Not a fanboy. I use what works for me. When I have first hand experience, I like to share it whether good or bad.
The internet is filled with bad experiences, but people tend not to share when something works.
Who says you need 100% "par uniformity" for SPS other than the owners of Neptune? I don't see 100% par uniformity on any light.
When Neptune states that 3 Sky units will "replace" 5 XR 30's--that is creating a mud puddle and subsequently falling face first in it when people call them out on the ridiculous claim.
If the tank requires 5 XR30 run at 100% for par, then the number of SKY will be similar. If the tank is running those 5 XR30 at less than 100% for coverage... ex 60%.... then a reduced number of SKY will likely do the job... ex 3 at 100%.
When Neptune creates tacky fake informercials with compensated one way or another beta testers (and almost every person on youtube talking about reef tanks) before any units are sold to general public, and all claim no bias in their reviews--that is creating a mud puddle and subsequently falling face first in it--when no criticism of the unit is expressed at all by anyone until people unaffiliated with the company review the unit, like Jake Adams....
That is called marketing. If you don't like it, don't watch. I watched them, knowing that they are commercials, to gain small insights. Many well respected people were in the videos and they have stated multiple times that they gave their true opinions. Reef Builders did a great job showing the interior of the light. But it is important to remember that it also contains many opinions. Examples
"rising tank temperatures from this stream of hot air" --> There are also reports of no change, or a reduction in tank temp (due to evaporation)
"it’s probably ‘fine’ during normal operation but loose parts don’t exactly instill confidence." --> Has been addressed many times, the reason for the design choice is the concern of breakage due to the thin material and small bezel.Design inspired by light diffusers in floating tile installations.
"Neptune only saw fit to include a paltry
FOUR control channels" -->On other lights (Radions, Kessils) I have used all of the channels to adjust because I just didn't like the spectrum. With the Sky, I have found no reason to even touch the 4 channels. I could see if someone liked the greenish tank color, they may have preferred to separate the Royal and Blue leds.
"we couldn’t help but be somewhat alarmed at the minimal amount of aluminum of the heatsink which is somewhat offset by having double the number of cooling fans." --> Any scientific backing to this concern? From a thermal management perspective, the broad distribution of diodes results in an exponential reduction in thermal hotspots.
"Neptune Systems didn’t use either of these tried and tested techniques for building long lasting aquarium electronics." --> Yup, I look forward to Neptune's response.
When Neptune is so obsessed with controlling the message going out on the internet pre-sale of the Sky that they tell beta testers what they can and can't say--that is creating a mud puddle and subsequently falling face first in it--when no criticism of the unit is expressed at all by anyone until people unaffiliated with the company review the unit, like Jake Adams....
Before a product is released it is standard protocol for any development to limit info from Beta testers. There have been many negative comments since release, whether it be the spectrum or construction and Neptune has been doing a good job of addressing it in their live stream including bringing in external experts.
When Neptune releases a light without an aquarium mount and has to tell buyers to use its competition's aquarium mount that is creating a mud puddle and subsequently falling face first in it when they try to tell us it was for any reason other than they were rushing the product to market...
I don't think this was an issues. It is nice that they are starting a "trend" towards a standard. Also when developing a product there is always going to be a deadline. I would rather have their team working on the light and use a well known mounting solution than spend that R&D/ testing time on an accessory.
When Neptune solicits retailers not to sell competing controllers like Hydros, that is creating a mud puddle and subsequently falling face first in it, when they get caught doing so and try to deny it....
This was never proven fact. Ryan from BRS specifically released a video dismissing it.
When Neptune wavemakers and products like the trident testers and requires users to buy their controllers just use those--should be stand alone products---that is creating a mud puddle and subsequently falling face first in it when they try to say such practices some how actually benefit customers/reefers...
There are benefits to the ecosystem. Making it stand alone would add substantially to the cost. If you prefer to have a stand alone, there are many different choices on the market... but this is not a stumbling point.
Overall it is great that we have choice in the market. I don't know why people have a compulsion to sow doubt. Any of the lights (Radion, Kessil or SKY) will yield great results. If you are struggling, it is probably not the light at that point.
