I disagree Adam. My 48 LED light I made puts out 1800-2200 PAR at the surface, 14" under the light, on a 30"x24" footprint. At full power it takes 144w. This is better output than a 1000w MH as far as intensity, but not quite the spread. Top end if you DIY you're looking at around $500 per 48 LED panel to replace a 1000w MH with an LED light, on the cheap end it would be under $300. So even on large tanks I still think LEDs are by far the most cost effective lighting method, but not the easiest to implement for most people. Even if you need 2 panels to cover the same spread ($600-$1000), the cost savings in electricity, 300w vs 1000w, is going to pay for the LEDs rather quickly.
I would put $ on a person being able to recover all cost of switching to LEDs, no matter the size tank, in under 18 months for any home aquarium. If you time it with your normal bulb replacement schedule and factor in 2x bulb replacement costs at 12 months. As an example, say a large tank uses 4 1000w MHs and replaces them on the cheap side of $100 per bulb, that is $800 is savings just from not having to replace the bulbs. At most your looking at a difference in power of 1200w vs 4000w but I am sure with the proper design you can easily get the LED side to under 1000w total to cover the same as 4000w of MH. 3000w less watts used 8 hours a day over an 18month period is easily going to cover the cost of the LEDs. My power bill went from $400/mo down to $80/mo by switching to LEDs and I paid $1000 total for all my LEDs for 2 displays and 2 sumps plus a lot of extra pieces 2 years ago. It took me less than 4 months just from the savings on the power bill to recover all the cost of my LEDs, then I also saved $350 by not having to replace all my T5 and MH bulbs because they were being replaced with the LEDs. In 24 months I have now saved over $7000 between electricity savings and not having to replace bulbs.