t5 vs MH

[Invigor]

anyone seen an article with t5 par values? I'm trying to do some research and don't have the equiptment to do it myself, just wondering if anyone else has done, or seen output specs.

thanks.

[SeaHorse_Fanatic]

Don't know about par values but T5 bulbs have fairly short useful lifespans in my experience. (8 months average) These were the NO T5s so I don't know what the lifespans or par values of HO T5s would be.

Anthony

[Invigor]

jayson at swc has t5s and says he's had em for about 2 years without changing them. I'm not sure if they were HO or NO

[Arty Morty]

What are these T5's ?
________
EXTREME VAPORIZER (http://extremevaporizer.net/)

[Funky_Fish14]

T5's are a smaller(thinner) fluorescent bulb(T5, T8, T12, etc.. are the thickness of the bulb) designed to last longer periods of time and be very bright without emiting much heat(waste heat). They were originally designed for factories/wherehousese but they somehow found their way into the SW market. HO T5's(Like Tek or Ar something, lol Aru, Ari? cant remember, anyways) are supposed to last 18-24 months, however the only shorter ones are the actinic T5's which I think are around 12 months.

On RC, there was a thread, some guys were talking about how they were running MH systems, and then they switched to T5 systems, and had deep tanks(24"). They were having problems with light loving corals that used to be doing good, but they were getting too much light(some even at the bottom of the tank), and they had to shade some of them, or move the top ones down. T5's from what some people say stimulate growth at similar rates to MH(but I guess there is no way to completely accurately test what give better growth rates because every system is different).

I know a few people who used NO T5's. What they said was that the bulbs seemed to switch spectrums, and one of the guys I talked to said that after 12 months, with his T5's, he was having to scrape his glass free of algae every day. I've heard nothing good about the NO's, but people seem happy with the HO's. Also, the nice thing is people are having sucess keeping acros under low W of T5. (3-4 24" bulbs, cant remeber their wattage but they total around 60-90W for 3 or 4). I am planning on doing a propagation tank in the future. Its going to be 72" x 30" x 12-14"H, im planning on running a 6 or 8 bulb T5 fixture over it. From everything I've heard and peoples experience Im expecting to get good growth from it, lots of light.

Not many people really compare them to PC or Fluorescent anymore, normally the comparisons are made to MH, which to me would be a good sign that the light these things provide is good.

Chris

[StirCrazy]

anyone seen an article with t5 par values? I'm trying to do some research and don't have the equiptment to do it myself, just wondering if anyone else has done, or seen output specs.

thanks.

there is no comparason. T5's were not brought out to compete with MH, but rather VHO. the set I have see were pretty much the same as a VHO but smaller. hence the shorter lifespan, lots of heat in a smaller tube, with less material. at anyrate to get a aproximation a 95 watt VHO is about 1/3 to 1/2 the PAR output of a of a 175 watt 10000K MH.

Steve

[blood_hound]

So what is more important the wattage or the Light output?

[StirCrazy]

So what is more important the wattage or the Light output?

the light output is the most important part. wattage is just how much power it consumes to make that light output.

Steve

[Invigor]

which I what I'm trying to accomplish :)

I'm trying to find a setup with the least power consumption and the most output.

[whaase]

Here is a example of what *can* be done with T5's.

http://www.nano-reef.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ad0a5c42eb1e83583d980e3867a36b09&threadid=24522

I was going to go for all T5 lighting, but I didn't want to have to replace 4-5 lights at a time, that is why I went with 1 MH bulb... even if you stagger the replacement, you are constantly replacing bulbs at $30-40 a pop...

just a thought.

Walter

[Invigor]

mmm that's niiiiiice.
the TOTM last month on reef central was a 110gal acro tank with 8 t5s on it. the coloration is amazing

[whaase]

That's the same guy as the link I posted.... the 30g was his old tank. He has seemed to master the T5's :lol:

Walter

[StirCrazy]

The problem with T5's is they lack the intensity to realy color the corals in deeper tanks, what you are seeing in thoes pics is basicly actinic shots, this is the good thing about T5's. with them you can put 6 on a small tank and go with 4 actinic bulbs and two daylight type bulbs and you get the floressing color of the corals like crazy, if you look at the back grounds of thoes pics all the non coral areas are dark and not lit up very good so you can tell the tank lacks the bright daylight intensity that MH will provide.

As for acros, depending on how deep they are any light will make them grow, lighting is a small part of SPS coleration, there is also the nutrents (or lack of) alk, Ca levels, and so on and so on. the problem comes to play is that the more colorfull your SPS is it seams the more light they need to remain that way. this is because from what I have been reading the color appears when the SPS expelles the algae from inside it, the algae is brown and in low light conditions an abundence of the algae give the corals a brown color. as the coral gets more and mor elight it expells the amount of internal algae as a fewer amount will produce the same amount of food for the coral. this also causes the corals to produce pigments to protect it from UV and causes the coloration. Don't confuse this with actinic coloration theough as that is from the algae giving of a different floressence.

an easy way to tell is to take the coral out of the water into day light and see its color. if it is brown in sunlight then you are getting the color from the actinic lighting, if it is the same color out of water as it is in the water then the color is from the light intensity and other conditions.

My huge Milli I used to have under PC and VHO was only colored in the tank with actinics on (other wise it was brownish) after I upgraded my lighting to 250 watt MH it got to the point when it was a medium blue when out of the water and vivid blue under the lighting.

Rich uses NO lights on his tank with SPS in it and gets some nice color, maybe he can pull us a frag and tell us what color it is in the sunlight compared to in the water.

Steve

[trilinearmipmap]

FWIW I have a T5 setup with LPS/softies and a single SPS coral (montipora digitata) and both growth and coloration are not very good, I know T5 for SPS can be done but I wouldn't recommend it.

[muck]

FWIW I have a T5 setup with LPS/softies and a single SPS coral (montipora digitata) and both growth and coloration are not very good, I know T5 for SPS can be done but I wouldn't recommend it.
Are you using the HO bulbs? if so which brand?

[Arty Morty]

They sound pretty good to me. I really dont like the consumption of a MH, not to mention the heat...I will be buying new lights in a month or two, I am glad I found this thread.
Just one question though...
Will they make the tank bottom twinkle like a MH does?
OK two questions
Will they be good enough for demanding clams?
________
Make a vaporizer (http://howtomakeavaporizer.info/)

[trilinearmipmap]

Are you using the HO bulbs? if so which brand?

8-bulb 54 Watt T5-HO pendant fixture by sunlight supply
4 11000K bulbs by CoralVue
2 actinic and two Blue Plus bulbs -- forgot who made those

previously had 4 GE 6500K bulbs rather thank the 11000K bulbs

I am happy with this system because I am not really interested in SPS, I just tried to grow Montipora digitata frags to see how it went. Probably if I rearranged my rockwork and put the sps high up just under the lights things would grow fine.

[mr_alberta]

They sound pretty good to me. I really dont like the consumption of a MH, not to mention the heat...I will be buying new lights in a month or two, I am glad I found this thread.
Just one question though...
Will they make the tank bottom twinkle like a MH does?
OK two questions
Will they be good enough for demanding clams?

You will not get the MH shimmer affect with T5's as they are not a point source of light. Also, if you are going to go with T5's make sure you get the High Output versions with very good reflectors. The system that trilinearmipmap is using right now is probably one of the best T5 systems available to us.

[Arty Morty]

What does a system like that run? Where would I find a price?
________
LovelyWendie99 (http://www.lovelywendie99.com/)

[Rikko]

Am I the only one who thinks the MH shimmer is annoying? Halide tanks make me queasy if I look at them too long.
I should mention that presently, lumens/watt output is still the greatest with MH/HQI. They get really hot but produce way more light. If you run, say, 10 fluoro tubes to match the lumens out, you'll be consuming more energy. That was the technical "fact" as of six months ago, anyways.

I did read an article somewhere (I searched for an hour and couldn't find it) that someone did a test using HO T5s with an Icecap ballast overdriving it and actually matched MH light output overall. It looks like the time is coming.

[StirCrazy]

I should mention that presently, lumens/watt output is still the greatest with MH/HQI..

don't get caught up with the lumens per watt thing or even lumins for that matter. the big difference is the actualy intensity of the light sourse which allows it to punch more light deeper into the water.

a good example here is with my two 96 watt PC's and two 95 watt VHO's I got an average PAR reading of 280 at a depth of 12"(7 of that water) so that is with 382 watts of light. One SA SE 250 watt bulb on a HQI ballast give me a reading just shy of 900 at the same depth, with only 250 watts of light output. so the intensity of the point sourse type light far exceded that of the gas tube type.

Steve

[Invigor]

steve for mythbusters canadian edition!

[Funky_Fish14]

Yeah but steve....the MH will give a much lower PAR rating off to the side of the tank than it would directly below the bulb. Take a reading to a side of your MH and not pointing at it...

Also, you said that the T5 Is just more heat in a smaller bulb but they emit LESS heat, thats what they were designed to do, emit more light and less heat than a startard T12. Also, that coloration you are talking about isnt necessarily all actinic. Who says everyone has 4 actinic and 2 daylight bulbs? I dont know if you read my post, but like I said, some people on RC switched to T5 lights from MH on 24" deep tanks and some of the corals that used to be at bottom were getting too much light and did better shaded under the T5s.

Also, these guys went to lower wattages of T5 compared to what they had in MH.

Yeah the T5 wont give the shimmer.

Also, T5 NO's from what I have heard and seen from everyone are crap...plain and simple. And T5 are useless(well not uselesss, but much more light is directed into the tank) without SLR(Single Lamp Reflectors).

Chris

[Funky_Fish14]

O yeah Steve,

"of the gas tube type"

MH bulbs also have a gas chamber where the light is emitted from. They dont have a filament.

Chris

[StirCrazy]

O yeah Steve,

"of the gas tube type"

MH bulbs also have a gas chamber where the light is emitted from. They dont have a filament.

Chris

your being silly here, I coulden't remember how to spell floressent at the time. and there is a difference becaue a floressent is a gas tube that emits light by exciting the gasses to the point where they emit light, a MH or HID actualy uses a broken filiment and causes a "sustained" spark to jump across the two filiments and create the light output.


Yeah but steve....the MH will give a much lower PAR rating off to the side of the tank than it would directly below the bulb. Take a reading to a side of your MH and not pointing at it...
Chris

oh ya but ya but, bull malarkie is the best reply for that one :mrgreen: you will have the exact drop in intensity off to the side as you would with a floressent tube. (you do know that light radiates at all angles from a MH bulb right?) at anyrate the only drop off by moving to the side is due to an increas in distance (which isn't much) and if you are not holding the measuring insturment corectly (as in keeping it strait up and down when moving to the side) for a proper reading the measuring insturment must alway face the bulb no matter where it is in the tank, so as you move to the side you angle the measuring insterment acordingly. any other variance in intensity from the bottom middle of the tank to the bottom edge is due to pour reflector design or to small of a reflector, and this is the down fall of using a DE type bulb as the smaller reflector makes for a focused light patteren.

Having said that a reflector set up on a floressent T5 bulb can have the same effect by limiting the light out to the sides so with any type of lighting you have to realy look at the reflector design.

even if you have a bad reflector design that does limit the bottom edges of the tank in PAR out put, whoulden't that now be a perfect place to put your low light corals?

Steve

[Funky_Fish14]

Yes steve you are correct about the MH. I wasnt thinking about that when I said It, I was just thinking about the fact that the chamber in a MH bulb where the arc occurs is filled with a special gas.

I know that light radiate from all sides, ofcourse! Lol. Its like the sun in a box, hehe. However here is a dilema, your corals are not getting light from above as they would be with T5, and then there is the possibility of them being shaded from the light(but this is a pretty crappy arguement as you said you could put lower light corals there), but Also you need more bulbs and higher wattage/power comsumption to cover the same area as you would with T5.

Having said that a reflector set up on a floressent T5 bulb can have the same effect by limiting the light out to the sides

This is where I think you are wrong. A T5 bulb setup should span the length of the tank...no? So why should this limit the light on the sides? It should have the same intensity as that in the middle of the tank(well, the PAR readings should be the same, though the center of the tank may be ever so slightly brighter because of the light from the ends of the bulb some of it would spill to the center of the tank from both sides but on the ends it would only spill from the center and not from the other sides of the tank but this is such a minute difference and its beside the point, lol).

I have a question about PAR(PP something something....photosynthetic photon something something, lol). How does it relate to the intensity of the bulb? I mean, can you have a bulb that would be as bright as say a 400W halide, with 0 PAR? I know the ballast can affect it(ie: a 250W 10K XM MH bulb running off a standard PFO ballast has 800 and a few, whereas running of an HQI ballast, the PAR goes up by over a hundred). I havent done much reading about it. And also, am I correct to say that the reason trilinearmipmap had bad growth of his Monti frags was because though T5 may be very bright, and the PAR may be relatively high, each segment of the light does not have a very high ouput when compared to a segment the same length of a MH so therefore it cannot send that PAR intensity far enough down, though the bottom of the tank may still be very bright? That might explain what I was talking about earlier with those guys having too much light at the bottom of 24" deep tanks. I dont know how their growth was though? Maybe its that yes, they are bright bulbs and produce alot of light, but that light is not strong enough to push the PAR down?

Sorry bout the really long post. Thanks.

Chris

[Funky_Fish14]

Bump.