This is very interesting to me. I have never heard of the 32% error. When @telegraham did his review he found a correction of 17% necessary (IIRC).Corrected the chart above per the guidance below. This is the unit I'm using Amazon Link. I would really like to get a hold of a 510 for comparison. Also, there are several versions of this meter. Mine is the latest with the large and small sensors.
Accurate PAR Readings – No Immersion Correction Applied
![]()
The PAR meter is calibrated similarly to a famous brand and provides direct sensor readings of PAR (µmol/m²/s).
Unlike the XX-510, VBR-Aqua does not apply an Immersion Effect Correction Factor (IECF).
![]()
As a result, underwater PAR values appear about 25% lower higher than those from an XX-510 — this is expected and does not mean the readings are inaccurate.
