PDA

View Full Version : LED compairison article


fishoholic
01-11-2012, 05:40 PM
A must-read if you're evaluating LEDs for your tank!
Feature Article: LED Lighting Tests: Radion, Orphek, Mvava, Ecoray and Ecoxotic

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2012/1/aafeature

MarkoD
01-11-2012, 05:46 PM
Wow look at the light intensity difference between the radion and the ecoray.

lastlight
01-11-2012, 06:33 PM
Now I really want some PR156 action!

That MVAVAII sure pumps the light out as well. The cannon-styles seem pretty weak... highly doubt you could replace a 250w halide with one.

slivermaster08
01-11-2012, 06:36 PM
After reading a few of his articles a few things pop into my mind: the data is collected through an inverted apparatus with just air and does seem to be corrected for the lack of water.... does that mean these tests are synonamous to having the LED fixture right on top of the water surface? That's what I would infer from these articles. I'm not sure many of us would mount a LED fixture right at water surface for fear of splashes, salt spray and heating up the tank for nano's.


I guess what I'm saying is take the numbers with a grain of salt and don't heavily rely on the PAR levels for picking coral (I was just about to do that because I'm still researching for the right fixture)! I think what the reader should take from these articles is the spread and (relative) intensity comparisons.


A good read and a good find! I'll have to look into these articles in greater detail when I'm not at work. If anyone does read these articles in great detail before me, let me know if the tester included any correction for hanging the fixtures 6-12" above the simulated bottom of tank/measuring point.

lastlight
01-11-2012, 06:39 PM
>> LI-192SA underwater cosine corrected sensor calibrated for both air and water

mseepman
01-11-2012, 06:42 PM
I think the other thing to remember is that ever since people have been trying to pin PAR numbers on LED lights, they've found that the measurement doesn't seem to represent the results in the same way that it has for MH and T5.

Also, regardless of whether it was right at water level or higher, since they are all compared the same, it just gives you some idea of what you get for the money you spend.

Those Orphek's sure did look pretty at MACNA...haha...but I'm still doing DIY.

slivermaster08
01-11-2012, 06:46 PM
Yeah I saw that in his original explanation of the testing procedure but does it state anywhere what the correction corresponds to in regards to how high above the tank the LED would be mounted or does that not matter too much.

For example, does his 24" graph correspond to 24" of water; 18" of water and 6" of air; or 12" of air and 12" of water? I didn't find anything that related to that specifically but I just took a quick read of the articles.

badAZZlars
01-11-2012, 07:47 PM
I would have like to see more measurements at 6, 12, 18" so I would know what the mid water corals were getting.

BigAl07
01-11-2012, 08:24 PM
One thing to take into consideration Re: PAR - This (in overly simplistic terms) is measuring the light photons striking the sensor. It doesn't measure WHAT type of photon (high in the spectrum, low, etc). So with that being said a MH with say 250 PAR is pretty good but a good portion of that 250 PAR is light that may not be useable by our coral. Look at a spectral graph for MH bulbs and you'll see peaks all over the place (which isn't absolutely bad but not part of this discussion). Now look at LED and see how it's spectral graph is much more defined. So in essence if the LED was putting out the same 250 PAR and it was in the correct spectrum for said coral then it's easy to surmise that more light energy that's useable for our coral is being created by the LED.

Re: Close to the water and heat up the tank for nanos - that's one of the BEAUTIES of LEDs. Their heat isn't projected down into the water from the light source. It comes from the back of the DIODE. Also unless you're using special Infrared LED (which you're not unless you've stuck your TV remote control into the tank) your LED is emitting little to no IR heat. That's why they keep the tank cooler but also why they require a massive heatsink.

mike31154
01-11-2012, 08:51 PM
Good to finally see some info on the multi chip arrays. I've decided to go that route with a DIY project & am gathering the parts in the form of 10 watt arrays in royal blue & 10,000K whites. I already have 4 cool white (6,000 to 7,000K) 10 watters with some heat sinks & optics. Work quite well with a 9 volt battery. Not sure whether I'll use optics in the end or not. I have 10 each of the royal blue & 10,000K on the way and figure these should provide adequate spread over my 4 foot tank. If not, I just add a few more. I see that the multi LED arrays now also come in combinations of different colours on the same chip.

Lampshade
01-11-2012, 11:04 PM
What really shocks me is the ecoray 112 - it has HUGE numbers, with 1 Watt bulbs! Everyone was nono-ing the 1 Watts, but i'm very impressed with the numbers, and the spread. The array bulbs seem to do great as well, very interesting article.

Glad someone finally shed some "light" on this.

*puts on sunglasses*

OOOOOOOOOOOH YEAH!

MarkoD
01-11-2012, 11:53 PM
What really shocks me is the ecoray 112 - it has HUGE numbers, with 1 Watt bulbs! Everyone was nono-ing the 1 Watts, but i'm very impressed with the numbers, and the spread. The array bulbs seem to do great as well, very interesting article.

Glad someone finally shed some "light" on this.

*puts on sunglasses*

OOOOOOOOOOOH YEAH!

In reality the ecoray have the worst spread I've ever seen. People are hanging them 2-3 feet above frag tanks and there's still dark spots between fixtures

Nano
01-11-2012, 11:54 PM
from what I have seen, I still like AI, and Radions best I think. but thats just my opinion

RedCoralEdmonton
01-12-2012, 12:14 AM
ya I still like the fixtures with even spread.... like seriously if you put a coral directly under some of those fixtures they would be toast, but move them to the side 3 inches and its all good... to me thats not a very good setup.... ill take even lower numbers any days of the week... at least I know I can mess with my tank and not burn coral....

Steve

cale262
01-12-2012, 12:24 AM
Interesting article but I believe Aquarium Reef lighting is more complicated than mentioned, I didn't see any reference to PUR (Photosynthetically Usable Radiation) which is actually more important than PAR. I'm no lighting expert but from what I have read (one or two articles pertaining to Reef LED), allot of PUR light is is not produced by the lower priced emitters (1W etc.) which may appear brighter (to the human eye) and produce more PAR than higher end LED that do provide the PUR spectrums that are required by most stony corals (zooxanthellae photopigments)...

If your up for the read...

AQUARIUM LIGHTING
By Carl Strohmeyer
Updated 1/08/12 (http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/Aquarium_Lighting.html#energy)






[edit] fixed link...

fishoholic
01-12-2012, 12:26 AM
What really shocks me is the ecoray 112 - it has HUGE numbers, with 1 Watt bulbs! Everyone was nono-ing the 1 Watts, but i'm very impressed with the numbers, and the spread. The array bulbs seem to do great as well, very interesting article.

Glad someone finally shed some "light" on this.

*puts on sunglasses*

OOOOOOOOOOOH YEAH!

I got the article from my Facebook link, personally I didn't understand it all but I thought others might find the info useful and helpful.

msjboy
01-12-2012, 02:45 AM
Vividaquarium in usa is setting half of their 800 gallon tank mh, other with led radions...using same stock on either side...we will see which is better in a few months for growth.

Majboy

naesco
01-12-2012, 02:59 AM
An excellent article from Sanjay Joshi who is THE acknowledged expert in aquarium lighting for well over a decade.

Thanks for posting it Fishoholic!

Ryan
01-12-2012, 03:18 AM
Wow look at the light intensity difference between the radion and the ecoray.


60 degree optics goes a long way. Not much spread though look how fast the numbers drop as you move away from center vs the radion.

asylumdown
01-12-2012, 05:28 AM
I'm actually feeling a little underwhelmed at the showing of the Radions. I know they're more even, but they do seem to get blown out of the water in terms of PAR by a whole bunch of other fixtures. For nearly 800 bucks a pop, "is it going to be enough to grow clams on the sand bed (or anything else that I want) in a 24-26" deep tank?" shouldn't even be a question that needs answering with a months long experiments in fish stores and on reef blogs, it should have been obvious from the very first test some reefer did with their at-home meter. I was set on getting 6 of them for my tank until I saw people posting PAR numbers in the low 200s at 12 inches deep. I know people keep saying that might not be as important for LEDs, but we have to evaluate new information within our existing framework until a new framework exists, and according to what we've all been learning for the past several decades, those numbers are really not impressive.

*sigh*, more waiting while other people are the guinea pigs I guess.

lastlight
01-12-2012, 05:35 AM
Maybe I should abandon my automatic dislike for the Radion (mostly due to it being flogged everywhere so heavily) and fall to my knees.

I'm sure Sanjay helped develop the thing so it must be the best. He was involved with the unbiased flow study paid for by Ecotech recently.

There's no doubt that Ecotech markets their stuff far better than anyone else. It's always being conscious of this that sorta drives me nuts. Ranting aside I do really want to see some actual reefs lit with them.

Nano
01-12-2012, 05:39 AM
I hear ya Brett, I haven't seen a lot of tanks online with them, compared to the SOL, and the ones I have seen, didnt really impress me. lol

Delphinus
01-12-2012, 05:51 AM
At least there do seem to be more people jumping on with them so there should be more anecdotal evidence from actual independent sources eventually.

The cost has come down a huge amount compared to the early generations of LED's, so this is a positive step, to me though I still see them as an uneconomical option for larger tanks. There's a way to go in this regard still.

unbiased flow study

:lol:

lastlight
01-12-2012, 06:00 AM
Those new Cree XB economically produced LEDs that were recently announced will hopefully help.

http://reefbuilders.com/2012/01/11/cree-xbd-led/

I feel like I need a shower after posting a link to RB.

Nano
01-12-2012, 06:07 AM
Those new Cree XB economically produced LEDs that were recently announced will hopefully help.

http://reefbuilders.com/2012/01/11/cree-xbd-led/

I feel like I need a shower after posting a link to RB.
LOL


It smells like nerds on here tonight... :wink:

asylumdown
01-12-2012, 07:30 AM
Those new Cree XB economically produced LEDs that were recently announced will hopefully help.

http://reefbuilders.com/2012/01/11/cree-xbd-led/

I feel like I need a shower after posting a link to RB.

hehe, that blog is my guilty pleasure. They gave me my idea for the little pico I set up that's turning out to be the most successful small tank I've ever run!

MarkoD
01-12-2012, 01:13 PM
lol @ "unbiased flow study paid for by Ecotech"

fishoholic
01-12-2012, 01:23 PM
An excellent article from Sanjay Joshi who is THE acknowledged expert in aquarium lighting for well over a decade.

Thanks for posting it Fishoholic!

No problem, I figured it was about time I post something informative and useful :lol:

mseepman
01-12-2012, 03:20 PM
Brett, I'm like you...for some reason I developed a pretty quick dislike for the Radion after going through the demo with the Ecotech guys at MACNA. They do market better than anyone else...but even their pricing structure irked me when it first came out.
I personally preferred seeing the lights that lit tanks with life in them...not just little colored balls as was in the Radion demo. Just my opinion though.