LEDs, T5s and MHs for zoas discussion. What are your thoughts?

[Lenny_S]

<ScienceNerd>
I've done a lot of research into light and photosynthesis because neither of those are my particular specialty. Saying that the light that comes from one thing is somehow better than the light that comes from another is just silly. Visible light is a stream of photons traveling in a wave between the frequencies of 400nm to 700nm. No matter what emits it, it is essentially the same. In the case of MH, T5 & LED, the real difference is in the quantity of the various wavelengths being delivered. To adjust those various quantities of wavelengths in either MH or T5, you would have to change the bulbs or combine different numbers of bulbs of different wavelengths. The same would be true of an LED fixture with a fixed set of diodes running at a fixed amount of power. But an LED fixture with several different diodes running discrete wavelengths and having the ability to run at variable power, would be able to run a very broad range of wavelengths and quantities.
The perception that T5 or MH "grow corals better" is really more a function of the fact that the light they produce has been "tuned" to grow corals over several iterations of trial and adjustment. And even with the lower cost, less adjustable LEDs, they have a collection of diodes that basically target that sweet spot of wavelengths and quantities. But those high end infinitely adjustable LEDs seem to be the ones most people struggle with a bit, probably because they are adjusted "by eye" for the most part, and the human eye simply can't detect those individual wavelengths and quantities. But at the end of the day, if one were so inclined, one could perfectly reproduce the light from any one of these 3 form factors to any other.
The real difference (aside from price and maintenance) is in the delivery of the light. All 3 deliver light in very different ways, so each of them deliver light in different patterns. But again, if one was so inclined, one could duplicate or at least closely approximate the pattern from any one light to any other.
</ScienceNerd>
<Hobbyist>
My PERSONAL preferences is LED. But that is a function of form factor, efficiency, power, flexibility and low total cost of ownership because bulbs don't need to be replaced every 9-12 months. Not because I think it produces "better light". Since this thread is about 95% opinion, I figured I'd throw mine in (mixed with a little science and fact).
</Hobbyist>

 

[USMC4Life]

Any LED with the right power and spectrum will work to keep most corals and anemones.
But not better than MHs and or T5s, IMO.

Grandis.

I thought the same until I changed to SB-reeflights because my MH was just costing me too much money. In the latest few weeks that I put the new LED up my corals started to visibly grow.

 

[joshporksandwich]

I've been running leds only on my 125g for 4 years without a problem. My zoas got smaller with leds but grew faster than halide led combo. With MH my zoas were huge. 1 year ago I added 1 MH to my frag tank and my zoas got bigger. I have a t5 led combo frag tank and I get the best colors in that system but growth is average . Leds alone are great and best for zoas in my opinion. If anyone wants to send me a brand of lights for free I will make sure I advertise for you guys, ecotech, ai, hydras are you listening?

 

[A. grandis]

I've been running leds only on my 125g for 4 years without a problem. My zoas got smaller with leds but grew faster than halide led combo. With MH my zoas were huge. 1 year ago I added 1 MH to my frag tank and my zoas got bigger. I have a t5 led combo frag tank and I get the best colors in that system but growth is average . Leds alone are great and best for zoas in my opinion. If anyone wants to send me a brand of lights for free I will make sure I advertise for you guys, ecotech, ai, hydras are you listening?

Me too... send me one for free!! Haha!
Grandis.

 

[A. grandis]

<ScienceNerd>
I've done a lot of research into light and photosynthesis because neither of those are my particular specialty. Saying that the light that comes from one thing is somehow better than the light that comes from another is just silly. Visible light is a stream of photons traveling in a wave between the frequencies of 400nm to 700nm. No matter what emits it, it is essentially the same. In the case of MH, T5 & LED, the real difference is in the quantity of the various wavelengths being delivered. To adjust those various quantities of wavelengths in either MH or T5, you would have to change the bulbs or combine different numbers of bulbs of different wavelengths. The same would be true of an LED fixture with a fixed set of diodes running at a fixed amount of power. But an LED fixture with several different diodes running discrete wavelengths and having the ability to run at variable power, would be able to run a very broad range of wavelengths and quantities.
The perception that T5 or MH "grow corals better" is really more a function of the fact that the light they produce has been "tuned" to grow corals over several iterations of trial and adjustment. And even with the lower cost, less adjustable LEDs, they have a collection of diodes that basically target that sweet spot of wavelengths and quantities. But those high end infinitely adjustable LEDs seem to be the ones most people struggle with a bit, probably because they are adjusted "by eye" for the most part, and the human eye simply can't detect those individual wavelengths and quantities. But at the end of the day, if one were so inclined, one could perfectly reproduce the light from any one of these 3 form factors to any other.
The real difference (aside from price and maintenance) is in the delivery of the light. All 3 deliver light in very different ways, so each of them deliver light in different patterns. But again, if one was so inclined, one could duplicate or at least closely approximate the pattern from any one light to any other.
</ScienceNerd>
<Hobbyist>
My PERSONAL preferences is LED. But that is a function of form factor, efficiency, power, flexibility and low total cost of ownership because bulbs don't need to be replaced every 9-12 months. Not because I think it produces "better light". Since this thread is about 95% opinion, I figured I'd throw mine in (mixed with a little science and fact).
</Hobbyist>

Thanks very much for your post!
I agree 100%!
With LEDs is a matter of having the guts and time to find that sweet spot and to get the right fixture for that particular tank!
It is kinda hard to find it, but it can be done, of course.
There is also a huge difference among everyone's goals for their tank's look and growth, so the relative taste is part of it too.
The T5s are almost magical and the only thing we need to find is the spectrum combo to please our eyes and/or to get that growth/color. Everything is 100% safe and ready to go, no matter what. It is much more enjoyable IMO.

Grandis.

 

[A. grandis]

I thought the same until I changed to SB-reeflights because my MH was just costing me too much money. In the latest few weeks that I put the new LED up my corals started to visibly grow.

Oh yeah... I wrote that "any LEDs would work to keep them", but didn't specify how and so on..
We do know that must be differences between LED fixtures, of course.
Same for MHs and T5s, I would say.
That's why I recommend the ATI fixtures. To me the ATIs are the very best!! Just can't go wrong with them because of the efficiency of the cooling system bringing that unique extra efficiency from the bulbs.
Grandis.

 

[joshporksandwich]

Thanks very much for your post!
I agree 100%!
With LEDs is a matter of having the guts and time to find that sweet spot and to get the right fixture for that particular tank!
It is kinda hard to find it, but it can be done, of course.
There is also a huge difference among everyone's goal for their tank's look and growth, so the relative taste is part of it too.
The T5s are almost magical and the only thing we need to find is the spectrum combo to please our eyes and/or to get that growth/color. Everything is 100% safe and ready to go, no matter what. It is much more enjoyable IMO.

Grandis.

I say with every light you have to find the sweet spot. I've burned thousands of dollars in corals with t5s, mh and leds. T5s are super strong and I've killed the most with them.

Also you guys are a lot smarter than me maybe you can explain to me the difference of par vs lumens. Someone told me you read par on mh and t5 but lumens with led. Or that for example a par of 200 with leds is different of a 200 par with mh or t5.

Thanks

 

[A. grandis]

I say with every light you have to find the sweet spot. I've burned thousands of dollars in corals with t5s, mh and leds. T5s are super strong and I've killed the most with them.

Also you guys are a lot smarter than me maybe you can explain to me the difference of par vs lumens. Someone told me you read par on mh and t5 but lumens with led. Or that for example a par of 200 with leds is different of a 200 par with mh or t5.

Thanks

Wow, I've never burned anything in my life with T5s and/or MHs. Never, ever... Hummm... Unless you have a 400W MH over a 55 gal tank or something like that without doing any kind of adaptation.
Every time you change bulbs or introduce new corals, zoas or anemones you need to give them a brake and allow them to adapt to the new environment. Maybe that's why...

I'm not sure who told you I read par on MHs and T5s and lumens with LED. But that isn't true at all...

Let's wait for the smart guys to give us the explanation for PAR and lumens.

Grandis.

 

[Lenny_S]

I say with every light you have to find the sweet spot. I've burned thousands of dollars in corals with t5s, mh and leds. T5s are super strong and I've killed the most with them.

Also you guys are a lot smarter than me maybe you can explain to me the difference of par vs lumens. Someone told me you read par on mh and t5 but lumens with led. Or that for example a par of 200 with leds is different of a 200 par with mh or t5.

Thanks

Lumens is a measurement of total quantity of light in a scale of candela per second. PAR is a measure of total light in wavelengths conducive to photosynthesis in a scale of photon density per square meter.
I have found this article and its references to be quite enlightening [emoji6]
http://www.aquarium-pond-answers.com/2012/03/pur-vs-par-in-aquarium-lighting.html?m=1

 

[USMC4Life]

Oh yeah... I wrote that "any LEDs would work to keep them", but didn't specify how and so on..
We do know that must be differences between LED fixtures, of course.
Same for MHs and T5s, I would say.
That's why I recommend the ATI fixtures. To me the ATIs are the very best!! Just can't go wrong with them because of the efficiency of the cooling system bringing that unique extra efficiency from the bulbs.
Grandis.

I'm not disputing that they are very good. But they are expensive to run and maintain in my experience.

 

[A. grandis]

I'm not disputing that they are very good. But they are expensive to run and maintain in my experience.

Oh, sorry...
I misunderstood.
Grandis.

 

[USMC4Life]

Oh, sorry...
I misunderstood.
Grandis.

All good.

 

[A. grandis]

I'm not THAT smart, but I still remember some things...
My $.02 on regards to lumens and PAR:

The reason people stopped measuring lumens for aquariums is because PAR would be "more directly related to photosynthesis" (zooxanthellae). Lumens shows only measures of visible light (human eye) in the form of intensity, putting aside UV and IR, like PAR. The best way to get a higher number for lumens is to have more yellow light from the source to be measured. Yellow light isn't what zooxanthellae use to grow/reproduce, so that shouldn't be the best way to measure what we are looking for.

PAR, in another hand, is a much BETTER way to measure light intensity then lumens for plants and zooxanthellae.
BUT it is relative and not a 100% accurate in many ways!
I've said that before... The main reason is because there are so many obstacles when one measures it. Every spot and distance from the bulb you measure will show a different number, as we know. The influences of distance and surface water movement will interfere with measurements too! PAR also doesn't include UV and IR in the shown numbers from the PAR meters.

The measurements of different colors of the spectrum aren't measured equally (PAR per watt), and the zooxanthellae and plants will use only part of what's being measured, so measuring PAR per watt isn't smart! The balance of the spectrum from the bulb needs to be highly considered!!! Choosing the right bulbs with specific spectrum curves will give you the key to the success, not PAR alone!! Not your eyes!!! That is another reason why when we get those MHs and/or T5 bulbs with specific spectrums there is no wrong way to go, as long as we choose the right ones for what we are using and we change them when they get old and compromise their spectrum after such hours of use. With LEDs we need to "dial" and find the sweet spot. Can't dial using your eyes, sorry.

The most important thing when measuring PAR is to have the light source very well distributed in that specific area measured.
T5s are much more forgiving when measuring PAR than MHs and LEDs, of course. Please keep in mind that a great MH reflector will make such a huge difference spreading the light, and that is the advantage over many LED systems! Even though, we need to know that such measurements are very relative because the foot print will have different numbers from spot to spot, besides other considerations.

PAR should be only a superficial help for a comparison when measuring light for the reef tank.
Testing PAR using the same fixture and the same exactly spot of measurements from the fixture will help us find out more about some of the differences between available bulbs. That way we can have an IDEA and choose the bulbs we want to use for our specific system.

Grandis.

 

[Christopher Davis]

T5 HO Home Depot DIY fixture with 48w HO ATI BULBS!

 

[Lenny_S]

@A. grandis I'm sorry, but most of what you wrote just isn't accurate.

The reason people stopped measuring lumens for aquariums is because PAR would be "more directly related to photosynthesis" (zooxanthellae). Lumens shows only measures of visible light (human eye) in the form of intensity, putting aside UV and IR, like PAR. The best way to get a higher number for lumens is to have more yellow light from the source to be measured. Yellow light isn't what zooxanthellae use to grow/reproduce, so that shouldn't be the best way to measure what we are looking for.

First off, I wouldn't say people have stopped measuring lumens... it's a completely acceptable way to measure the total quantity of light coming from ones fixture. A lot of hobbyists use lumens as an alternative to PAR because for many, a PAR meter just doesn't make economical sense. And what you call "yellow light" is what I hope you mean by "full spectrum" light and not actual yellow light between 565nm and 590nm. However, in either case all visible light will increase the reading from a light meter measuring lumens, it doesn't matter what "color" it is as long as the light wavelength is between 400nm and 700nm.

PAR, in another hand, is a much BETTER way to measure light intensity then lumens for plants and zooxanthellae.
BUT it is relative and not a 100% accurate in many ways!
I've said that before... The main reason is because there are so many obstacles when one measures it. Every spot and distance from the bulb you measure will show a different number, as we know. The influences of distance and surface water movement will interfere with measurements too! PAR also doesn't include UV and IR in the shown numbers from the PAR meters.

PAR meters are not perfect because for most of them they have a static calibration from the manufacturer, so you can't adjust the calibration yourself. It has absolutely noting to do with "obstacles" as you say. They are precision instruments, and every reading is accurate to the calibration. Naturally you are going to get many different readings as you change the placement and orientation of the sensor. That is not interference, you are getting exactly what it is receiving. But like any measuring device, the user has to know how to use the device in order to get a proper reading. In the case of a PAR meter, the best way to use them is to take many-many readings and map you tank at many positions and many depths. Lastly in this part, you call out that PAR meters don't measure UV and IR wavelengths. That is true, but you say it like it's a bad thing. In case you didn't know UV and IR (depending on intensity) are damaging to pretty much all life on earth. Most if not all photosynthetic life on earth develop ways to protect themselves from UV and IR. Would it be good to get a UV or IR reading? Sure, but not because it is desirable, but because you would want to eliminate it.

The measurements of different colors of the spectrum aren't measured equally (PAR per watt), and the zooxanthellae and plants will use only part of what's being measured, so measuring PAR per watt isn't smart! The balance of the spectrum from the bulb needs to be highly considered!!! Choosing the right bulbs with specific spectrum curves will give you the key to the success, not PAR alone!! Not your eyes!!! That is another reason why when we get those MHs and/or T5 bulbs with specific spectrums there is no wrong way to go, as long as we choose the right ones for what we are using and we change them when they get old and compromise their spectrum after such hours of use. With LEDs we need to "dial" and find the sweet spot. Can't dial using your eyes, sorry.

I don't know what "PAR per watt" even means, but it is irrelevant. You are correct in that zooxanthellae will only use a portion of what is being read from a PAR meter, but it will be a great deal of what is being detected by the meter, especially if you are using a light designed for coral. You are incorrect in the statement "MHs and/or T5 bulbs with specific spectrums there is no wrong way to go", you absolutely can, and many do. With any lighting, there are so many variables, the potential for error is high, so the user really needs to do their research and implement their lighting correctly.

The most important thing when measuring PAR is to have the light source very well distributed in that specific area measured.
T5s are much more forgiving when measuring PAR than MHs and LEDs, of course. Please keep in mind that a great MH reflector will make such a huge difference spreading the light, and that is the advantage over many LED systems! Even though, we need to know that such measurements are very relative because the foot print will have different numbers from spot to spot, besides other considerations.

Actually, the most important thing when measuring PAR is doing it correctly, and that will tell you how well your lighting is distributed. And here again, naturally you will get different readings as you position the sensor in different locations, that's the whole point. But once you have those reading, then you know how to adjust your light sources position and intensity so you can remeasure and see if you have improved.

PAR should be only a superficial help for a comparison when measuring light for the reef tank.
Testing PAR using the same fixture and the same exactly spot of measurements from the fixture will help us find out more about some of the differences between available bulbs. That way we can have an IDEA and choose the bulbs we want to use for our specific system.

I really just don't agree with the conclusion you've come up with, mostly because of all the inaccuracies of your previous statements. If you can, I think you need to try and better understand the basic properties of light and the basics of how it is used in photosynthesis. The scientific mind enters into any analysis with absolutely no preconception. I'm afraid in your case your mind is already made up so your "science" ends up being colored by what you have already decided.

 

[A. grandis]

@A. grandis I'm sorry, but most of what you wrote just isn't accurate.


First off, I wouldn't say people have stopped measuring lumens... it's a completely acceptable way to measure the total quantity of light coming from ones fixture. A lot of hobbyists use lumens as an alternative to PAR because for many, a PAR meter just doesn't make economical sense. And what you call "yellow light" is what I hope you mean by "full spectrum" light and not actual yellow light between 565nm and 590nm. However, in either case all visible light will increase the reading from a light meter measuring lumens, it doesn't matter what "color" it is as long as the light wavelength is between 400nm and 700nm.

PAR meters are not perfect because for most of them they have a static calibration from the manufacturer, so you can't adjust the calibration yourself. It has absolutely noting to do with "obstacles" as you say. They are precision instruments, and every reading is accurate to the calibration. Naturally you are going to get many different readings as you change the placement and orientation of the sensor. That is not interference, you are getting exactly what it is receiving. But like any measuring device, the user has to know how to use the device in order to get a proper reading. In the case of a PAR meter, the best way to use them is to take many-many readings and map you tank at many positions and many depths. Lastly in this part, you call out that PAR meters don't measure UV and IR wavelengths. That is true, but you say it like it's a bad thing. In case you didn't know UV and IR (depending on intensity) are damaging to pretty much all life on earth. Most if not all photosynthetic life on earth develop ways to protect themselves from UV and IR. Would it be good to get a UV or IR reading? Sure, but not because it is desirable, but because you would want to eliminate it.

I don't know what "PAR per watt" even means, but it is irrelevant. You are correct in that zooxanthellae will only use a portion of what is being read from a PAR meter, but it will be a great deal of what is being detected by the meter, especially if you are using a light designed for coral. You are incorrect in the statement "MHs and/or T5 bulbs with specific spectrums there is no wrong way to go", you absolutely can, and many do. With any lighting, there are so many variables, the potential for error is high, so the user really needs to do their research and implement their lighting correctly.

Actually, the most important thing when measuring PAR is doing it correctly, and that will tell you how well your lighting is distributed. And here again, naturally you will get different readings as you position the sensor in different locations, that's the whole point. But once you have those reading, then you know how to adjust your light sources position and intensity so you can remeasure and see if you have improved.

I really just don't agree with the conclusion you've come up with, mostly because of all the inaccuracies of your previous statements. If you can, I think you need to try and better understand the basic properties of light and the basics of how it is used in photosynthesis. The scientific mind enters into any analysis with absolutely no preconception. I'm afraid in your case your mind is already made up so your "science" ends up being colored by what you have already decided.

Sorry, my friend.
Most of the stuff I've said was what you also said, but in a different way. Please go back and read...
I'm not gonna waste my precious time trying to prove anything here on the subject.
Main reason being that I don't have to worry to measure either lumens nor PAR, nor have such time.
I just have to set and go with my T5s. Haha!

In regards to your last paragraph trying to tell me about my conclusions...
The same way I am set for my T5s you and others here are just set for your LEDs!
I didn't try to pursue anyone with my message, just tried to expose my thoughts.
Try search a bit deeper and you will find out more about what I've wrote.

I don't need to care much about all that. Thank God! Haha

Grandis.

 

[happyhourhero]

You literally did nothing but try and talk people out of LED and there is page after page of people proving that you are simply wrong in a majority of your statements. Now you try and say we just need to search for a deeper meaning in your posts? Troll supreme.

 

[sde1500]

You literally did nothing but try and talk people out of LED and there is page after page of people proving that you are simply wrong in a majority of your statements. Now you try and say we just need to search for a deeper meaning in your posts? Troll supreme.

Lol yea I do like that response. Claims one light is better than another, provides thoughts/facts on why. People challenge those facts, and the counter is "I'm not going to waste time proving why." Instead will just keep making blanket claims.

In reality, the argument comes down to this, MH and T5 are more plug and play. LED offers more control. More control is probably a detriment to a newer reefer. Thats about it. I looked into all those LED systems, don't need to adjust 6 channels of color, picked one that was 1 channel blue, 1 channel all others. Set up for full spectrum, I control intensity. Most corals growing happily. Light is light, just matters how much you shine on those corals.

 

[Lenny_S]

@A. grandis I think you need to decide if you want this to be a fact thread or an opinion thread. If it is opinion then hurray for that and spew yours along with everyone else and I take no issue with anyone's opinion because we are each entitled. But when you try to support your opinion with scientific inaccuracies stated as fact I feel obligated as a scientist to correct them because I have a great deal of respect for the field I've dedicated 2/3 of my life to.
If anyone needs to re-read a post I think it's you... for your convenience I've added them here...

<ScienceNerd>
I've done a lot of research into light and photosynthesis because neither of those are my particular specialty. Saying that the light that comes from one thing is somehow better than the light that comes from another is just silly. Visible light is a stream of photons traveling in a wave between the frequencies of 400nm to 700nm. No matter what emits it, it is essentially the same. In the case of MH, T5 & LED, the real difference is in the quantity of the various wavelengths being delivered. To adjust those various quantities of wavelengths in either MH or T5, you would have to change the bulbs or combine different numbers of bulbs of different wavelengths. The same would be true of an LED fixture with a fixed set of diodes running at a fixed amount of power. But an LED fixture with several different diodes running discrete wavelengths and having the ability to run at variable power, would be able to run a very broad range of wavelengths and quantities.
The perception that T5 or MH "grow corals better" is really more a function of the fact that the light they produce has been "tuned" to grow corals over several iterations of trial and adjustment. And even with the lower cost, less adjustable LEDs, they have a collection of diodes that basically target that sweet spot of wavelengths and quantities. But those high end infinitely adjustable LEDs seem to be the ones most people struggle with a bit, probably because they are adjusted "by eye" for the most part, and the human eye simply can't detect those individual wavelengths and quantities. But at the end of the day, if one were so inclined, one could perfectly reproduce the light from any one of these 3 form factors to any other.
The real difference (aside from price and maintenance) is in the delivery of the light. All 3 deliver light in very different ways, so each of them deliver light in different patterns. But again, if one was so inclined, one could duplicate or at least closely approximate the pattern from any one light to any other.
</ScienceNerd>
<Hobbyist>
My PERSONAL preferences is LED. But that is a function of form factor, efficiency, power, flexibility and low total cost of ownership because bulbs don't need to be replaced every 9-12 months. Not because I think it produces "better light". Since this thread is about 95% opinion, I figured I'd throw mine in (mixed with a little science and fact).
</Hobbyist>

Lumens is a measurement of total quantity of light in a scale of candela per second. PAR is a measure of total light in wavelengths conducive to photosynthesis in a scale of photon density per square meter.
I have found this article and its references to be quite enlightening [emoji6]
http://www.aquarium-pond-answers.com/2012/03/pur-vs-par-in-aquarium-lighting.html?m=1

As you can see, I CLEARLY distinguish between what is based on research vs. what is just my preference or opinion. If your intent was to restate something I wrote, you did a pretty poor job of it and I corrected your errors. This is more for the benefit of others seeking guidance from this thread than for my own.

 

[A. grandis]

You literally did nothing but try and talk people out of LED and there is page after page of people proving that you are simply wrong in a majority of your statements. Now you try and say we just need to search for a deeper meaning in your posts? Troll supreme.

LOL!
You guys are just coming with this PAR stuff to drive the attention out of the videos I've posted.
You guys are the ones with the mind set on LEDs!
You must be kidding me!

I found a site that could be the beginning for the search about what I posted about PAR:
http://www.compareledgrowlights.com/par_and_lumens/

Have fun!

Grandis.