wide lense for XR30w Pro or not ?

[david p.]

hi,

my tank is 48x20x20, SPS dominant, i read that the wide lense could help me to reduce 'hot spot' and have a better spread of light, specially because my tank is 20'' deep, most SPS mid - hight position in the tank.
the standard lense seems to be for deeper tank.

anythoughts ? anyone using them and have you seen a big difference ?

thanks

 

[Salty1962]

I use them and really like the spread. Plenty of light on the sandbed.

 

[DLHDesign]

I've got one of my three XR15 Pro's running a wide-angle lens. At the ~20" deep mark, it dropped PAR in the center by around 30-40 compared to the standard lens.

Anecdotally (I didn't run too many measurements beyond the center point), it does appear to spread out the light more - which make sense, of course.

 

[Jimbo662]

I switched the lens on all 3 of my xr30s and could really tell the difference in the overall lighting of the tank.

 

[mcarroll]

hi,

my tank is 48x20x20, SPS dominant, i read that the wide lense could help me to reduce 'hot spot' and have a better spread of light, specially because my tank is 20'' deep, most SPS mid - hight position in the tank.
the standard lense seems to be for deeper tank.

anythoughts ? anyone using them and have you seen a big difference ?

thanks

The hot spot and shadows are characteristics of your light and pretty much all similar lights.

Switching lenses will make a small difference. But they aren't going to change the character of the light significantly.

You'll still have lots of shadows and a hot spot, they just won't be as stark as they are now. On the downside, you'll be wasting a lot more power by having more light reflect off the tank surface. How high is your XR30 mounted? Wider lenses usually call for a lower mounting.

Why is reducing the "hot spot" important to you?

And why exactly are you after a better spread of light?

If you've got hard-core answers (to you-doesn't matter what anyone else thinks) for either of those questions, then I think you'd be better served by switching lights than by putting even more money into these.

For example, a 48" Orbit Marine Pro strip ($332 from googling) eliminates the hot spot AND shadows instead of just reducing them a little.

It also will cut the amount of light escaping over the rim of the tank and how much is being reflected off the water....so you'll be spending more power lighting the tank and less power lighting up your room.

2¢

 

[tankstudy]

hi,

my tank is 48x20x20, SPS dominant, i read that the wide lense could help me to reduce 'hot spot' and have a better spread of light, specially because my tank is 20'' deep, most SPS mid - hight position in the tank.
the standard lense seems to be for deeper tank.

anythoughts ? anyone using them and have you seen a big difference ?

thanks

I have the wide lens on Gen3 XR30w. The light spread is significantly larger but the par drops significantly. I was using 1 Gen3 XR30w over my 20 gallon nuvo but I wanted the spread to be wider because the ecotech light arm has a set height. I noticed about 30-50% drop in par, using a biotek btm 3000 par reader, in various locations around the tank but the light spread is much better. To compensate for the loss of par, I had to increase the power output of the radion making it run a little warmer compared to when it was just running with the standard lens.

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

The wide angles are required Imo. I even duplicated the new radion lenses for a bit using a full seal on top of the tank and a thin acrylic sheet. (half-hemisphere water droplets from condensation)
Though I ended up taking it off cause the eurobracing started to warp.

It's the only difference between led's and mh/t5's Imo. Light being sprayed vs focused well.

Fwiw, the shadowing issue is pretty much gone with the 120 vs 80/90's but you have to have enough pucks spread. Not worth worrying about too much though.

 

[DLHDesign]

...you'd be better served by switching lights than by putting even more money into these

Just FYI: The wide-angle lens ships with the unit, so no additional monetary cost incurred. It takes about 5min per light to swap out, so not a hard thing to undo at a later point if undesirable results occur.
(I'm not suggesting a cavalier attitude towards changing the lens's; just providing info for those who might not have had the opportunity to know the details.)

 

[david p.]

The hot spot and shadows are characteristics of your light and pretty much all similar lights.

Switching lenses will make a small difference. But they aren't going to change the character of the light significantly.

You'll still have lots of shadows and a hot spot, they just won't be as stark as they are now. On the downside, you'll be wasting a lot more power by having more light reflect off the tank surface. How high is your XR30 mounted? Wider lenses usually call for a lower mounting.

Why is reducing the "hot spot" important to you?

And why exactly are you after a better spread of light?

If you've got hard-core answers (to you-doesn't matter what anyone else thinks) for either of those questions, then I think you'd be better served by switching lights than by putting even more money into these.

For example, a 48" Orbit Marine Pro strip ($332 from googling) eliminates the hot spot AND shadows instead of just reducing them a little.

It also will cut the amount of light escaping over the rim of the tank and how much is being reflected off the water....so you'll be spending more power lighting the tank and less power lighting up your room.

2¢

i knew from the start that (one of) the down side of most led been the hot spot and shadows if compared to T5 and MH.
my question was more related to light distribution, my lights are mounted on the RMS system

if i take the picture from ecotech, since i don't have a deep tank, i am more prone to have those hot spot, specially in the upper part of the tank. i currently run my radion at 65%overall (it shows 42% on the graph) and i eventually want to try to increse the lighning , i would increase the 'red' spot (hi-hi PAR), by switching to the wide lense, i woudl have a more 'green / light green' (mid-high PAR) all over the tank. does it make sense ? i understand that ill have to increase power on the lights

as for the 48" Orbit Marine Pro strip, let's say we agree to disagree, they are not comparable light in my opinion. if i already spent so much money on my tank, i doubt the wide lens is a budget issu.
but thanks for you reply, i want to average out the comments and see.

Just FYI: The wide-angle lens ships with the unit, so no additional monetary cost incurred. It takes about 5min per light to swap out, so not a hard thing to undo at a later point if undesirable results occur.
(I'm not suggesting a cavalier attitude towards changing the lens's; just providing info for those who might not have had the opportunity to know the details.)

the wide lens did not come with my lights.

i might end up trying them and returning them if i don't like the results, i will borrow a PAR meter to mesure the outcome on light distribution.

 

[DLHDesign]

the wide lens did not come with my lights.

Oh! Sorry; that's a surprise - my XR15 Pro's came with them, so I figured the XR30 Pro's would as well... Did you get them new?

I'm curious because I've thought about getting an XR30 to bump the middle of my tank a bit. The lack of included wide angle lens's wouldn't be a deal breaker, but it's interesting to know...

 

[david p.]

actually i was purchasing the XR30 but they received the Pros in a regular XR30 box,so i got a deal for the pro... don't know if i was supposed to get the lens or not, did not ask because getting the pros almost cost me nothing

 

[mcarroll]

as for the 48" Orbit Marine Pro strip, let's say we agree to disagree, they are not comparable light in my opinion.

I was not trying to sell you on any particular light, just making a useful comparison, but turning up ones nose like that makes this is an interesting point.

So far as your corals are concerned they are extremely comparable.

The Orbit even does sunrise/sunset dimming, but I wouldn't bother arguing the human-oriented features (storms, wifi, funny LED colors, et al) – you should definitely get what you like and what you can afford as far as those features go.

The point is that when you're at the top of the market, spending-wise (tho I see you got a deal – cool!) can it make sense to still need to spend more money to correct the light?

In that mode of thinking, if you have a substantive issue with the hot spot and shadowing (enough to open a thread, but I don't know your concerns or how you feel about them), it makes a lot of sense to look at a solution that doesn't create those problems in the first place.

The Orbit Pro is merely one fine example of a different fixture type that doesn't create the shadows....there are many.

i will borrow a PAR meter

I may be repeating myself on this, but I would get a lux meter.....you can start with a free app for your smartphone ("galactica luxmeter" for IOS is one of many out there) but I would spend $15 to get a handheld #lux #meter like what I use. Search for the "LX-1010B".

You can then use the PAR meter you borrow to calibrate your lux meter.....you'll have a conversion factor that makes your lux meter able to give equivalent readings to the PAR meter. (Google "Dana Riddle lux meter" and read his stuff on advanced aquaria.)

 

[david p.]

The point is that when you're at the top of the market, spending-wise (tho I see you got a deal – cool!) can it make sense to still need to spend more money to correct the light?

it'S not that i need to correct the light, but i have seen some people maping the PAR in their tank, and they reach crazy number right under the LED puck, then it decrease fast as you go on the outside. i would prefer to have a more even distribution.

as for the lux meter, that's at the surface of water right ? i want to know my reading mid and higher section of the tank.

 

[mcarroll]

it'S not that i need to correct the light, but i have seen some people maping the PAR in their tank, and they reach crazy number right under the LED puck, then it decrease fast as you go on the outside. i would prefer to have a more even distribution.

That's fine and I'm for-it if you're for-it....I was mostly wondering if there was a more specific reason or if it's just because it seems theoretically better for the light to be more even?

I honestly wouldn't try comparing your tank with others' on that basis....your don't say you're having any problems, so your corals are totally adapted to your lights at this point. Someone else's tank isn't better at all just because the light is spread out differently. Unless you just like the light spread out more like that.

If you like the light just fine how it is, I would not change anything – keep your corals happy. Big changes to light – whether intensity increases or decreases – can cause bleaching and mortality in stable colonies.

To that end...

as for the lux meter, that's at the surface of water right ? i want to know my reading mid and higher section of the tank.

Yes, you would use your phone above the water!

No, you don't need specific readings below the water.

Take surface readings before the change to your light and use the old readings to set up the light with the new lenses....and move corals as needed/if needed to minimize changes to the light a colony receives.

It works – you and I wouldn't be the first two people to do it this way either!

 

[mcarroll]

sorry for the late edits on that

 

[david p.]

Yes, you would use your phone above the water!

No, you don't need specific readings below the water.

Take surface readings before the change to your light and use the old readings to set up the light with the new lenses....and move corals as needed/if needed to minimize changes to the light a colony receives.

It works – you and I wouldn't be the first two people to do it this way either!

thanks, will try that first.

as you mention, i like what i have for now, i'm new to the hobby and try to get as much as i can from my lights, but i also see horror story of people burning their coral with those LED. so i'm cautious and try to get as much input as possible.
so far i get good growth, but could i get more!!

thanks again!

 

[mcarroll]

Sometimes diagrams that illustrate coverage and light spill and hot spots are handy. Light spill is the percentage of wasted power you're projecting outside the tank.

These are all proportional and "mathematically correct" diagrams. 48"x20" tanks, with the lights as described in the pics.

The light circles are what you'd find AT THE TOP OF THE WATER. The company's diagrams depict the bottom of the tank, so you have a somewhat distorted view of the available light. Looking at the light at the top of the tank gives more perspective and is more useful IMO.

I added the last diagram just to show the difference in light distribution of a strip...in the diagram, that's the Orbit Pro I mentioned.

I'm guessing this is about what you have now:




This is about what you'd have by switching lenses without changing the mounting height:

I'm guessing this is what you would actually have after the lens switch....note the mounting height change.



]This is what you'd get if you switch the mounting height but keep the old lenses. Makes sense to have three of four smaller fixtures if you do it this way....you can spead them out nicely.



Here's and example of multiple smaller lights on a slightly different tank (60"x18"):



Here's your tank with a 48" Orbit Pro. Note the relative lack of light spill and evenness of the light field.



A 36" Orbit Pro ($279) does even better with spill:

 

[david p.]

Sometimes diagrams that illustrate coverage and light spill and hot spots are handy. Light spill is the percentage of wasted power you're projecting outside the tank.

These are all proportional and "mathematically correct" diagrams. 48"x20" tanks, with the lights as described in the pics.

The light circles are what you'd find AT THE TOP OF THE WATER. The company's diagrams depict the bottom of the tank, so you have a somewhat distorted view of the available light. Looking at the light at the top of the tank gives more perspective and is more useful IMO.

I added the last diagram just to show the difference in light distribution of a strip...in the diagram, that's the Orbit Pro I mentioned.

I'm guessing this is about what you have now:




This is about what you'd have by switching lenses without changing the mounting height:

I'm guessing this is what you would actually have after the lens switch....note the mounting height change.



]This is what you'd get if you switch the mounting height but keep the old lenses. Makes sense to have three of four smaller fixtures if you do it this way....you can spead them out nicely.



Here's and example of multiple smaller lights on a slightly different tank (60"x18"):



Here's your tank with a 48" Orbit Pro. Note the relative lack of light spill and evenness of the light field.



A 36" Orbit Pro ($279) does even better with spill:

that's interesting... i'll sleep over it... my tank is in the basement in the same room than my home theater... more spill means more light polution for my projector!
you really want me to sell my radion to get those orbit LED !!! that's exaclty the kind of info i wanted! good food for thought!
think i might stick to the std lens not the wide one's