New lighting - new technology????

[BCReefer]

I was at a LFS this weekend and he showed me some new lighting coming out. It is fluorescent 65W but is supposedly = 4 x = 260W.

It is designed for Hydroponics, which is usually years ahead of us, but it is equivalent to 6400K.

It has a built in ballast and requires a socket that you can p/u from HD for $20.00. the bulb cost $95.00. they also have a 95W = 400 W for a little more. They are super intense brightness. The cost savings since you are only running 65W is great plus there is less heat and no more ballast’s.

I am leery but the owner is getting me some information next weekend. I told him I have corals and he said no problem, these lights will work. It almost sounds to good to be true.

Has anyone heard of this type of lighting? How can we check what the manufacture says is true for wattage?

Patrick

[Tau2301]

Patrick,

Do you remember what the name or brand was on the packaging. I would like to see if there is any info on the Net.

[DJ88]

Patrick,

If you can get the brand name I'd be very interested myself.

What kind of socket does it plug into? Can you describe it? How it looked?

[DJ88]

That is what I thought you were talking about . I was reading somewhere in the last week about those things. At a hydroponics web site. Now you think I could remember it? Or who I was talking to? Not a chance.. grrr.

Keep us posted. May try those for my 'fuge.

[ 25 March 2002, 13:16: Message edited by: DJ88 ]

[StirCrazy]

Hey I have had a borchur on thease for about 1.3 years now.. Albrite can get them.. they are PC bulbs that are designed to replace MH bulbs in wharehouse lighting and come in different colours upto 6500K.. I will try find my sheet, scan it and post the info again..

Steve

ok I just spent the last few min looking on my messy desk and I can't find it. I will keep looking but if I can't find it I will go to albrite and grab another info sheet tomorrow.

Steve

[ 25 March 2002, 16:21: Message edited by: StirCrazy ]

[StirCrazy]

ok here they are I found them.. I hope thease are the same thing you are talking about, I found them when I wwas looking for lighting alternatives for my fresh water planted tanks.
here is a pic of what they look like (basicly a power compact self ballasted light that uses a mogul socket.
http://members.shaw.ca/stircrazy/cfl.jpg

and here is the full product sheet
cfl product sheet 277KB (http://members.shaw.ca/stircrazy/cflproductsheet277KB.jpg)

Steve

[FishGeek]

Hey these look familiar! An Aquarium shop in west Edmonton uses these bulbs already. They are about 8" long I remember seeing them and they were super brite. I asked them a few questions on it but don't remember If they answered me or not. I do remember them telling me that they can get them in on a regular basis. The store was Aquarium Illusions if anybody wants to know.
Next time I'm down there, Ill try to get some more info about them. Price, power, lumens out put ...etc.

Simon

[CHEAPREEF]

Hey Simon, what tank do they use those lights on? I go there all the time and have never seen them.

Clinton

[smokinreefer]

FWIW, i have seen those bulbs being used at a hydroponics shop that opened up beside my old place of occupation. i chatted with a fellow that was working there and he did mention those bulbs, how they were pretty new, and lower wattage with higher output, and cheaper...but the boss wasnt in so i wasnt able to get a closer look.

seems like a very viable alternative...if not for the display...atleast for grow out /refugium puposes.

[kris]

well i was at kevins store when he first brought them in, and we chated about it. i think i will take the plunge and try them out on my new 100g.

for the price of the bulbs, and the savings on electricity, and not to mention the fact that they run cooler. i think its worth a try

[stephane]

They have only 6000 lumen for 85 watt
Iwasaki have 18200 lumen for 250 watt

so you need tree to make same lumen intensity
so at 95$ each 285$ and consume 255 watt+ 3 socket

Iwasaki are 90$ an consume 250 watt + one socket

not a great deal IMO and Im pretty shure they will never have a better shelf life and color shift than the good Iwasaki

just my 2 cent

[ 25 March 2002, 22:38: Message edited by: stephane ]

[FishGeek]

clinton

They use them on their wall display tanks. Not the coral tanks. I heard they are trying to convert the wall unit into the coral tank as soon as they get the filtration system running.

Simon

[FishGeek]

Clinton

Hey you new to the site? Seems more and more E-town people are on here every day. Now we are 4 strong. Tomorrow we take over the world.

Simon

[stephane]

Maybe you need compare aple whith aple

They have only 6000 lumen for 85 watt
Iwasaki have 18200 lumen for a 250 watt MH bulb 6500k
Iwasaki have 5000 lumen for a 70 watt MH bulb 6500k

so you need tree to make same lumen intensity
at 95$ each 285$ and consume 255 watt+ 3 socket

Iwasaki are 90$ an consume 250 watt + one socket

not a great deal IMO and Im pretty shure they will never have a better shelf life and color shift than the good Iwasaki

just my 2 cent[/QB][/QUOTE]

[BCReefer]

It is called Envirolight. I saw them at Kevin’s on the bypass in Surrey/Langley. I am trying to find it on the web but so far no luck.

It is hard to describe the look but tube that has a 180 degree bend every 4”. These bends are also in a circle so that it has the same shape as a regular bulb.

The socket is larger than a normal light bulb socket but it will not fit into a MH socket ( I think).

I am hoping to have this information by tomorrow or Wednesday at the latest.

[BCReefer]

Try this link. The light I saw was 65W and was suppose to out put 4x the wattage?????

Lighting (http://www.cutthelightbill.com/utube.html)

This is only for reference only as the manufacture is different.

[ 25 March 2002, 12:47: Message edited by: BCReefer ]

[CHEAPREEF]

Looks like i'll stick with the 1 MH as planed. One of the main reasons to go with MH was to get it down to one or two bulbs. Simon are you talking about the front tank where they cure their LR? There are two MH with 2 VHO actinics on there as of yesterday. Give me an email some of use should get together.(sort of a club or something. LOL) ;)

Clinton

[StirCrazy]

stephane, whare did this 95.00 / bulb come from..last time I checked it was only 50.00 for the 85 watt moddel. anyways aside from that I don't think this would be a option to replace a MH (like you said lets "compare aple whith aple") a compact floressent is going to be lower than a MH anyday.. but if you ae comparing thease against a 96 watt PC then they are good.. they are cheeper , require no ballast, only 12" long, and have about the same lumen. so for smaller tanks, or non-sps tanks they wouldbe great as you can put more in the same amount of space to cheeper.
look on the net a two 96watt PC set up costs almost 500.00 retail.. I can buy 8 to 10 of the other ones for thisand have 4 to 5 times the amount of light.. or maby just put one on a 10 gal refuge.. who knoes.. I will go to albrite today and confirm the price but I am sure it was lower than 50.00

Steve

[stephane]

Originally posted by StirCrazy:
stephane, what did this 95.00 / bulb come from..last time I checked it was only 50.00 for the 85 watt moddel.
Steve<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Bcreefer tag this price on the first post I actualy never see any of those bulb.

if they are 55$ it could be an option for refugium
like you said or namo tank

[BCReefer]

I hear what everyone is saying about the lumens etc, but what about the cost savings on power consumption and then the water evaporation from the MH. I currently have 1 175W MH and 2 30W actinics. The problem that I find with MH is that with my 33G tanks which is 3’ long I believe that only the middle 12” gets the full intensity of the MH and the further you go out the lower the intensity.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

So I was thinking about putting 2 of the 65W or 95W bulbs in and take out the 175W MH.

Stircrazy – yes that looks exactly like what I saw.

Stephane – you indicate that you would need 3 bulbs to match the lumens. I am at about 50% understanding of how lumens work with our aquariums, I understand the wattage and Kelvin thing, but not so hot on the lumens. Can you explain to me, in laymans terms please, why the lumens are important.

Lastly, if you way some of the pro’s and con’s like less power consumption, no noisy fan needed, cheaper bulb, no ballast needed – but then it is fluorescent, less lumens??, new technology.

What if we went with the 90W lights which is supposedly comparable to 400W?

Thanks all for the information.

[stephane]

Originally posted by BCReefer:
I hear what everyone is saying about the lumens etc, but what about the cost savings on power consumption and then the water evaporation from the MH. I currently have 1 175W MH and 2 30W actinics. The problem that I find with MH is that with my 33G tanks which is 3’ long I believe that only the middle 12” gets the full intensity of the MH and the further you go out the lower the intensity.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

So I was thinking about putting 2 of the 65W or 95W bulbs in and take out the 175W MH.

Stircrazy – yes that looks exactly like what I saw.

Stephane – you indicate that you would need 3 bulbs to match the lumens. I am at about 50% understanding of how lumens work with our aquariums, I understand the wattage and Kelvin thing, but not so hot on the lumens. Can you explain to me, in laymans terms please, why the lumens are important.

Lastly, if you way some of the pro’s and con’s like less power consumption, no noisy fan needed, cheaper bulb, no ballast needed – but then it is fluorescent, less lumens??, new technology.

What if we went with the 90W lights which is supposedly comparable to 400W?

Thanks all for the information.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">the consumption cost are about the same if you compare to MH
the lumen are the real intensity a lamp (real light to get out of the bulb) They
said 90W equal 400w but not 400w of MH bulb they
more often compare to incandescent bulb who are
energy wasted. kelvin rated is the color of the lamps. an watt are the power consumption

HID (hight intensity dicharge) for mercury vapor,
sodium,and metal halide are the best economy savingway to light anyting thats require lot of light. That why any big commercial area is ligth with those lamp, you would never see a Home Depos light with any kind of fluorescent for $ reason

that said it alway depend on where do you want to go whith your reef if you dont want to keep
animal that require big intensity of light it could be an option to put conpact fluorecent but
to save the most $ I will go more regular like a GE super daylight at 3$ each and overdrive it by electronique ballast or a ice cap and suplement it by actnic 03 that way you could change all your buld every six monts for very less $ dont forget that those conpact are gone a loose their initial intensity probably very fast and shift color in less tham one years

never forget that No fluorescent could never give you the full spectrum of a MH buld and the beautifull color that they give to you tank .
IMO lightning is a great part of a good looking reef I will never buy a 125$ coral an put them under a light that made them look like crap.

see you Stephane

[FishGeek]

Clinton

It's the wall tanks with all the fish in it along the back wall.
My email is latexluv@hotmail.com
Email me any time as I have no life and check it very often (he he )
What side of the city r u at? I'm in millhoods

Simon

[StirCrazy]

Originally posted by stephane:
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">you said save money and IceCap in the same statment :D

conpact are gone a loose their initial intensity probably very fast and shift color in less tham one years <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">actualy thee are a few tests going on right now that show "good PC's" only dim with age, there spectrum doesent change.. if I can find them again i will post the info for you to read.

never forget that No fluorescent could never give you the full spectrum of a MH buld and the beautifull color that they give to you tank . [/QB]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">actualy this is far from the truth.. there is a far greater selection of NO tube colours than you can imagin.. MH is still very limited in its colour selection as are PC bulbs. the problem is that NO bulbs are not as intense as MH so you can't get the amount of light you need in deeper tanks.. but as far as colour goes NO is more virsitile than MH anyday IMHO.

Ok, I went to a few stores today the bulbs I was talking about require a external ballast but I found the self ballasting ones also. the local hydroponic store wants 139.00 each for a 95 watt bulb (so -10% on orders over 100.00.. works out to 125.00) they are 6400K and the internal ballast in them is a electronic one.. so instant on and no flicker. I am going to keep looking for a sourse for them because if a store is charging 139.00 you should be able to buy them wholesale for under 100.00 easy.

so even at 120.00 each they would still be good for nano's refuge's, or inplace of other PC's if you don't mind the 6400K temp.. they are ~12" long and 3" wide so you could stuff a lot of them in a hood if you wanted to .

Steve

[BCReefer]

So would 2 95W lights be just as good as 1 MH bulb for lumens but with a better spread of the light?

I am in the midst of upgrading my lights and I want to go as cheap as possible both short term (i.e. cost of ballast and bulb) and long term (i.e. power consumption).

[StirCrazy]

the totaly lumen value might be just as good but the intensite woulden't.. so IMO it totaly depends on how deep you are trying to punch that light into the water.. thats why MH are so good. being a point sorce light they penatrate a lot deeper than the equivalent powered PC.

with my light meter at the bottom of my tank (24" distance between the meter and the lights) I get a reading of 5375 lumen +/- 3% from two 96 watt PC and 3 NO actinic bulbs (but this is anywhere on the bottom of my tank not just in a couple spots). I am going to take another reading with a water proof meter when I fill up the tank so I can see how much I lose due to the water ( has anyone done this and worked out a percentage loss per distance in water?)

Steve

[stephane]

Originally posted by StirCrazy:
[QUOTE]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">you said save money and IceCap in the same statment :D

I have said overdrive whith a electronique ballast they only cost 35$ or a ice cap If your
good in calcul you would even save on long run whith an ice cap

never forget that No fluorescent could never give you the full spectrum of a MH buld and the beautifull color that they give to you tank . [/QB]<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">actualy this is far from the truth.. there is a far greater selection of NO tube colours than you can imagin.. MH is still very limited in its colour selection as are PC bulbs. the problem is that NO bulbs are not as intense as MH so you can't get the amount of light you need in deeper tanks.. but as far as colour goes NO is more virsitile than MH anyday IMHO

you could never achieve the magical look given by a MH even if you mix all the fluo in the world do you have ever see shimering effect in a tank light with fluo? a tank light with MH alway look more alive

but your are probably right an that why in a couple of years all reef will be convert whith
your new bulb

[StirCrazy]

hehe ya.. I like the glimmer lines also.. they look cool, but you can get them with yellow MH bulbs also. some people have reported getting them from overdriven NO tubes but I haven't seen that myself.

I can't see anyone using these bulbs for a show tank, well I guess I can as Safari uses one on one of there tanks so I found out today.. looks good but it has actinic help.. now if they made a 10000K version :D

Steve

[fredfish]

"These are also available in wattages as high as 100, replacing the energy guzzling 400 watt and above, in commercial spaces."

I think that this hydroponics site is being misleading. Notice that they don't say what kind of lighting, just 400W. I am sure they are 4X more efficient than no lighting, but not HID.

Has anybody thought about how the configuration of these lights may affect the usable light they emit. With the two bends it is like putting 4 tubes in a bundle. How much of the light shines inwart towards another part of the tube and never gets out to your tank?

Fred.

[reefburnaby]

Hi,

I have seen these lamps before and I think reefers used them too (especially nano) - light of america sound familiar ? They are basically 65W (or 55W) PCs compressed in to a smaller package. So instead of 2 tubes (like a regular PC), there are 4 to 6 tubes in a zig-zag configuration. The 4x comparison (I think) is betweeen normal incandescent lamps to this PC lamp.

- Victor.

[Troy F]

Patrick, I like your preposed lighting set up but is there any reason you can't go with the 150W 10000K set up?

[canadawest]

Troy, I think he's already got the 175W MH, just getting a new lamp for it(as he mentioned in the post).

I suspect he's just looking to add some additional lighting at a low cost.

[BCReefer]

I have re-read some of the posts here and I decided that I am going to supplement my lighting with 2 26W compact fluorescent bulbs & I as I need a new 175W bulb I am going to get either a 6500K or 10,000K.

The total cost for the 2 compacts, sockets and cables will be about $80 - $90 and then I have to install them in my hood which shouldn’t be to big of a problem.

This will then give me:

1 175 W MH 6500 or 10000K
2 26W compacts which is suppose to equal 208W
2 30W actinic

This should provide me enough light to keep everything happy anywhere in my 33G tank. Also if I increase the size of the tank to a 4’ 18” wide I would upgrade the MH to 250W and then use the compacts as a supplement.

Any big reason not to do this?

Cheers,
Patrick

[BCReefer]

Troy,

Andrew is correct, I just want to supplement my 175W MH. I have seen some tanks and I feel that my tank is not quite bright enough so I though adding the 2 compacts would make the tank look better and help the corals in the process.

I would of course time the lighting so that it is added slowly over a period of 2 weeks.

Cheers,
Patrick