Whats yalls thoughts on these leds

gcarroll · Sep 20, 2017

flsalty said:
Ryan put himself in a hard place when he didn't mention the brand/source of the BB he tested. As a neutral person, not a member of the BB crowd, the test was essentially worthless. If I was in the market for a BB, the test wouldn't have any real value in my decision as to which BB I would want.

Many of them use the same diodes, the same reflectors, and the same layout. How does any of the other things affect to raw data? Build quality, heat sink, dimming, bluetooth/wifi connectivity does not matter in that data.

reeferfoxx · Sep 20, 2017

Many use the same diodes but not the same reflectors. You have choices between 60 deg clear/beaded, 90 deg clear/beaded, 120 deg clear/diffused(unable to find a beaded 120). The layouts are brand name specific as well.
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_fr...1.A0.H0.X165w+led.TRS0&_nkw=165w+led&_sacat=0

gcarroll · Sep 20, 2017

So what is the best of those?

reeferfoxx · Sep 20, 2017

gcarroll said:
So what is the best of those?

Well, I haven't tried them all? Which one didn't work for you?

gcarroll · Sep 20, 2017

reeferfoxx said:
Well, I haven't tried them all?

So you really can't dispute the data from the BRS tests can you?

reeferfoxx said:
Which one didn't work for you?

No offense but those will never hang over my tank. IMO, they are ugly and I don't like to have self imposed handicaps.

reeferfoxx · Sep 20, 2017

gcarroll said:
So you really can't dispute the data from the BRS tests can you?

Can you specifically give me data that BRS presented other than spectrum and par? Because I can confirm that the par and spectrum is spot on considering the I've par tested two different names and the diodes fit the spectrum analysis. However, these boxes don't run at 165w but actually 140w.

gcarroll said:
No offense but those will never hang over my tank. IMO, they are ugly and I don't like to have self imposed handicaps.

So you are only arguing for BRS and not from your own personal experience. Nice. Nothing bias about that huh?

gcarroll · Sep 20, 2017

So what about the data are you disputing? The wattage?

So I have to own the product to comment on the data? OK. I'll remember that if I ever see you comment on someones tank. I mean you can't comment becasue you don't own it right? Yes, it's that rediculous!

reeferfoxx · Sep 20, 2017

gcarroll said:
So what about the data are you disputing? The wattage?

So I have to own the product to comment on the data? OK. I'll remember that if I ever see you comment on someones tank. I mean you can't comment becasue you don't own it right? Yes, it's that rediculous!

Gosh. Don't hold a grudge or anything. Since we are answering questions with questions. Whats your stink about a 140watt par monster that costs less then $100? Because its ugly? I mean you have every right to be subjective about looks but the performance didn't meet the $800 light?

Next time car and driver does a review on the ford fiesta they should really consider comparing it to a McLaren. Wouldnt you think?

MorganAtlanta · Sep 20, 2017

gcarroll said:
So what is the best of those?

That would depend on your application... How wide an area are you trying to light? How high off the water do you have them? There may not be a "best" one size fits all. In fact, it may be a mix of optics, depending on the specific situation and your needs/wants/desires.

reeferfoxx · Sep 20, 2017

@gcarroll when you say the performance doesnt meet your liking, does that mean the spread and spectrum or par per watt? Because, as stated by many other people, the spread was ambiguous due to no lens degree given for said tested box. BRS had no layout chart for diode placement. The spectrum fell within reason for photosynthetic organisms. And you are getting a unnecessary amount of 900+ par per 140watt black box. The radion tested 800+ par per 190 watts. Is that correct? $100 vs $800.

Flippers4pups · Sep 20, 2017

"Next time car and driver does a review on the ford fiesta they should really consider comparing it to a McLaren. Wouldnt you think?"

That would be soooo funny! Lol

With my Mars Aquas, as I've stated before, I modded them to the sb reeflights diode layout. They were good before the mod, but after the mod my corals took off. I also pulled all my lenses to blend the colors better and eliminate shadows. I'm sure it drastically improved the hot spotting effect from the lenses. Couldn't be happier!

Not everyone is going to mod their lights, but I did. They definitely work for me.

But it's not only a question of par, nm and k's, (yes, my spectrums are in the zone to cover most if not all chlorophyll's) it's also your water parameters and how you keep your tank. Each is different and what works for me, may not work for you.

gcarroll · Sep 20, 2017

reeferfoxx said:
@gcarroll when you say the performance doesnt meet your liking, does that mean the spread and spectrum or par per watt?

Spread and par per watt. I want as even light as possible as I am a sps guy and I want to place them anywhere I please. Par per watt because I live in California where watts matter. I'm not going LED if it can't even compete with metal halide efficiencies. At that point I might as well go back to halides. As for spectrum, looking at a spectrometer reading is not enough to judge whether I will like the spectrum. The corals while tell me all I need to know. I have yet to see any tank that I envy using these fixtures. Not that I have not seen mice tanks running black box LEDs.

reeferfoxx said:
@gcarroll Because, as stated by many other people, the spread was ambiguous due to no lens degree given for said tested box. BRS had no layout chart for diode placement. The spectrum fell within reason for photosynthetic organisms.

You get no argument from me there. They grow corals very well but that is not enough for me. Color of the corals is far more important to me.

reeferfoxx said:
@gcarrollAnd you are getting a unnecessary amount of 900+ par per 140watt black box. The radion tested 800+ par per 190 watts. Is that correct? $100 vs $800.

It's not about peak PAR. Notice how the par is fairly even for the Radion despite the fact that all the LEDs are in a cluster. Now that cluster comes with a disadvantage and that disadvantage is shadowing. That can be compensated for!

reeferfoxx · Sep 21, 2017

reeferfoxx · Sep 21, 2017

gcarroll said:
Notice how the par is fairly even for the Radion despite the fact that all the LEDs are in a cluster.

I do want to point out that ecotech recommends that one XR30 be placed in a 24x24 cube which BRS conveniently tested in. I'm not sure if the results would match on something different. That light really takes an impressive advantage of glass reflection. But, I do understand your points and I know it's not about peak par. My only gripe is the video doesn't represent all BBs and the mysterious hot spot on the right hand side which magically disappears is or has to be a rare occurrence.

I've yet to see this on either boxes i've tested.

As far as coral color goes, my whole job is color correction or color grading for photography and video. So, I understand that aspect.

gcarroll · Sep 22, 2017

reeferfoxx said:
I do want to point out that ecotech recommends that one XR30 be placed in a 24x24 cube which BRS conveniently tested in. I'm not sure if the results would match on something different. That light really takes an impressive advantage of glass reflection. But, I do understand your points and I know it's not about peak par. My only gripe is the video doesn't represent all BBs and the mysterious hot spot on the right hand side which magically disappears is or has to be a rare occurrence.

I've yet to see this on either boxes i've tested.

As far as coral color goes, my whole job is color correction or color grading for photography and video. So, I understand that aspect.

I did not see the hotspot disappear, I just got less prevelant as the distance grew. That hotspot was definitely weird and Ryan even stated that it was as well as possible reasons for it. None of those reasons hinted that it would be a normal occurance in all the fixtures.

The comparison was done with the radion because of it’s form factor. It wouldn’t be fair to test it against a XR15 or a Hydra 26 as they are a much smaller form factor. I think testing it versus a Radion XR30, Hydra 52HD, or Geisemann Verve would have all been fair. Eventually we will see how all the lights stack up against each other. This is just the beginning of the testing so we still have a lot of fixtures to compare.

As for the 24” cube. It is one of the most common tank sizes in the hobby in which the results can be applied to multiple sizes (example: 60g, 120g, 180g, 240g). I would prefer that they test on a 36” tank as that would yield the best information for my use.

reeferfoxx · Sep 22, 2017

gcarroll said:
The comparison was done with the radion because of it’s form factor.

I guess I just dont see what your are seeing. Panel vs puck. Besides the 60-90 lenses are typically suggested for 15-20 gallon tanks or if used in multiples, deeper larger tanks.

Fwiw this back and forth is getting pretty old.