Honestly, I am personally waiting until at least next year when they launch their "400w" version of the led lighting. That should drop the price on these "250w" units... plus I read that they will be coming out with lower end units without all the fancy lcd displays and controls.

There, slept on it. I'm in. It's high time I invested in my system instead of continuously trying to stretch my buck. This is the wrong hobby for that and I should know better after all of these years. Yes, this thing costs like some gold & diamond plated toiliet seat Britany Spears might have, but for me the pro's out weigh the con's.
I'm sick and tired of having second-rate stuff.
Dec.1st I'll pick my unit up if it has arrived.
Merry Christmas to me.

You GO dood! And keep us all informed too! :mrgreen:

Lucky Ba$%#rd!

Thank god. I have wanted the 72 inch for a long time now. I just wanted to get some feed back, on coral growth before investing 3thow on a light. I will keep checking up , hope you post some before and after tank pics. I feel the same way about getting cheaper stuff, when really there should be no cutting corners for your fish. I take better care of my fish than myself, half the time they eat better than me too:biggrin:

Hope you wont sacrifice the quality of other equipment, like a skimmer, for this though, but good luck and let us know how well it works.

Ok talk a real hard look at that picture below.. it doen't put out anywhere near the amount a MH would BUT of what it does put out 87% is in the PUR range compared to the 78% of usable light the MH puts out..

Now to put this into proper perspective If the solaris puts out 100 units of light, 87% will be in the PUR range or 87 units of light. Where if the MH puts out 600 units of light 78% will be in the PUR range or 468 units.

no where in that graph does it say how much light is put out, only how much of the output is usable.. it is a very nice marketing ploy though..

Steve

I got a pretty nice euro reef, i just need a good light.

Doesn't this quote from that link address the PAR issue?

"Using the data shown in Figures 2 and 4, plus standardized surface area, the 75-watt Solaris produced 89.4% of the PAR generated by the 250-watt XM 20,000K lamp.

This equates to totalized PAR (µmol·sec) over a normalized surface area of 113 µmol·sec per watt for the Solaris, and 38 µmol·m²·sec per watt for the metal halide lamp."

It sounds to me like the 75w Solaris produces more PAR per watt, but less PAR in total. But not substantially less... 89.4% of the MH PAR.

that was my understanding.

My ETSS Reef Devil works really well actually (now that it's overdriven it positivly howls), but I'm upgrading to a Euro-reef rc180 very soon. I see a wave box & calcium reactor in the not too distant future as well...I want this to be "tank of the month" quality.