I like mine too. It does a good job of blending the light and definitely reduces, if not eliminates hot spots. It’s a lot of money for what amounts to a plastic light filter (especially when you have multiple lights), but it is well designed and you do need to take into consideration the R&D cost.
All things considered, I’m very happy with it.
I have a second SQ 520 on its way (first one would not fire up - likely the USB cord) and should be able to fit my Apex Par Rock thing. The lack of stability effecting that Seneye is serious and as you pointed out the 45 deg cone is obviously an issue. Ill do the measurement gambit again once the SQ comes in.Point was it's best "under center". It does not measure probably more than a 45 degree cone.
apex/Apogee being corrected for off axis light will post higher PAR #'s (theoretically) because it gathering all light in a approx 130 (150 whatever.. 180 is optimistic)degrees off parallel.
You point it towards a light source and your values jump..moreso than an Apogee/Li-Cor
Seneye actually works better than it should..
Your going to like them!
Nice looking rig. What are those mounted to?I like mine too. It does a good job of blending the light and definitely reduces, if not eliminates hot spots. It’s a lot of money for what amounts to a plastic light filter (especially when you have multiple lights), but it is well designed and you do need to take into consideration the R&D cost.
All things considered, I’m very happy with it.
Man anything Giesemann makes it going to work just fine. Plus that light it basically a large heat sink - certainly will help with the longevity of the LEDs. The LEDs all appear hit the same spectrums and the G4Pros, wifi, blue tooth, sexy profile. Cant ask for much more than that. It also looks like they are constructed like my Specra in that the you could remove the endcaps and try a sheet of diffuser if you wanted to. Certainly it could be retrofitted somehow. I like those lights!
Maybe - the lights are certainly more blended and have a t5-ish look about them but there is still a pretty big LED UV pop that you need a couple of true actinic bulbs to get from t5s. Not a problem for me as I run a couple of actinic bulbs in my t5 rig
. I stuck 6 "test subjects" under them @ about 350 par yesterday (added to the tank several days ago, just moved them up) so it will be interesting to see how the do. T5s and MH have always produced great results for me so I'm inclined to favor them though Ive been fiddling with LEDs for several years now. Unfortunately the tank the Radions are on crashed during hurricane Irma just as I was starting to see good growth. i thought this was supposed to take the place of the wide angle lens that were available for the older Radions, and help diaperse the light also at a wider angle as well as mix them together. are you saying, the rations have a wider aspect without the diffuser?Sorry Man, didn't pay enough attention and missed the 80% - Ill do that when I get back to work i the morning. With respect to 100%.
10" below the surface
Centered on G4Pro - lengthwise orientation
No diffuser
All lights on
Crazy stuff here
10" below the surface
Centered on G4Pro - lengthwise orientation
No diffuser
One light on 
Still a wacky amount of light @ 10"
10" below the surface
Centered on G4Pro - lengthwise orientation
With diffuser
One light on
Looks like a 29% difference but still more light than most corals can use.
10" below the surface
Off Centered on G4Pro @ 9.5" - lengthwise orientation.
With diffuser
One light on
Lots of fall off on the sides of the light though. This is 4" away from the edge of the light and clearly shows the necessity to both own a Par or Lux meter and be prepared to overlap lights. WAY easy to over light with these guys.
Im saying that those are the measurements that I got. Kind of obvious that its going to happen though as the diffuser is a half inch or so thick.
i understand the thickness of the actual diffuser panel is only a few millimeters thick. If you mean the whole frame around it, then I don't understand what that has to do with the angle the lense throughs. again, i thought the diffuser was going to help widen the area of light and get light into the darker corners, anybody else have any experience with this?
Ya, the thickness of the frame, sorry I should have been more clear there. It doesn't appear to be a big deal though and raising the lights a little would certainly help if it does become a problem. If I had a way to hang them at 18 - 24" above the water I would for even better blending and spread.
It is dead simple as long as you orientate the white plate correctly - promise.
