No just for the idea of it seems PAR is relative .. sometimes..
My biggest "complaint" is that people take say 100W of AI Primes (which have the white channel dimmed usually) and then replace it w/ 200-250W of another light source and say how much better growth is.
Separating out the causality is sometimes not as straight forward as one thinks.
Even PAR vs PAR measurements don't work well since you are only taking a few spot measurements and assuming parity across the board..
Anyways nothing to do w/ the orig. o/p's question.
If one wanted a "long term" light with varying demands that is a strength of LED, maybe not cheap leds but buying an "overpowered" well built led and running it cool will generally give one the lifespan and compensation for higher demand later and/or dimming over time of the diodes.
Then again a few cheap capacitors in a power supply may prove me wrong.
Over time from an "observer" standpoint I've listed "commercial" led's weak points vs other forms of light and have made my own conclusions on what seems right and wrong with them.
Currently the Phillips CoralCare is the pinnacle of LED lighting.
Problem is it's not "blue pop" centric.
Did I mention how it looks to one is or should be a consideration. Maybe even above "optimal growth"
I mean you got to look at the darn thing and have it pleasing..
My outside opinion...........
Not getting into "better" .. seems to be a religion..
For the o/p personally throw a quality hort 4 tube 24" fixture ($150) and see how that works as they learn how to balance an aquarium (any kind).
The flater more dispersed light of a t5 will probably prevent light from being the ultimate decider in their success.
ONE caution is keep in mind it's only a 12" wide tank.
Raising a multitube t5 can cause a lot of light loss in the tank..
BUT it's your fine adj. "dimming"
Then "upgrade" later. Prob get a different tank, different dimensions by that time.
Economics wise a 4 tube 24" 5 yr old ATI may not have a very high resale value. Neither would most LED's though.