I will say this, I am a pretty smart guy and ran a commercial grow facility for about 5 years. We spent a LOT of time testing bulbs, reflectors, different combinations of lights. The LED guys were pushing us HARD to invest in LED. I spent on average about $9,000 /month on electricity. Two 3 phase 600 amp panels maxed out plus a third 240 400 amo panel.
Anyways, save 4k a month on power? Sure I will bite. The par numbers looked good, as did the wavelength. First trial was aweful. We doubled the wattage. Meah.. about the same as the HPS in terms of quantity but the aromatics were not there.
Finally I made my own units. Highest quality bin LED, meanwell drivers, huge heat sinks. They were blindingly brite, I thought this is it! We put those units against a 1,000 HPS bulbs, exact same strain, co2, nutrients, everything. It came in with 30% less yield.
So, right then and there I never looked back. Corals and plants are both photosynthetic although they use different wavelengths. I kind of laughed when LED manufacturers were creating little pucks to light wide areas? Why? For less disco affect I guess. It just doesnt align with the physics of light energy and the whole inverse square thing.
Form factor is definately a win for LED, as is the heat thing. Hawaii and halides... ummm no. Simplicity.. MH is a BIG win. It doesnt work? It's the bulb or the ballast, either one is less than $100.
And BTW.. quit spending money on "aquarium" ballasts. You can get much higher quality digital ballasts for less money. Especially on Ebay. A 600 watt adjustable ballast will drive 250 and 400 watt bulbs using the 50% and 75% setting respectively.
Anyways.. thought it was interesting that there is something besides pure par going on.