No love for MH?

[Bpb]

What are you guys doing with old bulbs these days? In the past I always kept 1 or 2 around, incase of a bulb failure or breakage while cleaning. The remainder, I was always able to give to other hobbyists for lighting fuges,frag tanks or maybe someone just wanted to try a different brand of bulb/ K rating. I believe, I am the only hobbyist in my area still using MH, so those options are out.

Keep a spare one per pendant and just recycle the rest. Despite what some are saying, finding people to take even free mh bulbs can prove to be quite a challenge

 

[jda]

I do the same thing...or mail them to people who want to see the color before they buy a new one. For years I gave 1 year old bulbs to a guy who used them for another year and he had a nice reef.

 

[120reefkeeper]

I keep a few spares for a just in case moment that never seems to happen lol. When I put in a new set the oldest spares are recycled.

 

[jda]

We have had a massive number of hobbyists moving back to MH around me. Massive. Of course, Denver is a big city and I don't hear from the people who are not looking for MH help. I loan out fixtures that I am not using and usually send along whatever old bulbs that I have from XM and Hammy 10k, couple 14k, couple 20k and even a 6500k if I have one in the wattage.

Once somebody sees a 16x16 pendant light a tank area where they had $1500 worth of Radions and no only do the corals look better, but respond better after a few days, most of them are hooked.

One of my new friends loved the Hamilton 10k on m80 (overdriven) with no supplement. His tank looks like a natural reef at high noon with massive shimmer and extreme pop. He really love the crisp white with no hint of windex. It is impressive and neat to see this look where the most what that you usually see anymore is from 14k Phoenix.

 

[Syed123]

Metal halides are still great. I would still be using them if not for the down size to a reefer 170. Still have my 4 foot metal halide and T5 fixture if I ever set up a 4 foot tank again. Not really cost effective having two radion gen 4 XR30 vs changing 2 pheonix DE bulbs and 4 T5's. It would take me 6 years worth of bulb replacements to pay off the radions, mounts and reeflink which I would probably replace for newer LEDs afterwards.

 

[TheGreatWave]

Can I just make the suggestion that aside from subjective visual shades, that there isn't that much of a difference in light then you guys make it out to be?

Sure MH and T5 grow well, they are several hundred watt fixtures that do a good job at spreading light around. Put the same wattage of reasonably wide band, reef oriented LED distributed in the same way and you will also get good growth.

Comparing these traditional flood lights to highly directional, low wattage LED exhibits a lack of understanding. I'm not surprised that a small LED fixture running at ~100 watts does not compare to a 400w to 800w of light supplied by a different tech.

As soon as you obsess over things like this that don't matter it's over. Sure your coral may grow and look nice to you, but it is not adding anything to the hobby other then anecdotes. Hardly the "better" that you guys keep passing around like a seedy doobie. It's light that grows the coral, not the fixture. If I showed you a frag from an unknown source not a single person in here could say with any confidence what kind of light was used.

I choose LED now because they are small, have color choices, built in timer and no bulb changes. The trade off is they are expensive to get the wattage and spread comparable to traditional flood lights, because they are smaller lights, they are harder to use. No different then if you were trying to light your tank with screw in pig-tail CFLs or 50 watt MH fixtures. Yes some fixtures are more efficient then others due to wasted heat, but this can effectively be ignored. 100watts of LED is a 100watts of light, period. you may gain or lose a little with one tech or the other but you will comfortably be in the ballpark.

So what makes the light of the week better now? Subjective coloration? Did you perform the experiment 3 times with equal wattages and distribution of each light to rule out other variables? Fond memories of days gone buy? What was your water clarity like then and now? Were your fish small and your tank was new then, now your tank is a big nitrate mess?

See what I mean, for every positive switch to one tech, you can find another person going the opposite way. If you read one of these types of threads long enough, you see the same people going around and around the same tech switching both ways. Its insane is what it is lol.

Form follows function. You determine the amount of light you need, (total wattage over area) then choose a tech that fits your style and budget. If you had 800w of light before, you are going to be disappointed replacing it with 200w of another tech. 1000w of T5 will grow more then 200W of Mh and vice versa.

How come light manufactures all say their lights are the best and talk nothing about nutrition? How come the jar of reef-roids doesn't say what spectrum of light to use? How come your jar of kalkwasser doesn't adjust dosage in accordance to flow? Because it doesn't matter that's why. You guys don't need to know how to grow coral, you need to learn to use the equipment.

 

[jda]

I do agree that 100 watts will never output light like 400w will, but there are still plenty of difference that you can see if you have the right kind of experience. We get these posts all of the time and then a few years later, when the difference can be seen by the poster, they write different stuff.

I only really keep acropora and clams (not even any Montis, Birdsnest, etc.) so if you want to argue that the differences that you cannot see are on easier to keep coral, then fine... that could be true. I won't argue that. I can assure you that with acropora, I can see coloration and growth differences even when using similar wattage LEDs.

All of the details do matter. The small detail that the only for-sure thing that gives energy to the coral is light - this matters. Spectrum matters. Intensity matters. Feeding reef roids probably does not matter. Lighting is the most important thing that we give our corals so saying that details don't matter is dangerous.

I want the best-of-the-best for my coral. Nobody said that LEDs could not grow coral. The old adage is that they grow coral "just fine" without saying which kind of coral. In any case, "just fine" is not good enough for me... I want the best.

I don't come at these opinions lightly. I have used nearly every reasonable brand, and even offered 20+ free ones, and found them lacking. If they were better, I can afford them and I would use them. My posts are not some sort of old-man "I hate everything" type of dogma. I still have opinions, like how I would use Panels over pucks any day, and that UV and IR matter... so Orphek Atlantik V4 would be my panel of choice if somebody made me use them. Kessils are underpowered toys with too few people using them alone over Acropora to ever have me even consider them. I don't care at all about apps... just need to set the color. I saved no power.

Manufacturers all say that their lights are the best because the uninformed will believe them. I don't know that I have ever seen ATI, Hamilton or Giesemann say that their lights are the best... they probably don't have to.

 

[EmdeReef]

Can I just make the suggestion that aside from subjective visual shades, that there isn't that much of a difference in light then you guys make it out to be?

Sure MH and T5 grow well, they are several hundred watt fixtures that do a good job at spreading light around. Put the same wattage of reasonably wide band, reef oriented LED distributed in the same way and you will also get good growth.

Comparing these traditional flood lights to highly directional, low wattage LED exhibits a lack of understanding. I'm not surprised that a small LED fixture running at ~100 watts does not compare to a 400w to 800w of light supplied by a different tech.

As soon as you obsess over things like this that don't matter it's over. Sure your coral may grow and look nice to you, but it is not adding anything to the hobby other then anecdotes. Hardly the "better" that you guys keep passing around like a seedy doobie. It's light that grows the coral, not the fixture. If I showed you a frag from an unknown source not a single person in here could say with any confidence what kind of light was used.

I choose LED now because they are small, have color choices, built in timer and no bulb changes. The trade off is they are expensive to get the wattage and spread comparable to traditional flood lights, because they are smaller lights, they are harder to use. No different then if you were trying to light your tank with screw in pig-tail CFLs or 50 watt MH fixtures. Yes some fixtures are more efficient then others due to wasted heat, but this can effectively be ignored. 100watts of LED is a 100watts of light, period. you may gain or lose a little with one tech or the other but you will comfortably be in the ballpark.

So what makes the light of the week better now? Subjective coloration? Did you perform the experiment 3 times with equal wattages and distribution of each light to rule out other variables? Fond memories of days gone buy? What was your water clarity like then and now? Were your fish small and your tank was new then, now your tank is a big nitrate mess?

See what I mean, for every positive switch to one tech, you can find another person going the opposite way. If you read one of these types of threads long enough, you see the same people going around and around the same tech switching both ways. Its insane is what it is lol.

Form follows function. You determine the amount of light you need, (total wattage over area) then choose a tech that fits your style and budget. If you had 800w of light before, you are going to be disappointed replacing it with 200w of another tech. 1000w of T5 will grow more then 200W of Mh and vice versa.

How come light manufactures all say their lights are the best and talk nothing about nutrition? How come the jar of reef-roids doesn't say what spectrum of light to use? How come your jar of kalkwasser doesn't adjust dosage in accordance to flow? Because it doesn't matter that's why. You guys don't need to know how to grow coral, you need to learn to use the equipment.

^^^ Agree.

Tanks do look much better under T5s and MHs IMO but I'm not convinced that the growth and coloration is that much better, as long as you have enough LEDs. The principal problem with LEDs IMO is that an average reefer buys 2 radions (insert any other comparable brand), head spinning from how much they cost, and then puts them on a 6ft tank and hope all will be great...

For me the two major drawbacks of MH are heat and the look of MH. If you live in a hot and humid climate, the cost of cooling will make the upfront cost of LED more palatable. Secondly, if you want to keep a reef tank in your living room - it'll be impossible to make MH visually appealing, at least for my taste.

I used my old MHs for years on my frag tank, I was going through more topoff water than my 200g...of course the AC ran non stop trying to cope with humidity...

 

[TheGreatWave]

jda, rest assured my post was not specifically addressed to you, I was simply yelling at the sky. For every person like you, there are nine that aren't.

I too would use panels over pucks, I do agree that there are nuances in spectrum that LED have traditionally lacked. (which is why I used the term reasonably wide band LED) I would even entertain the usefulness of wavelengths outside of the visible spectrum. There are a lot more colors of "light" then what we can see that are almost surely being utilized by some animals.

Spectrum - seems to be loosely defined as accepted bluish "reef" colors, which are independent from technology. I might agree the blue path we are on is too blue, I've never went diving but any picture or video I see at depth all have sort of olive-greeny-blue colour. Not "popping" florescent exciting type blue that hobbyist tote as being almost vital. (Is this form or function? I don't know)

Intensity - is also ubiquitous to all the technologies. Once the photon leaves the fixture, the PAR meter doesn't know what it came from. It is not "light" as we see it until the particle is absorbed and partially reflected by the animal. I wouldn't be surprised if there is no difference in a photon from a red light vs blue, it could literally just be the frequency as suggest by science that is the difference. If you slowed down photons from an X-ray, it would probably grow coral. If you could speed up the rate of photons from a radio, you could probably grow coral. Do you think your coral can see the radio stations in your town?

No light bulb manufacturer will tell you their bulb is second best. The point I was trying to make about the reef-roids comparison is how we can get caught up and hyper focus on things that while are important, aren't actually the limiting factor to desired success. If someone was doing a reef-roids test, chances are they used whatever lights were cheap, cheerful and were all the same bulb type.
The company that swears they have the best 2-part, probably doesn't care what kind of thermostat is in the heater. That doesn't mean they are saying heat isn't necessary.

Think about it, the MH light is a street light. Just designed to be bang for buck as long as it was kinda white. Then came concerns for light pollution so they switched to sodium to make the white light a little redder. It looks dimmer to us but still blasting the same amount of light visible to something else.

Same with T5, probably evolved from old Neon type signs into something that makes a nice, reasonably cool linear shaped source for office lighting. Nothing nurturing or life sustaining in the design, infact some claimed of headaches and flickering, probably due to some cost saving compromise.

So really the type of light tech that matters for coral is unique to the individuals availability and budget, primarily speaking. People have success with MH and T5 because they are cheaper, easy to use compared to LED and have been around longer.

 

[jda]

I truly believe that people have success with MH and T5 because they are truly better. We have all seen some LED tanks that are pretty good, but they most look like outlier and the people appear to have run run things perfectly to keep them around for a long time. You don't usually see one little thing wipe out a tank lit with MH or T5s. I do feel that light is the limiting factor in most situations. Again, I am into acropora and they are demanding. Running a MH/T5 and having middling level stability and water quality will yield far better results, IME, than having a middling LED and having the best stability and water quality. It is just easier to do well with them since they seem to feed the coral better and allow them more room for error in other places.

I will never argue that the reefer matters first and foremost... they do. Experience is next - we have all seen the guy with the nicest build thread with the nicest gear end up struggling when they think that they know it all from BRS videos and posts on a message board. However, a good reefer with good tools can be even better.

I will also never argue that other things do not matter... but it isn't like you have to forsake a heater to have good light. You can still buy a solid thermostat heater and put it on a Ranco (probably the best combo) and still run MH or T5s. They are not mutually exclusive. I feel that I have some of the best equipment on the planet and have also chosen not to use some very popular equipment becuase it is not trustworthy (apex, for example).

There is just too much evidence that spectrum from 350-850nm is all important. The only people that say otherwise are "papers" and "studies" from LED manufacturers who don't want to add those diodes (for good reason since they are expensive, don't last and add heat, which kills their value-add). The addition of T5s showing such increased benefit even with the same PAR (LEDs turned down to compensate) is just too much for most to ignore that spectrum is missing. You can see it when you go to homes or shops that use LED only - you just know that they could be better if they had more T5s or MH over the tank.

I will argue that you can have better results with LEDs by running them more at 10k-14k all of the time. I don't think that it is any accident that some of the best LED tanks like Therman and Dr. Joshi run 100% on all channels all the time and the have the lights way up high. I still think that their tanks could be better with different lights, but hard to argue that they do among the best for what they have.

 

[TheGreatWave]

I could see how and agree with LED being inferior if they don't continue to fill out the spectrum. That would be reasonable. Going forward if that is the case they should adopt the ability to swap out certain diodes just like changing a bulb in the old days. Not ideal but a reasonable compromise IMO. After all, the MH and T5 have to be replace too, the manufacturers cost is actually our cost.

Myself I am satisfied with things like the Ecotech AB+ experiment, as well as seeing a strong majority of the premium aqua farms are using success with the LED. I would quote the farmers, but don't want to get it wrong. WWC? Premium? They mount the lights high, because the PAR is additive not necessarily to save money on fixtures. (Though it stands to reason they mount an light as high as possible)

 

[jda]

Some of those vendors get their fixtures for free since they shill for EcoTech. I don't mean to sound elitist or snobby here, but if you think that WWC, PA, Vivid, etc. are premium, then we are truly on different levels. These are the McDonalds of reefing. Premium to me is Battle Corals, RMF and some of the high-end hobbyists that sell like Copps, av99, Ty, etc.

Even if you could get a LED fixture where you could swap out true UV diodes every six months and have enough IR, they would be the same wattage, or more, than a comparable MH fixture, still not blend as well and still make shadows. ...only now you have heat to deal with (it is not hard with MH, so it would not be hard here either) and you are replacing expensive diodes that would likely cost more than buying a new MH bulb. Where is the value add? The fixtures would cost more, they would still disco or not blend well, they would still shadow and now you would have to run fans (chiller in hot climates) and add in routine costs to replace degradable parts. Even if a LED company spun this better (less realistic), then who would buy these? This is the conclusion that people have come to who have done this for long enough... there is no argument to be made that they are better, or even the same. If you just want to play with colors, thunderstorms and apps, then they are the best for that.

None of this matters much since they have not filled out this spectrum right now, so they are inferior. My corals don't care about promises with the next generation of lighting when they need light today.

The tech has stalled without many new advances since multi-color replaced blue and white... there has been different multicolor, but not huge breakthroughs other than Orhpek putting in true UV and IR. I would not expect too many advancements for LEDs... just more of the same rebranded as "huge improvements" with maybe a AquaMarine over Cyan diode, or something like that. That being said, MH has not changed much either, but there are dual arc bulbs now, new formula bulbs with less IR out of the usable range (less heat) and ballasts that are more efficient... improvements, but nothing mind shattering. You are probably mostly looking at what each is going to be.

 

[oreo54]

You can see it when you go to homes or shops that use LED only

That's a matter of pss poor CRI..
Problem is you haven't seen good whites..

. I would not expect too many advancements for LEDs... just more of the same rebranded

not if I can help it.. in more fields than one..

Just because it is "popular" to throw basically blue w/ a smidge of yellow in lights calling them "white"..doesn't mean one needs to accept that..
Problem w/ reef lights is CRI is out the window to begin with but it doesn't mean one needs to settle for inferior white w/ large holes in their spectrum.
Of course selling supplemental light/ strips to fill those holes is profitable..
you seem to ignore than fact that many already don't use one light type /MH/T5 LED/t5


won't even get to the "best" is somewhat subjective..like w/ color..or a matter of "opinion"...
you are dealing w/ a host that has needs/wants and symbionts that also have needs/wants AND can be a different collection or varients/species..

Oh on the left is "mud" on the right is white..

Old reminder of an unbiased source..
https://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/2/aafeature2

 

[TheGreatWave]

Some of those vendors get their fixtures for free since they shill for EcoTech. I don't mean to sound elitist or snobby here, but if you think that WWC, PA, Vivid, etc. are premium, then we are truly on different levels. These are the McDonalds of reefing. Premium to me is Battle Corals, RMF and some of the high-end hobbyists that sell like Copps, av99, Ty, etc.

I totally accept that these lights would be promotionally offered to this highly visible farmers. The notable thing is that the light is literally the food that runs the business. They have already gone through the anxiety and growing pains with real financial consequence. If the LEDs didnt just work, but work well they would be out of business or switched back to another light.

Even if you could get a LED fixture where you could swap out true UV diodes every six months and have enough IR, they would be the same wattage, or more, than a comparable MH fixture, still not blend as well and still make shadows. ...only now you have heat to deal with (it is not hard with MH, so it would not be hard here either) and you are replacing expensive diodes that would likely cost more than buying a new MH bulb. Where is the value add? The fixtures would cost more, they would still disco or not blend well, they would still shadow and now you would have to run fans (chiller in hot climates) and add in routine costs to replace degradable parts. Even if a LED company spun this better (less realistic), then who would buy these? This is the conclusion that people have come to who have done this for long enough... there is no argument to be made that they are better, or even the same. If you just want to play with colors, thunderstorms and apps, then they are the best for that.

Unlike other tech, LED does not have to directly generate heat to produce light, plus they are highly directional. That is what makes them more efficient, heat cannot be a concern with these as there is nothing that makes less wasted heat. The only heat in a LED is the power supllies which can be made more or less efficient, and heat generated at the diode due to light being absorbed directly in the lens.

As you mentioned, a panel essentially eliminates shadowing problems, especially if you were to angle some of the diodes.

The value added depends, the extra cost of LED is usually higher then the efficiencies gained. It's too early to say because people change LED fixtures every few years right now. Almost as much as T5 bulbs lol
If you bought a moderately priced LED light and ran it for years, then yes you will at least save on bulbs, maybe a bit of power.

None of this matters much since they have not filled out this spectrum right now, so they are inferior. My corals don't care about promises with the next generation of lighting when they need light today.

I can't argue that I guess.
I might add though that there is some stellar coral grown under Radions, all of the nicest I have ever seen in person has been grown under and viewed under Ecotech Led fixtures. That is saying something about the pudding.

The tech has stalled without many new advances since multi-color replaced blue and white... there has been different multicolor, but not huge breakthroughs other than Orhpek putting in true UV and IR. I would not expect too many advancements for LEDs... just more of the same rebranded as "huge improvements" with maybe a AquaMarine over Cyan diode, or something like that. That being said, MH has not changed much either, but there are dual arc bulbs now, new formula bulbs with less IR out of the usable range (less heat) and ballasts that are more efficient... improvements, but nothing mind shattering. You are probably mostly looking at what each is going to be.

T5 and MH have also stalled as you would say and also have to be replaced due to degradation, UV or otherwise. I would rather plug in a half dozen cheap diodes that can be sourced in a lot of places these days vs ordering and storing long T5 bulbs, or even worse sourcing some rare-bird MH bulbs. Diodes are cheap and small panels would be trivial for third party, non-aquarium manufacturers to make.

 

[jda]

LEDs do get hot to the same degree as MH just by flowing wattage - this is a watt-for-watt equivalency without IR (Tullio Del Aquila has this in his MACNA presentation). Fans and heat sinks can take care of this in LED and are there for a reason - do a bad job at this and you ruin diodes since they do get quite hot. The extra heat from the MH is in the IR... if LED add IR (and they probably need it it to some degree), then they have the same issue and no value add.

I don't see directional output as a positive, although I can see why people think so on paper. This is a theoretical gain not understood by people until they get colonies. 12x12, 16x16 or 20x20 reflectors with 360 degree output are much better, even if you lose some small percentage to spill and stuff. People start to see this as their stuff grows and grows.

There are no cheap diodes if you end up having to replace UV diodes over time. The last that I looked, they were like $10 apiece for 5w "good" ones, but I don't have any idea now. Add in some kind of housing to be able to "swap" them and then lenses and who knows how much the costs would be (Oreo would and he is sure to post a few links, but a simple dollar figure would work for me?). Replace 4 or 5 of these every 6 months in a single fixture and a $40-60 MH bulb looks pretty cheap. There is a reason that UV diodes are not in many fixtures - if you start having to replace stuff, then their shtick gets soft.

I am not sure what a rare-bird MH bulb is, but if you mean 14k Phoenix, then they are wide available, cost in the $45 range and last for 2 years. You should choose a different bulb if you want to talk-down a MH bulb. 20k Radium are twice as much, so those might be better.

Oreo - knock yourself out. If you can make something that is better, then I will use it and everybody will if it is affordable. I am skeptical, but still open minded... I did try out nearly every decent option in my home already. However, tie will go to the incumbent, which is pretty much normal in life anyway. I even am easy with few requirements... I don't expect no heat or less power since I pretty much know that this is impossible... so just give the same results with a fixture that will last a decade and then you will have something. If you can get 360 degree output with a large reflector into a sexy fixture (AquaMedic, Giesemann or Sfilogi like), then even better. I can almost assure you that I will not buy the first iteration of anything, but seconds and thirds usually quickly come out with some key fixes and then it is a good time to buy. I wish that I could say that you will get rich, but that won't happen in this hobby, so probably good that you are looking to other areas as well.

 

[TheGreatWave]

LEDs do get hot to the same degree as MH just by flowing wattage - this is a watt-for-watt equivalency without IR (Tullio Del Aquila has this in his MACNA presentation). Fans and heat sinks can take care of this in LED and are there for a reason - do a bad job at this and you ruin diodes since they do get quite hot. The extra heat from the MH is in the IR... if LED add IR (and they probably need it it to some degree), then they have the same issue and no value add.

That is incorrect, MH require heat to produce light, a diode does not. T5 has electrodes not unlike to a regular incandescent bulb and also suffer losses at the phosphorus layer. It can't make light with out heat.

Ask yourself why the inside of your car is sooo much hotter then when you stand outside of it? Would it be that hot if you removed all the glass?
That is the primary heat source involved in generating heat at the diodes. You can't discuss junsction or wire temperatures because there are a million ways to lay out the panel to avoid it. If you run 100 watts from one diode with thin wires, then ya maybe the wires are going to warm up, same as with the other tech.

I don't see directional output as a positive, although I can see why people think so on paper. This is a theoretical gain not understood by people until they get colonies. 12x12, 16x16 or 20x20 reflectors with 360 degree output are much better, even if you lose some small percentage to spill and stuff. People start to see this as their stuff grows and grows.

I'm not growing coral on the roof. The reflector is the happy accident that most fail to point out when talking MH. Somebody can shine LED at reflectors too you know, but why on earth would you unless you had to.
You are saying big reflectors grow better coral then a small LED.

There are no cheap diodes if you end up having to replace UV diodes over time. The last that I looked, they were like $10 apiece for 5w "good" ones, but I don't have any idea now. Add in some kind of housing to be able to "swap" them and then lenses and who knows how much the costs would be (Oreo would and he is sure to post a few links, but a simple dollar figure would work for me?). Replace 4 or 5 of these every 6 months in a single fixture and a $40-60 MH bulb looks pretty cheap. There is a reason that UV diodes are not in many fixtures - if you start having to replace stuff, then their shtick gets soft.

I bought 2 complete UV nail dryers from a retail store with power supplies for $15 Canadian. I use the panels for curing resin prints. I can also buy online a small board with a stepper motor driver on it for $3. So a small PCB board with a single diode on it? You can't make anything cheaper then that. You would be spending $4-$6 dollars for a fair retail price, not $60. If you ordered roll of diodes and had the boards assembled you'd have so many you'd be giving them out at Halloween. Places like Alibaba etc. would flood the market with 3rd party options if they recognized the product. Nothing proprietary about a 1" PCB with a few pins and a diode.

Another option is leaving UV up to a specialized fixture. Just as MH needs that reflector I guess it's reasonable to use a reptile bulb for UV augmentation. In reality this is just semantics for using T5 with LED isnt it? lol

I am not sure what a rare-bird MH bulb is, but if you mean 14k Phoenix, then they are wide available, cost in the $45 range and last for 2 years. You should choose a different bulb if you want to talk-down a MH bulb. 20k Radium are twice as much, so those might be better.

You have just confirmed my point without me specifying a bulb lol.
The thing is everyone has white bread LED like Ecotech, Kessil AI Primes available online and at smaller LFS. Black box LED are also ubiquitously available online if you want to go with a less polished product.

 

[oreo54]

What "color" do you prefer?
Why would you want a 360 degree output? Wasteful and, frankly, unnecessary..

I did try out nearly every decent option in my home already.

Try these..
https://store.waveformlighting.com/collections/a19-bulbs

Better yet.. Put 12 of these over a 24" cube natural reef style.. Tell me what you think..
https://store.waveformlighting.com/...ulb-for-jewelry-display?variant=5959397474333

quality costs..
heck get one and play w/ a real LED..

 

[jda]

Sorry Oreo, I mean "in my house" over one of my reef tanks... I have used and test a lot.. probably 20-24 different kinds. For general lighting, just some screw-in LED bulbs that I got in a 10 pack from SAMs club on sale have been great.. after the adoption we have 5 kids and I had to promote myself from light Sergeant all the way to light Commander in Chief, so at least I get to feel better using 6-8 watts instead of 60 when they leave every single one of them on.

if you think that downward only output is a positive. You will never get to replacing T5 or MH unless you scatter the light like they do. It is just too important and I cannot explain this enough to people who just don't know. Oreo - if you meant for general lighting, then I agree, just down is fine... I was talking about in a reef where reflection is your friend.

EcoTech might like to hear that there is no heat... they might save a lot of money of Heat Sink and fans. I cannot even say more if you don't know that the IR is where the heat comes from. Have you watched Tullio's presentation from MACNA -

 

[TheGreatWave]

That sounds a little out of context. The computer you are typing on is FULL of diodes and none of them require a "heater" to operate. A florescent light has a heater, a florescent without a heater is called a ...ready for it... cold cathode tube.

Who needs scattering (reflection) if you have distribution? It's no like light from a T5 travels in squiggly lines or around the corners. I agree with Oreo that shining lights away from coral is not ideal. It's like my suggestion about point a LED at a MH reflector, you could, but why would you unless you had to.

 

[DogsRule]

^^^ Agree.

Tanks do look much better under T5s and MHs IMO but I'm not convinced that the growth and coloration is that much better, as long as you have enough LEDs. The principal problem with LEDs IMO is that an average reefer buys 2 radions (insert any other comparable brand), head spinning from how much they cost, and then puts them on a 6ft tank and hope all will be great...

For me the two major drawbacks of MH are heat and the look of MH. If you live in a hot and humid climate, the cost of cooling will make the upfront cost of LED more palatable. Secondly, if you want to keep a reef tank in your living room - it'll be impossible to make MH visually appealing, at least for my taste.

I used my old MHs for years on my frag tank, I was going through more topoff water than my 200g...of course the AC ran non stop trying to cope with humidity...

I don't care for the look of MH fixtures either (or most other light fixtures for that matter), but they can be housed in a canopy like other lights. I've always run my MHs about 6-7" above the water surface for this reason. I live in Florida & the new 210 gallon reef evaporates 20 gallons a week compared to the 92 gallon that evaporated 10 gallons. I'm fine with that, as I've gone from a single 250 watt bulb to three 250 watt bulbs, but only doubled the evaporation rate. Haven't noticed any increase in the house AC running & the tank is in the living room. I consider evaporation a positive, as it allows me to dose more kalk via top off