No love for MH?

[MnFish1]

I wonder what percentage of top end led users (as in sales, not effectiveness, but brands like radion, kessil, hydra, ect), keep their panels longer than the 18 months or so you can stretch a set of bulbs for. Or those that switch them out as soon as 36 months, either negating the bulb change hassle argument entirely, or getting away with skipping ONE bulb change. Just hypothetical.

I realize the challenge in obtaining that kind of data. I’ve been guilty of retuning my entire lighting system more often than I should, but every time I’ve either broken even or ended up in the green. I’m a bad example. But if I sit and count out every person I am personally friends with in this hobby, as well as some of the more vocal people on forums, people tend to swap their panels out for different brands or just upgraded generations or funnier adding t5 bulbs on a schedule roughly equal to maybe 2 bulb changes.

It’s fine. You’ll not find me arguing what I insist works better. I just think the bulb change argument is too flawed for too many people. I think people can and should use whatever they like. I just wish more people were honest and simple and say “I simply value controllability, form factor, and popularity as the primary factors of importance in a light fixture” and stop saying stuff like “I choose leds because bulb changes are expensive and a hassle” or “they’re too hot and use too much energy”. Because those bottom two aren’t the real truth. And even if someone swears they are, if they did some soul searching and could swallow their pride, they’d admit “I really only chose these because they’re the popular choice, carry a status symbol to them, and they have a sleek look that is most important”

I know every one of you radion users aren’t like Sanjay who nuked his tank with a failed chiller, or paletta who wanted to be rid of a commercial dehumidifier since he kept a 300 gallon tank inside a room the size of a shoebox

You're right - I just always forgot to do it... . I dont plan on changing my Radions any time soon .

 

[jda]

@rockskimmerflow it is pretty apparent that wider spectrum near daylight is the best at rendering good color in coral, but it not great at illuminating all of them. You can take coral under these lights and "blue it up" and then they look good. Some lighting systems can do this all in one package, many cannot and some can but are not run the right way to achieve this (this is an Oreoism blaming the user, but he is right in this case).

This is a pretty common phenonomen with corals purchased from Battlecorals who uses a lot of 6500k. Their color fades in some tanks a bit when the same spectrum is not given.

You can do this to some degree with any lights. GE 6500k T5 is excellent at this. I would never burn a 6500k halide unless I just landed a wild SPS shipment in which case, this is the best way to ease them into captivity - Iwasaki is great for this purpose. LEDs at 100% on all channels seem to do well like Dr. Joshi or Therman where the actual colors in the corals are better. Some MH bulbs can do both render and illuminate/pop very well which is why they are loved.

This is a lot of posts ago, but Radium 20k is a general purpose light in Germany and center EU... it was used over a reef on accident a few decades ago. It is still made for general purpose lighting. 14k took a similar path in Japan, but I do not think that it gets used much for general purpose lighting as much as the Radium does. ...not that this means anything to anything... just kinda fun info.

 

[honkit]

No study. Personal observations. I've never said study.

Any link where Sanjay mentioned this?

 

[fredk]

...
Everyone needs to just chill out, take a breath and try to be helpful, not confrontational. Am I asking too much?? T...

Why yes, yes it is. People get a little (well actually a LOT) wrangy when the subject comes up.

 

[A. grandis]

Any link where Sanjay mentioned this?

Go talk to him. That's how I found out.
They cut him off when he starts to talk about that kinda stuff on interviews... Cause the interviewer is normally sponsored by a LED company.

 

[honkit]

Go talk to him. That's how I found out.
They cut him off when he starts to talk about that kinda stuff on interviews... Cause the interviewer is normally sponsored by a LED company.

Talk to him? Not like I personally know him. In short, it needs to be substantiated.

 

[alton]

FYI for you LED users trying to change a true MH user into LED, it is like the old old gun saying " You can have my Metal Halide fixture when you pry my Cold Dead Fingers from My Last Metal Halide Lamp!"

 

[A. grandis]

I don't think the old school guys are trying to make the newbies to change per say. Point here is that when people say LEDs are iqual or better than halides is just an absurd. Truth of the matter is that in reality there is a huge misinformation and misunderstanding about the whole subject in many ways. Threads like this are good to expose some truth.
The ones whole believe in what we say are the ones who tried and changed. Like I've said, results are what people are looking for.
The halide guys don't like the fact they see lots of non sense from too many people and companies about the true results. They are tired of that!

 

[A. grandis]

Talk to him? Not like I personally know him. In short, it needs to be substantiated.

Please continue to do your search and find out. Dr. Sanjay isn't the only one who noticed those things and more about the subject.
Or try for yourself, like others did.

 

[MnFish1]

I don't think the old school guys are trying to make the newbies to change per say. Point here is that when people say LEDs are iqual or better than halides is just an absurd. Truth of the matter is that in reality there is a huge misinformation and misunderstanding about the whole subject in many ways. Threads like this are good to expose some truth.
The ones whole believe in what we say are the ones who tried and changed. Like I've said, results are what people are looking for.
The halide guys don't like the fact they see lots of non sense from too many people and companies about the true results. They are tired of that!

One problem with this is that all I've heard from halide people is saying 'corals grow better'. All I've heard from the LED people is 'corals grow the same as halides'. I dont think either side has made any kind of case. I would suggest that the reason MH give more consistent results is that they can only be used 'one way'. They come on - and they go off. LED's are set at multiple PAR, color, etc levels in various tanks that may give different results. There are so many variables to coral growth - that for anyone to say that 'any light' makes 'the difference' seems incorrect to me. Nutrients, alkalinity, flow, etc all influence coral growth - and unless you control for all those variables in addition to lights - its all just opinion.

My opinion is that with a similar color spectrum and PAR - a halide light and a comparable LED will grow coral the same way (if all other factors are equal). All of the rest is just opinion as well.

 

[jda]

Leaving better/worse or opinions aside, it is not the same. This sounds harsh, but anybody that says that the two are the same lacks the breath and depth to know what they are looking at. You might like one or the other better, or just don't care about the differences, but there is no equality here. Most people who cannot tell the difference often can after a bit more time in the hobby... and they still might not care. You have to do a lot of this observing in person since photos and the intewebs are not always good at showing things for what they are. This can be hard without a club in your area and if you don't travel and look at takes when you do. I can tell the moment that I look at a tank in person how it is lit.

I can mostly pick out the types of panels if it is a LED tank since BB and Kessil especially have their own look and AI and EcoTech do too... it gets harder with older generation panels and I get fooled if I see a Gen1 or Gen2 Radion tank since, for example.

 

[MnFish1]

Leaving better/worse or opinions aside, it is not the same. This sounds harsh, but anybody that says that the two are the same lacks the breath and depth to know what they are looking at. You might like one or the other better, or just don't care about the differences, but there is no equality here. Most people who cannot tell the difference often can after a bit more time in the hobby... and they still might not care. You have to do a lot of this observing in person since photos and the intewebs are not always good at showing things for what they are. This can be hard without a club in your area and if you don't travel and look at takes when you do. I can tell the moment that I look at a tank in person how it is lit.

I can mostly pick out the types of panels if it is a LED tank since BB and Kessil especially have their own look and AI and EcoTech do too... it gets harder with older generation panels and I get fooled if I see a Gen1 or Gen2 Radion tank since, for example.

I know you feel that way - and you may have the experience to tell. The question is not whether a tank looks one way or another right - to me the question is is the coral just as successful in MH vs LED.

Lets say I take 10 colonies - divide each of them in half - so now there are 20 pieces - and let them grow for lets say 3 months - . If I blindly placed them in a single tank - in some kind of neutral lighting (maybe sunlight) - are you saying you can tell the difference (between the ones grown in MH and LED)? Addume similar alkalinity, PAR, flow, nutrients in both tanks. I would humbly suggest that 99% of people could not do that.

 

[jda]

I do feel that way about the corals that I keep. Again, degrees and differences... I doubt that it would matter much at all for softies and a bunch of LPS or Montis. For the acropora that I keep, I can see different colors under MH and under LED. The MH colors are usually deeper with more contrast, brighter brights and sometimes additional colors. The LED colors usually will have more "black light" fluorescence, blended and muted colors where sometimes monochrome corals are more even. This is generalizing. Somebody might like either better, but they are not the same. I can see why people like the "black light" fluorescence.

We have done experiments with the same corals in the same system under different lights and the MH ones are nearly always more colorful. I shipped a bunch of ORA Pearlberry frags to @ca1ore a while back and he thought that the ones on the MH looked better, but this was a while ago and his opinion might have changed. Perhaps he can chime in.

Again, for a mixed reef or for even easier non-acropora SPS, this is probably not much of a difference, but it is a big difference in my world. I literally have not seen a high-end acropora tank under LED that I thought would not look better under MH or T5, and there are some good ones - most of them agree which is why there is so few of them anymore. Nearly all have at least switched to hybrids or just gone all the way. I do understand that this is a small percentage of people in the hobby who are at this level, but it seems that a very large percentage want to get there.

This does not even touch on output, spread, lack of shadows, etc... but it is easier to see a shadow and death from underneath than it is a difference in color where your perspective is an internet photos (which is really hard).

In your example, I would bet that nearly everybody could see a difference in the twenty colonies. They might not be able to tell which was which, but they could see it... and then they would want to know, of course. The increasing usage of T5 hybrids should speak to this trend a bit... you almost never see somebody regret adding in T5s to their LEDs... it is kinda like sex where nobody says "I tried it once in college and it was not for me." I don't know if I have ever seen somebody not rave about when they added their hybrid. Most posts talk about the increase in color and how the corals are easier now and stuff. If this is a real trend, the MH is the next step beyond this.

I do agree with you that success is in the eye of the beholder. For sure. I would never post or argue that somebody's tank was inferior when they just love it - this is the pinnacle in reefing is to be happy with your tank at whatever level and with whatever inhabitants. If you are in the lighting or SPS forum, you have surely seen that I don't steer people away from LED unless they are talking about high-level acropora, wanting to take another step forward (usually suggest a AquaticLife hybrid here first) or for larger tanks (MH are probably still the most effective and cheapest lights for huge tanks). I even recommend different types of LEDs (panels over pucks for me) and T5s for a lot of folks with mixed tanks inclinations. I mostly post this stuff to help the people who want to be at a higher level and even though there are not as many of them, the few that send me nice PMs thanking me for opening their eyes far outweigh the more PMs that I get about how big of a clown that I am.

If you ever in Boulder stop by. I will be willing to bet that there would at least be a part of you that considered, even for a brief second, switching lights after seeing my tanks in person. You probably wouldn't but you would probably see what I am talking about.

 

[MnFish1]

In your example, I would bet that nearly everybody could see a difference in the twenty colonies. They might not be able to tell which was which, but they could see it... and then they would want to know, of course. The increasing usage of T5 hybrids should speak to this trend a bit... you almost never see somebody regret adding in T5s to their LEDs... it is kinda like sex where nobody says "I tried it once in college and it was not for me." I don't know if I have ever seen somebody not rave about when they added their hybrid. Most posts talk about the increase in color and how the corals are easier now and stuff. If this is a real trend, the MH is the next step beyond this..

Thanks - I think we (I) have been interpreting your posts as meaning something different than you did. I was talking about coral growth/health - not necessarily 'how they look'. I agree with you that Halides give a definitely 'more uniform' look - with different colors. The experiment I mentioned was only that - if coral x grown in MH was put next to coral y grown in LED - could the proponents (of both) pick out which was grown where if they were both put under a neutral light source. If thats not possible - to me the debate becomes much more 'personal preference' than 'husbandry'. Thanks for the explanation

 

[jda]

I do think that growth can be an issue, but it does not have to be depending on choices. There is more of a difference with colonies and larger areas rather than frags. MH on competent reflector will cover more square inches of high the tank with lots of light than most LEDs. This can help when you have dinner plates to illuminate, as well as the corals below them that now need more light from the sides. A regular MH can easily handle 24x24 or 30x30 whereas this can be stretch for a more powerful Hydra 52 or xr30 with colonies... but if you choose to get two or three units, then it is not an issue. Usually, when you buy a competent MH setup, you are set, but with LEDs sometimes people need more and they don't often get them... in the end MH might win here, but it is hard to blame a kind of tech for this. Panels can help with some coverage over pucks.

The exact same with growth can be said for shadows and coverage... can be an issue, but doesn't have to be with more units and more coverage.

I will never argue that a benefit of MH is that you cannot "mess with them." You don't have to mess with a LED either - if people are stupid, that is on the people, not the light. Same with heat the other way - it is super easy to mitigate any MH heat (especially with some of the modern bulbs which have a lot less) and most of the people who cannot choose not to or live in the Mojave or South Florida and even most of them can.

There was a time when some white diodes were death to coral, but those are long gone and not worth discussing. Those generations of panels were quickly replaced.

I go back and forth on health. Of course, there is no rule that you cannot have a super-stable tank with any light - this is a good idea. I do notice more LED tanks having bleaching events, bad color or death with some minor swings, but I could also probably argue that these are young tanks where the average reefer is to blame who happens to use LED (and dry rock). However, I did run the alk in my tanks down to 4.0 twice last year when a co2 bottle when empty and then I raised it back up with baking soda instantly... so from 7.0 to 4.0 in a day and then 4.0 to 7.0 in about 2 minutes. Nothing even batted an eye where some people complain about alk swings of .5 to 1.0 causing issues. Sometimes I think that it matters and sometimes I am not so sure that this is not other types of husbandry. I do find that the frags that I get in trades from T5 and MH systems ship better and grow faster once in my tanks... not that the others do poorly, just the MH/T5 ones do better. In the end with health, I cannot get past this photo where the corals thrive despite being out of the water for about 8 hours. There is no planktonic food in this area, so light is all that they have for energy and they thrive and grow very well in an environment that nobody would argue that there is good stability:

 

[jda]

For your colony question, if we split 10 colonies and put half in my 4x2 frag tank with 2x MH over it or under a 4x2 frag tank with a pair of xr30, I think that the MH would outgrow the xr30s over time of 1-2 years, but probably not initially in the three months that you mentioned. If you put 4x xr30s over this tank, it might be closer to the same. This kinda makes sense, right? 500w of MH vs 360w of LED where radiated watts will be more with the MH. Get the LED more up to 500w and it gets even.

 

[ReeferReefer]

I wonder what percentage of top end led users (as in sales, not effectiveness, but brands like radion, kessil, hydra, ect), keep their panels longer than the 18 months or so you can stretch a set of bulbs for. Or those that switch them out as soon as 36 months, either negating the bulb change hassle argument entirely, or getting away with skipping ONE bulb change. Just hypothetical.

I realize the challenge in obtaining that kind of data. I’ve been guilty of retuning my entire lighting system more often than I should, but every time I’ve either broken even or ended up in the green. I’m a bad example. But if I sit and count out every person I am personally friends with in this hobby, as well as some of the more vocal people on forums, people tend to swap their panels out for different brands or just upgraded generations or funnier adding t5 bulbs on a schedule roughly equal to maybe 2 bulb changes.

It’s fine. You’ll not find me arguing what I insist works better. I just think the bulb change argument is too flawed for too many people. I think people can and should use whatever they like. I just wish more people were honest and simple and say “I simply value controllability, form factor, and popularity as the primary factors of importance in a light fixture” and stop saying stuff like “I choose leds because bulb changes are expensive and a hassle” or “they’re too hot and use too much energy”. Because those bottom two aren’t the real truth. And even if someone swears they are, if they did some soul searching and could swallow their pride, they’d admit “I really only chose these because they’re the popular choice, carry a status symbol to them, and they have a sleek look that is most important”

I know every one of you radion users aren’t like Sanjay who nuked his tank with a failed chiller, or paletta who wanted to be rid of a commercial dehumidifier since he kept a 300 gallon tank inside a room the size of a shoebox

I don't have experience with MH but I ran T5s for years before switching to LED.

For me personally, bulb changes and heat were actually major factors. I had a 36 inch 6 bulb T5 fixture so it cost me about $120 a year in bulbs. I use a fan to cool my tank, controlled by my Apex and and the fan runs less than half as much as it did with my T5s.

Heat might not be a problem for others who don't use a canopy or don't live in one of hottest cities in the country.

 

[WVNed]

I took my Photon V2 off my tank and put one of the new fixtures I showed above on my 75 gallon tank for 10 days. No acclimation. Everything was happy, no fooling with settings.
Everything on for 8 hours then I increased the T-5s to 10.
Point a camera at the tank and the pic comes out looking like the tank. No funny colors.
The 75 gallon went up 1 degree using the legs that put the fixture about 6 inches off the water. So I turned the Inkbird down 1 degree. Not a problem
IS MH better, I don't know but it is certainly easier and it is very good.
Plug it in and it works.
I have used CF, T-5, MH and LED in the past. They all worked.
I originally planned to simply buy another Photon V2 to get to 8 feet. In the end I chose not to.
I chose MH for what will be my last tank because it is the easiest and most bulletproof of everything I have used and I can light a large tank for a reasonable cost. That has a tremendous value to me.

 

[MnFish1]

I do think that growth can be an issue, but it does not have to be depending on choices. There is more of a difference with colonies and larger areas rather than frags. MH on competent reflector will cover more square inches of high the tank with lots of light than most LEDs. This can help when you have dinner plates to illuminate, as well as the corals below them that now need more light from the sides. A regular MH can easily handle 24x24 or 30x30 whereas this can be stretch for a more powerful Hydra 52 or xr30 with colonies... but if you choose to get two or three units, then it is not an issue. Usually, when you buy a competent MH setup, you are set, but with LEDs sometimes people need more and they don't often get them... in the end MH might win here, but it is hard to blame a kind of tech for this. Panels can help with some coverage over pucks.

The exact same with growth can be said for shadows and coverage... can be an issue, but doesn't have to be with more units and more coverage.

I will never argue that a benefit of MH is that you cannot "mess with them." You don't have to mess with a LED either - if people are stupid, that is on the people, not the light. Same with heat the other way - it is super easy to mitigate any MH heat (especially with some of the modern bulbs which have a lot less) and most of the people who cannot choose not to or live in the Mojave or South Florida and even most of them can.

There was a time when some white diodes were death to coral, but those are long gone and not worth discussing. Those generations of panels were quickly replaced.

I go back and forth on health. Of course, there is no rule that you cannot have a super-stable tank with any light - this is a good idea. I do notice more LED tanks having bleaching events, bad color or death with some minor swings, but I could also probably argue that these are young tanks where the average reefer is to blame who happens to use LED (and dry rock). However, I did run the alk in my tanks down to 4.0 twice last year when a co2 bottle when empty and then I raised it back up with baking soda instantly... so from 7.0 to 4.0 in a day and then 4.0 to 7.0 in about 2 minutes. Nothing even batted an eye where some people complain about alk swings of .5 to 1.0 causing issues. Sometimes I think that it matters and sometimes I am not so sure that this is not other types of husbandry. I do find that the frags that I get in trades from T5 and MH systems ship better and grow faster once in my tanks... not that the others do poorly, just the MH/T5 ones do better. In the end with health, I cannot get past this photo where the corals thrive despite being out of the water for about 8 hours. There is no planktonic food in this area, so light is all that they have for energy and they thrive and grow very well in an environment that nobody would argue that there is good stability:

Thanks for the thoughtful answer agree 100%

 

[MnFish1]

For your colony question, if we split 10 colonies and put half in my 4x2 frag tank with 2x MH over it or under a 4x2 frag tank with a pair of xr30, I think that the MH would outgrow the xr30s over time of 1-2 years, but probably not initially in the three months that you mentioned. If you put 4x xr30s over this tank, it might be closer to the same. This kinda makes sense, right? 500w of MH vs 360w of LED where radiated watts will be more with the MH. Get the LED more up to 500w and it gets even.

Yes