Is T5 still one of the best choices in reef lighting.

[buruskeee]

I did not experience par is par using radion g4 and g6. Running 300-400 par with led gave me the color fading like I would get with 600-700 par of halide. I don't think it is a coincidence that we saw a bunch of sps keepers running much higher nutrient levels when full led tanks because mainstream. The increase in zoox certainly does protect the coral from becoming damaged from too much light. The par from a linear source of light, a wider point source, and a narrow point source of light does not have the same effect on SPS. When quality LED prices offer more value, I will be covering a tanks footprint almost completely with diodes. I really want those ATI stratons but price is crazy.

Again, spectrum. Maybe it was fading due to higher PAR makeup of the blue range and it wasn’t used to it. Who knows why you saw the fade, but photons are photons and all PAR measures is how many photons are hitting a specific area. As for point source/linear, that’s hot spot and spread issues. Compare the AI Blades to T5s when looking at shadowing and linear source.

As I argued before, if spectrum is exactly the same (spread/coverage area, hot spot, etc), PAR for PAR it’s no different one tech to another. They’re all the same photons.

 

[bobnicaragua]

What you’re talking about is spread. That’s a different discussion. What I’m referring to is that the photons that come out of each tech is exactly the same. If there was a T5/MH/LED fixture that was designed with the exact spectrum and gave out the exact PAR as each other - it would grow across exactly the same. That’s been my whole point from the beginning. There’s some folks that think 100 PAR from LED is not the same as 100 PAR from arc based bulbs because “LEDs are lasers” - it’s just no where near factual.

You’re arguing a very specific point. All lights are not created equal. The delivery from the reflectors vs a lens are not exactly the same. The spectrum isn’t exactly the same. It’s still easier to find success with old tech.

People have gravitated to LED because of marketing, controllability, less heat, and they make corals glow and look cool as hell.

Hybrid lighting takes advantage of the strengths of multiple platforms and is dismissed out of hand by most reefers because they don’t want old technology.

If you are focusing on acropora, look to some type of hybrid between T5, LED, and halides. Any combination makes keeping your acros happy a little easier.

 

[buruskeee]

You’re arguing a very specific point. All lights are not created equal. The delivery from the reflectors vs a lens are not exactly the same. The spectrum isn’t exactly the same. It’s still easier to find success with old tech.

Lense has more to do with spread/hotspot, the photons (and its energy) remain exactly the same. If you disagree, bring at least a hypothesis on what would differ. I’ll give you a hint, look up fundamentally what a photon is and if there can be a different type that exists that is perceived as light.

As I said repeatedly, it’s only the spectrum that is different. If the spectrum was identical you’d never know the difference PAR for PAR with growth or color of corals. Period.

 

[Cichlid Dad]

 

[Reefering1]

I’ll give you a hint, look up fundamentally what a photon is and if there can be a different type that exists that is perceived as light.

Key word here is "perceived".. mh and t5s put out more than just percieved light. You want to seperate all aspects of the light source and say the photons are the same. Even if you discard spread/delivery, the "percieved light" is only 1/3 of what the bulbs put out(uv,ir). Look at it as a whole, not just the one aspect that you think the leds are "as good"

 

[buruskeee]

Key word here is "perceived".. mh and t5s put out more than just percieved light. You want to seperate all aspects of the light source and say the photons are the same. Even if you discard spread/delivery, the "percieved light" is only 1/3 of what the bulbs put out(uv,ir). Look at it as a whole, not just the one aspect that you think the leds are "as good"

You mean spectrum? UV and IR is a a part of the spectrum, which has been repeatedly discussed in this thread. If the spectrum is exactly the same, what is MH or T5 doing that LEDs are not? No one can answer this because there is zero difference. You can say you like MH because you believe in the UVb and IR spectrums, but saying LEDs are lasers and implying it’s more synthetic is a huge myth and disinformation.

Way to conveniently not quote the next line in what you quoted.

 

[MartinM]

Having run T5 since the early days and then the Blades, the Blades are superior in almost every way. If they can improve spectrum on version 2, they are easily one of the best lights on the market. By improve I mean include all 5 LED spectrums on one Blade.

More PAR per watt, best spread of any LED, actually controllable unlike T5s, tons of pros over a T5 setup.

3 of the 57” Blades gave me SPS PAR all over my 72*36 tank. It would have taken at least 8 T5s minimum to compare.

If you throw a freshwater into the mix you can get a good full spectrum. I'm running 2x glow 2x grow and 1x FW on my 200x80cm.

+1 to If budget is an issue, go T5. If it's not, seriously consider blades instead, or do what I do and mix them up, because I wanted some T5s heavy in the UVA-UVB range to supplement the LEDs.

 

[Reefering1]

You mean spectrum? UV and IR is a a part of the spectrum, which has been repeatedly discussed in this thread. If the spectrum is exactly the same, what is MH or T5 doing that LEDs are not? No one can answer this because there is zero difference. You can say you like MH because you believe in the UVb and IR spectrums, but saying LEDs are lasers and implying it’s more synthetic is a huge myth and disinformation.

Way to conveniently not quote the next line in what you quoted.

I guess my point is that its not the same, leds do not produce the same output. It would be equivalent to you saying that a toaster is the same thing as the engine in a car because they both produce heat and can burn you if you touch certain parts. they may me similar in that one way,idk, but they do different things.. as far as the lenses go, i want to agree with you, but can't get past the loss in intensity as the led spreads the light. Maybe at its core, it is more similar to a laser beam compared to the other light sources. Another equivalent would be like me saying that halides don't produce heat, you just need a chiller.

 

[bobnicaragua]

Lense has more to do with spread/hotspot, the photons (and its energy) remain exactly the same. If you disagree, bring at least a hypothesis on what would differ. I’ll give you a hint, look up fundamentally what a photon is and if there can be a different type that exists that is perceived as light.

As I said repeatedly, it’s only the spectrum that is different. If the spectrum was identical you’d never know the difference PAR for PAR with growth or color of corals. Period.

Your point is a bit inconsequential, but I’m not arguing you’re wrong.

I go back and forth between running LED T5 hybrid to LED T5 Halide hybrid. I just put the halides back up this week.

I keep the par at about 300 on the sanded, so that never changes much.

With halides in the mix, the acros get a deeper color that’s less translucent and less pastel. They look heartier, if that makes sense.

 

[PeterErc]

Great 2 cents. +1 on the vinyl. I feel sorry for the younger crowd that have never heard Pink Floyd or zeppelin on an analog DC amp through large floor standing speakers turned way too far up.

This is way more interesting than arguing about lights. What’s your address? I am coming over. What did you say? Turn it up I can’t hear it

Sad news is I am not the younger crowd unless you are really old.

I know my corals grow better when they listen to full range music instead of 130db at 40hz. Think they might do better if I can make the stand rattle like an old hooptie?

 

[DIYreefer]

It's funny because I never thought I'd be arguing with people over their love of lightbulbs lol

This. This is it, right here.

Let people light their aquariums however they see fit. Who cares?!?!?! Lol.

 

[PeterErc]

It's funny because I never thought I'd be arguing with people over their love of lightbulbs lol

Well LED’s aren’t light bulbs so it like arguing over a fire to a heating element.

I had to do it lol

 

[jandin101]

T5 was the most affordable way for me to light my Reefer 300. I found a used ATI hybrid fixture online that someone was trying to get rid of for like 50 bucks and added a Reef LED from Red Sea that I also bought used in the middle for some shimmer.

Fantastic coverage. It's actually more light than I need, and I wound up hanging the fixture really high above the aquarium so that my sand bed only had a PAR rating of 100-150 for my lower light corals. On top of the aquascape the PAR reads closer to 300. I have almost no shadowing and the corals seem to be responding really well and growing.

The only problem is that the aquarium is in the middle of our living room, and the light spillage is pretty bad. If you lie down on the couch you get blinded by the T5s.

 

[DCR]

"Photons are Photons" and "Spectrum is Spectrum" implies an over-simplified understanding of light to suit our very limited knowledge as humans. There has to be more to light than just PAR and spectrum, at least as measured by our crude instruments. We don't know what we don't know. The fact that corals respond differently to different lighting systems (including natural sunlight), as many experienced reefers will attest, with seemingly the same par and spectrum proves this is wrong or incomplete at best. Corals in their natural habitat are exposed to natural sunlight with 2000-2500 PAR and thrive. I challenge any reef keeper to match that if you really believe that PAR and spectrum is totally sufficient to define light.

 

[jda]

"food is food" and "calories are calories" is just as bad of a statement as "photons are photons." ...only photons are quantums which are both theoretical and infinite... and calories are neither.

 

[londre5000]

I ran T5's along with Hydra 52HD for a while. The color spectrum and pop definitely was better and less "blue" however I had so many issues with my t5 ballast, I took them down.

 

[Cichlid Dad]

"food is food" and "calories are calories" is just as bad of a statement as "photons are photons." ...only photons are quantums which are both theoretical and infinite... and calories are neither.

Thank you... Exactly my belief.

 

[rtparty]

There is more to lighting than just spectrum. The reflectors on halides and T5 are large and really good at throwing light at every angle. I run T5 LED hybrid and pretty much all of my canopy is covered in lights.

The T5 are great at lighting up shadowed areas, which is beneficial to acropora. I have dimly lit areas that go totally dark when the T5 shutoff and only LEDs remain on.

Yes, because you have a narrow LED fixture that doesn't spread light nearly as well as some claim

 

[dricc]

T5 is the most cost efficient way to light a high light tank today, specifically ATI fixtures. You can light a 6' tank with bulbs brand new for $850 (way cheaper used today). Par over 700 up high, 200+ on sand with blanket coverage. Bulbs will go 18 months with a little par reduction regardless of what regurgitation you read on here. Corals grow fast and extremely dense under t5. Only thing that I don't like about T5 is strictly appearance related. SPS florescence looks a little flat compared to 20k halide and LED. Adding some blue reefbrite or other led strips helps with this.

This is what I do. I have metal halides,t5 and reef brites. I run them separately throughout a eight to nine hour lighting period.

 

[BobbyJ]

Just built up a Cade 1200 and went with mixed lighting. Running a dimmable aquatic life T5 setup and 2 A360 leds. I went this way based on cost. The led blades for a 48”Setup and 360 leds to fill, was pricey $$$$. I’m very happy overall with the setup and coverage.