The chart is nearly useless inshore. Most people complain the accuracy is so poor it shows them running on land or trees when they are floating in 5'. There are dozens of threads on that going back for years on multiple boards about that. It is so bad it was a good part of the motivation for the entire FMT start up which corrected all of the Garmin chart problems. But if you did run an FMT chip, you actually could run around the 10000 islands at midnight and with no moon too and do it successfully. I have actually done that in plenty of crazy places including the S curve at Choko. The tracks are just an added bonus to the product. Fewer than 1% of the tracks on FMT were provided by others and none goes on the map unless its verified which is different from most other mapping companies which want everyone to send in their data and they will add it on as community add on with no vetting at all. The last time I checked community edits on the garmin/navionics chart in the everglades, none of it was even remotely correct. It was also put on video and demonstrated in great detail on the SFL update video released a year ago. Everything else about ISLA is just as unique as the tracks and that includes all of the NOAA markers which are all corrected on FMT for their exact locations.


----------



## Backwater (Dec 14, 2014)

What are you talking about? Look closer to what I said. I'm not disputing you by saying Garmin is better! On the contrary, I'm saying what FMT is using for imagery is superior. However, what the jewel really is with FMT is the tracking. 2 different items, 2 different subjects, which Garmin really doesn't have. Therefore, they (Garmin vs what FMT brings to the table) can not compete. Hello!

Just pipe down a bit! The OP (original poster) simply asked....



redfish5 said:


> Anyone have experience with the *New Garmin mapping? Looks like they might be releasing a new chip with high res imagery. Just curious if it will be something that competes with FMT. *At a quick glance, quality doesn’t seem to be there like FMT—but time will tell I guess.


I mentioned...


Backwater said:


> *The 2 have no relation. The FMT is not about the mapping as it is about the trails they run that shows on the maps.* I think FMT also uses Bing satellite map overlays.


When I mentioned "The 2 have no relation," I'm simply stating that even if Garmin seriously improves it's imagery and nav charts, I mean... Even if Garmin purchase the same source of imagery and charting (the map) as what ISLA has with FMT, the FMT tracking and data overlays is what seriously sets the two apart. Yes Garmin's imagery and charting is crap in compares to what ISLA imagery and chart data feed is. But if Garmin pulls a rabbit out of the hat and improves what they have in imagery and charting, they still don't have the tracking data that took years to create. THAT, is what that blind monkey can use to keep his ass out of trouble in the 10k! 

So the bottom line is, in relation to the OP, where he's saying, "can the 2 compete due to the new improvements that Garmin is doing" (and I have no idea what new imagery and chart mapping they now have)? And I said "no" because the Imagery/charting map is a different item than the "tracking trails" with what is in the FMT chip, even if Garmin's new imagery and charting compares. 

Maybe someone can compare the new stuff Garmin has with Imagery and charting, on just that level. But nevertheless, Garmin doesn't have all those tracking trails that ISLA invested all that time, money and resources to produce.

Nuff said!

I suggest a small tulip glass with some decent scotch, neatly poured in it! Have a good Holiday! 

Signing off of this thing.


----------



## Seymour fish (May 13, 2018)

nativejax said:


> Had a Garmin on the last boat and there is literally nothing they could do to make me come back to them. Nothing. Went back to a Navico unit with North and South FMT and could not be happier.


Will Never own another garmin product of any kind either


----------

