PDA

View Full Version : Lighting Poll


TRIX
11-02-2006, 05:10 PM
What does everyone feel the all round best lighting system is. Please take everything into account, Initial cost, Maitnence cost, Quality, ECT.

Fish
11-02-2006, 05:28 PM
I think T5ho, at least that's what I've decided on this time around. My past experience has been with T8no, T12vho, PC, and halide - I still love the shimmer of halide, and URI Vho for actinic, but I think that T5 has the best looks overall. Plus the fixture itself looks the nicest, and it will be nice to save a bit on my power bill.

- Chad

Der_Iron_Chef
11-02-2006, 05:49 PM
I agree with "Fish"....T5 looks brilliant, is more economic than MH, and in my opinion, looks better. More options, too.

Having said that, I'm working with PC lighting now. On a budget :smile:

Ruth
11-02-2006, 06:05 PM
Personally I like the T5/MH combo. I just don't think you can beat the MH for look or performance. I have found that in order to have a really intense light from the T5 (I don't have a par meter) you have to change the bulbs about every 6 months - they are also quite expensive and delicate to ship.

danny zubot
11-02-2006, 07:02 PM
MH for me.

Cost wise is can be cheeper if you are a DYI'er. My 400 watt setup cost me less than $200. It may not be the most energy efficient buy 9 out of 10 corals prefer it.

marcingo
11-02-2006, 07:11 PM
Hey guys you seem to know what your all talking about. Any idea how much power a month metal hallides would most likely use (any estimate is good)

I recently bought 2 150watt double ended HQI pendents that are on the way and am wondering what you guys think these will use up in power. I hope its not like 80 dollars a month or something.

Sorry for hijacking your thread.

danny zubot
11-02-2006, 07:19 PM
If you use this link to RC you can figure out the entire power consumption for you tank.

http://www.reefcentral.com/calc/tank_elec_calc.php

marcingo
11-02-2006, 07:25 PM
thanks

littlesilvermax
11-02-2006, 07:59 PM
I really like my 250 watt halides ( I personally think you can get 2years per bulb). I also really like my VHO actinics (best color IMO) and I get 2+ years per bulb with them. I also get 2 years oper bulb on my T5s.

All depends on what you want for color and intensity. Good and bad stuff exist in all lighting catagories.

mark
11-02-2006, 08:19 PM
Comes back to the question "what do you want to keep" and "how big do you want to keep it in"?

Had a 75g FOWLR lit by 2-40W NO fluorescents, perfectly fine. Now I'm starting a reef, bigger tank, got a hi light clam, don't think I have any choice other than MH.

Current tank has only been up since spring but working for me is 2-40W NO fluorescents for dusk/dawn effect and evening viewing, 2-250W MHs, thinking now supplementing with either T5 or PC actinics would make things ideal.

TRIX
11-02-2006, 11:22 PM
Sounds like MH with T5 is taking the lead

StirCrazy
11-03-2006, 12:12 AM
Personaly I feel the best bang for your buck is MH lighting with VHO actinics. the T5's I have seen at a couple LFS here have been totaly disapointing.. I guess they would be better than NO bulbs but thats about it.

for pure intensity you can't beet the MH lighting.

as for your question about your 150's they will be fine for a tank less than 18" tall.

Steve

Doug
11-03-2006, 01:27 PM
Going on 17yr.s now doing reefs and seen many of my friends. Nothing lights like halides. I run T-5,s over my 75. Nice colour and a decent light, however when I put my 175w halides back on, even with cheaper 14K bulbs, the corals look better.

My friend switched his 180 from halides to multiple T-5,s a year or so ago. The experiment is now over & his 400w halides are back over his tank. His huge leathers & other softies seem to be enjoying the intensity.

I did like vho and agree with Ben,s post on actinic vho bulbs. Good T-5 actinics are pretty close but I still think vho has the edge. Also the above mentioned friend had a previous 120g mixed aquarium before the 180. He lit it with 6-110w vho bulbs. That was one of the nicest looking aquarium I,ve seen. Colours were superb, even with sps.

So I guess I agree with the halide/T-5 combo or halide/vho combo for overall best intensity and colours both the corals & overall tank appearance.

My next best, and better cost wise, would be just halides with a higher colour temp. like the 14K-20K bulbs. And to boot, I like the cheaper bulbs like CV,s or SA bulbs.

Reefer Rob
11-03-2006, 03:27 PM
T5s for me. They run much cooler, and a more even light throughout the tank. Lighting all the surfaces of the corals, not just the ones facing a single point light source. You can play with different bulb combinations to fine tune your "colour". That shimmer effect with MHs is nice though.

Fish
11-03-2006, 05:18 PM
To those that were not impressed with the output of the T5 they've seen, do you know what fixture it was?
I have been following the massive T5 thread on RC... somthing like 150 pages... and the consensus there is that T5ho without good reflectors is about the same as PC, but T5ho with good individual reflectors (like sunlight supply or icecap) is stronger than halide. Infact, there are instructions for how to acclimate your tank when you switch from halide to T5ho so that your corals aren't burnt.
For example, I have been told that the 96w Tek fixture over a 30gal tank might be too intense for some softies, but even a 175w halide wasn't too much light over my 20gal. And a more recent post claims that halide drops off quicker as it gets closer to the bottom???
I know that most of what we read on bulletin boards is just recycled quotes from somewhere else eg, how many times have you heard "wet/dry filters are nitrate factories" or "refugiums need lower flow" etc.
I am just trying to make sence of the difference between the majority of what I read about T5ho and some of the members' experience in this thread...
could it be due to the reflectors? Or are all the RC posts just over-hyping T5?
Thanks,

- Chad

ps - I should add that in the same thread, it was reported that halides with a new kind of "luminarc reflector" are brighter than the Tek T5ho.

Doug
11-03-2006, 10:33 PM
T5s for me. They run much cooler, and a more even light throughout the tank. Lighting all the surfaces of the corals, not just the ones facing a single point light source. You can play with different bulb combinations to fine tune your "colour". That shimmer effect with MHs is nice though.

I dont find them any cooler than my 175,s. But I agree with the light spread. Big difference compared with 2 halide bulbs over a 4ft. tank versus 4- 4ft. T-5,s.

Chad, I like the output. I think my 4-4ft. bulbs are as bright, as my two 175,s. I would say the halides are more intense in an area under them. I think the T-5,s drop off quicker though.

I have good individual reflectors. And I have bleached sps that were fine under my 175,s. So the intensity is there.

skylord
11-03-2006, 10:56 PM
I have MH 175's with 2 40w Actinic's. Thought that was plenty of light when compared to my neighbors 150s with no actinic's(very yellow looking).

I just bought a New Wave T5 4 light fixture made by Sunlight Supply for my wifes new 15g mangrove tank. It sits right next to the main tank so I could plumb them together.

I bought these because I had heard they put out OK light but not great....just right for a low light tank right? Wrong.....they surprised me as to how bright they are. Driving home last night I asked my wife why we left all the lights on and she informed me it was just the tank light. We have 2 daylight, one grow and one actinic in this fixture. Mushrooms and Ric's seem to like the light....we put a couple of zoa frags in and they went brown so we are waiting to see how they do with a little time. Maybe they will color back up.

I was going to change the 175's to 250's but may just remove the NO actinic's and add T5's.

Scott

StirCrazy
11-03-2006, 11:42 PM
and the consensus there is that T5ho without good reflectors is about the same as PC, but T5ho with good individual reflectors (like sunlight supply or icecap) is stronger than halide. Infact, there are instructions for how to acclimate your tank when you switch from halide to T5ho so that your corals aren't burnt.

look at the main company there.. IceCap... this wouldn't be the first time they underhandedly spread false info to sell there product.

For example, I have been told that the 96w Tek fixture over a 30gal tank might be too intense for some softies, but even a 175w halide wasn't too much light over my 20gal. And a more recent post claims that halide drops off quicker as it gets closer to the bottom???
I Or are all the RC posts just over-hyping T5?
Thanks,.

I would have to say way over hype.. that would be saying that T5's are brighter than the sun. A big clue is that if a T5 drops off faster with depth it is less intense.



ps - I should add that in the same thread, it was reported that halides with a new kind of "luminarc reflector" are brighter than the Tek T5ho.

the problem is that companies rig tests, by comparing there absolute best T5 output against a MH output it is very easy to make the MH seam like it has less output.. I can do it here with the same bulb... it is all the angle and location you take your readings from.. thats why when I was testing bulbs I made a fixed bracket that I could only adjust to ensure it was directly under the middle of the bulb.

Ok now for the "T5s make my tank brighter than MH" argument... yes it is true, visually there is an appearance that it is brighter but in reality it is not.. the reason for this is that like VHO and PC a T5 spreads light evenly and if you have 5 bulbs over a tank you are lighting the whole tank evenly reducing shadows so it gives the appearance of a brighter tank. With MH you get more shadowing on the edges depending on the reflectors spread and because it is a point light source there is more shadowing on the edges, but if you look at what really counts, intensity, MH wins hands down.

If anyone in Victoria has an actual T5 set up with 10 or 20K bulbs I can bring my jig over and do some actual PAR measurements to show how much difference there really is.

Steve

Fish
11-04-2006, 01:12 AM
Steve,
I should have been more clear - I never said that that Icecap claimed 'so and so' about their reflectors - I said that Icecap reflectors are better. That is the result of par readings comparing their output to that of the Sunlight Supply/Tek reflectors and the Aquatinics reflectors. This information is from the RC thread, and it has had over 4,600 posts so far. Allegedly, T5 bulbs are a complete waste of time without high quality reflectors. All I was wondering is what was going on with some of our members here.
I pride myself on keeping an open mind in this hobby and it has helped me overcome some misconceptions that people have. For example, I chose to ignore the "canister filters are not for saltwater" doctrine and a lot of nano hobbyists have benefited from my nano design.

I still remember when all the stubborn old PC users would get in 'lighting fights' and post pics of how they could keep anemones just as well as the halide guys and gals. I was/am a strong proponent of halide and watched as each one of them eventually made the switch as well. I believed that halide was, hands down, the best way to go and I wouldn't recommend anything else. However, at the same time, I never assumed that mankind had reached the pinnacle of aquarium lighting and that halide is as good as we are going to get.
It sounds like that's how you feel about it:

"I would have to say way over hype.. that would be saying that T5's are brighter than the sun."

No one is saying T5ho is brighter than the sun. No one is saying (I hope) that halide is as bright as the sun. What I am suggesting is that T5ho, with the proper reflectors, is brighter than halide. Of course I would love to see some canreefers do the testing, that way I wouldn't have to blindly accept the findings of our American counterparts. However, from seeing Nate and Paul's Tek fixtures, I don't see how a 175w halide bulb could ever possibly put as much light/PAR into the tank as 175w of T5ho. And the very fact that the readings on a halide need to be taken directly under the bulb is another point for T5 in my books - I would really like my whole tank to be well-lit; left to right, front to back, and not just in a certain spot.

I don't mean to be argumentative, I was just hoping that some of the people who were disappointed with T5 could qualify their results. If they were using good gear like the Tek or Aquatinic fixtures, than I've got a real problem because all that info on RC was baloney (and I wasted multiple hours of my life reading it). If however, they were using ebay or catalina specials with cheap reflectors, than I'm not too worried, because the T5 experts themselves have said that their performance would suck.
Hopefully together we can figure it out.

Peace,

- Chad

Pan
11-04-2006, 01:17 AM
heh, now add to this discussion the LED fictures...ie solaris ( ithink thats them)

Fish
11-04-2006, 01:20 AM
aww crap... no wonder I can't sleep at night ( :

Solaris looks awesome and has great possibilities! - too rich for my blood though. Who knows, maybe LED is the future....?

Doug
11-04-2006, 01:07 PM
Comparison is actually hard to do without using some measuring device as Steve mentioned. I believe the thread on Rc Chad mentioned, does have lots of par measures.

I will agree with Chad, that my 4 T-5,s are brighter than my two 175w halides. No disputing that. What they will measure at the tanks bottom is another question.

Then again, I,m comparing with 14K 175w bulbs. If I used the new Iwasaki 14K bulb, I would assume the halides would be brighter. So there,s the problem.

My friends 250w 14K halides is not as bright as all his T-5,s. A pair of 400w 14K,s are a bit brighter but throw a pair of 65K Iwasaki,s on and wholley mackeral.

Reefer Rob
11-04-2006, 02:40 PM
If somebody in the Lower Mainland has a light meter and they want to take some measurements, they could measure my lowly 324 watts of T5s I have now, or wait until I set up my 180, it will have about 800 watts of T5 lighting over it. That sounds like more fun :cool:

StirCrazy
11-04-2006, 09:02 PM
If somebody in the Lower Mainland has a light meter and they want to take some measurements, they could measure my lowly 324 watts of T5s I have now, or wait until I set up my 180, it will have about 800 watts of T5 lighting over it. That sounds like more fun :cool:

Ok when you do this make sure it is a PAR meter not a lux or what ever meter. To bad you wern't on the Island as I do have a PAR meter.

Steve

kwirky
11-14-2006, 03:17 AM
There are a lot of factors to consider for the "best" light.

I think individual applications can be deciding factors for "the best light". Square tanks vs long/narrow tanks, deep tanks, shallow tanks, etc etc.

I think cube tanks are best lit with MH lights. T5's are good IF they're propperly reflected. And a properly cooled fixture (not the sunlight supply fixture) can get almost DOUBLE the output (can't remember the name of that 'better' branded T5 fixture). I'm really contemplating voiding my sunlight supply warranty and carving holes in the top of my 8 bulb fixture for ventilation fans. Heard you get about a 75% increase in output by running the lights cool.

about those solaris lights, I think of them as buying your fixture, AND your next 8 bulbs at the same time. That's something I rather would NOT like to do, since it can be great to experiment with a different bulb combination when you change lights. Sure you can change the colour, but you're just decreasing output with colour changes. The good thing going for the solaris fixture though is the fancy cloud effects it's computer can do.

I was pricing out the components of the solaris for a while, and those 1-2W LED's get pretty pricey once you work in the cost of their power supplies. Not very economical to DIY...

speaking of economical, MH wins as king for costs if you understand how to solder a capacitor ;)

Fish
11-14-2006, 12:46 PM
Are you thinking of "Aquatinics" fixtures? They are getting some good reviews because they come with cooling fans and acrylic shields and their individual reflectors are all stacked in a parabolic shape so you get better mixing of light. Unfortunately, the ballasts on the aquatinics fixtures are 'hard start' and not as good as Sunlight Supply's. I know that the Sunlight Supply have been tested with fans and a par meter and that their output is better with active cooling... but I didn't think it was anywhere near 75% better! I thought it was more like 15-20%???

- Chad

Farrmanchu
11-14-2006, 02:45 PM
I use 4 X 54 Watt T5HOs with individual parabolic reflectors, on my 55Gal display. I think the only thing I'm missing by not having Halides is "shimmer". I keep a Crocea a few inches off the bottom, and it looks great. I originally used only 2 bulbs, and when I went to 4, the Coraline on the top back of the tank actually bleached. When I get around to building the canopy it will be about 8 inches tall, low profile compared to Halides. The T5s also don't impact my Temp. as much as Halides. T5HO with a small Halide for "shimmer", IMO would be best.

littlesilvermax
11-14-2006, 03:53 PM
I use 4 X 54 Watt T5HOs with individual parabolic reflectors, on my 55Gal display. I think the only thing I'm missing by not having Halides is "shimmer". I keep a Crocea a few inches off the bottom, and it looks great. I originally used only 2 bulbs, and when I went to 4, the Coraline on the top back of the tank actually bleached. When I get around to building the canopy it will be about 8 inches tall, low profile compared to Halides. The T5s also don't impact my Temp. as much as Halides. T5HO with a small Halide for "shimmer", IMO would be best.

I disagree with T5s or VHOs not affecting temp as much as halides. Flourescents put off a lot of heat too, it is just not as concentrated as a halide.

I think equal amounts of light = about the same amount of heat.

My halides affect my system by less then 1 degree F.

kwirky
11-14-2006, 04:14 PM
I originally used only 2 bulbs, and when I went to 4, the Coraline on the top back of the tank actually bleached.

lol coraline doesn't grow in the top 8" of my own tank :) I've got a little porite frag up there now, and that's all there is for life up there. And the fixture is run ~7" from the water surface.

I disagree with T5s or VHOs not affecting temp as much as halides. Flourescents put off a lot of heat too, it is just not as concentrated as a halide.

Agreed, my sunlight supply fixture (8 bulb 4' fixture) gave off crazy heat on my 120g. increased the temperature by 6-8 degrees without the 6", 100cfm AC fan! I think it was the light hitting the rocks, then warming the water. But it can really heat up the tank if I'm not careful. I run the fan on a timer to tweak evaporation/top-off, and I have to adjust it every once in a while.

Are you thinking of "Aquatinics" fixtures? ... I know that the Sunlight Supply have been tested with fans and a par meter and that their output is better with active cooling... but I didn't think it was anywhere near 75% better! I thought it was more like 15-20%???

- Chad

No, not the Aquatinics, I mean the ATI fixture is the "awesome" fixture from germany. Don't know if it's available yet, but I read about somone running one on a 120-240 transformer in order to review it, and it got an output of 320 (don't know what the reading was in. PAR, lux, dunno), compared to sunlight supply's 150. Somone on the same thread tested their sunlight supply fixture after active cooling was installed in the top (3 90mm computer fans), and it increased to 250. I just can't find the damned thread! :redface: ATI cools their fixtures to a specific temperature, and the reflectors are even coated in silver!

I remember reading somewhere, too, that measuring the PAR of flourescents is difficult compared to MH because of MH being a point source, and flourescents being a spread light. advanced aquarist had a good way of measuring a spread light source by measuring it the same way they measure MH reflectors. They used this method to review the solaris fixture.

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/8/review2

BCOrchidGuy
12-16-2006, 04:03 PM
To get an accurate comparison you'd need to measure output from the lights at different depths in different shaped tanks and on and on and on. You'd also need to compare lights at the same power consumption and MEASURE the power usage and give results in a par/watt ratio I think you'd also need to find out how much power it takes to get the same par value from each fixture because increases in light is not linear (IE a 350watt MH will not give you twice as much light as a 175). You'd also need to use comparable quality and how the heck do you measure quality? A 400 watt Home depot MH yard light will not compare with a 400watt MH top of the line German set up and of couse a 25 watt T5 from Home depot will not comare with any of the better T5 set ups. Companies pay people big money to interpret test results to validate or support their opinions and product. Just look at the bit salt war over the years s-15 I believe. I think it's an interesting thread, being old and stubborn I still like MH but remember MH doesn't need to be on all day, a MH lamp will supply the needed light for most corals in a few hours (4-6). If I'm not mistaken (again) MH is supposed to simulate noon day sun, IE sun overhead not dawn till dusk. When I do my next tank I think I'll do the 250HQI MH for 6 hours and have PC 50/50 for 14 hours a day.

Doug