Question for LED owners

[dbrewsky]

And as far as energy concerns go, especially for a sps setup... forget about the energy savings between leds and mh... the actual consumption is not going to be much lower than what you currently have with the MH.

HOWEVER.... the savings in cooling the tank is where you will see savings. My tank now stays cool enough that my fans never kick on vs my older tanks where i had to crank the ac down and run fans all summer long to avoid running a chiller. So Yes, LEDs will save you money if you are already having to deal with the heat energy issues from MH.

 

[Reefrookie220]

See my trouble is that LED's don't provide heat which forces me to run a heater and I'd rather have to run a chiller than a heater because I've had heaters fail and friends had heaters fail and lost everything.

I haven't had a heater in years thanks to mh

I've seen some leds throw some heat! Also if you gotta use a heater get a ground probe! Most heater fails are because of this.

 

[Harold Green]

At 1000w wouldn't MH have becomr a viable option? If I find myself considering 400w or more I will fire up my MH's.

I've run metal halides and vho's before and been successful with both however I don't like having to deal with all the excess heat. If led's will give me good growth and I don't have to change out lamps once or twice a year, don't have to replace ballasts every few years and the current draw of the led's is lower so the running cost is less then I see only disadvantages to running MH's. Not to mention if I choose I can change the color temperature of the lighting with the twist of a dial. I can adjust the intensity as I need for different corals and also do that independently across the tank, something difficult to do with MH's. And considering that I've built several diy units if any I have fail I can get replacement parts and repair them myself. Several of my lfs have replaced their MH units with led's and that kind of says it all as far as I'm concerned.

 

[dbrewsky]

haha yeah, but nothing like multiple mh in a canopy lol

 

[dbrewsky]

From my research into leds, there is a lot of success and one of the things I have noticed from researching successful tanks is that the majority of the led-only tanks that are thriving are utilizing more fixtures than you would think necessary. This is more for adequate dispersion and coverage of the light since led are unable to effectively disperse that light over the same foot print as florescent/mh. now whether this is cost effective over keeping existing technology on these tanks is up to the end user to decide. If 2-4oo watt mh in huge efficient, reflectors like the luminarcs could cover the same area adequately vs 6 radion pros, then you may not see any savings or cost savings.

a photon is a photon as long as the corals are getting the energy from these photons that they require it would make sense why you see tanks that do aweseome with led, mh, vho,t-5, natural sunlight.... you name it.

 

[ca2or]

I've run metal halides and vho's before and been successful with both however I don't like having to deal with all the excess heat. If led's will give me good growth and I don't have to change out lamps once or twice a year, don't have to replace ballasts every few years and the current draw of the led's is lower so the running cost is less then I see only disadvantages to running MH's. Not to mention if I choose I can change the color temperature of the lighting with the twist of a dial. I can adjust the intensity as I need for different corals and also do that independently across the tank, something difficult to do with MH's. And considering that I've built several diy units if any I have fail I can get replacement parts and repair them myself. Several of my lfs have replaced their MH units with led's and that kind of says it all as far as I'm concerned.

All good points for sure. I can counter that my friends who are SPS dominant are sticking with MH for now

 

[Harold Green]

From my research into leds, there is a lot of success and one of the things I have noticed from researching successful tanks is that the majority of the led-only tanks that are thriving are utilizing more fixtures than you would think necessary. This is more for adequate dispersion and coverage of the light since led are unable to effectively disperse that light over the same foot print as florescent/mh. now whether this is cost effective over keeping existing technology on these tanks is up to the end user to decide. If 2-4oo watt mh in huge efficient, reflectors like the luminarcs could cover the same area adequately vs 6 radion pros, then you may not see any savings or cost savings.

a photon is a photon as long as the corals are getting the energy from these photons that they require it would make sense why you see tanks that do aweseome with led, mh, vho,t-5, natural sunlight.... you name it.

You'll see cost savings. Both in lamp replacement and in lowered cooling costs.

 

[Harold Green]

All good points for sure. I can counter that my friends who are SPS dominant are sticking with MH for now

I never said led's were better nor was I suggesting to anyone to change, I was explaining my reasoning for my going to led's on my tanks and my personal experience with led's.

 

[ca2or]

I never said led's were better nor was I suggesting to anyone to change, I was explaining my reasoning for my going to led's on my tanks and my personal experience with led's.

I didn't mean to cone across as challenging. I'm not.... I agree with your logic

 

[dbrewsky]

haha yeah i no way trying to argue, believe me I was having no issues with sps with radiums but all kind of headaches with the led until i started to figure out the intensity issue. Even then, there is a reason why most of the reputable growers still stick with t-5 or mh for their sps systems.

 

[Wiz]

40b running with 2 reef radiance 165p+. Bout 12" above water. Run whites and blues at 40% max ramped up and down from 10am to 11pm. Any more intense and things close up. I have a very mixed reef. From montis, acros, and lepto to eleganse, frogspawn, candycane and acan to zoas, shrooms, leathers, and xenia. All grow fairly well. Heat is not an issue which was with my halides. I got slightly better growth and much better pics under t5s. But leds look better in person, cheaper, cooler, no replacements, fully adjustable from my phone!, and shimmer like halides. Very happy with my transition. Only lost my duncan.
Have a friend who has radions and can't run them above 30% without burning.
I've run these leds for more than 6months now. Dont see any problem other than bad pics. Dont use a par meter. I'm old fashion and move things till they're happy :)

 

[mcarroll]

People tend to over complicate this issue so I totally understand your post!

All you're trying to do, in a nutshell, is simulate sunlight over the reef. This is easy with most lights and a lux meter. Tune your lights to anywhere between 30,000 and 80,000 lx at the water surface and you're golden. What happens beneath the water is exactly the same as what happens beneath the water in the ocean.

This applies to any reef lighting, not just LED's. Accuracy of lux does not matter here.

And watts do matter - anyone saying they don't simply doesn't understand or are selling something. ;) The use of differing lenses and other factors can make comparisons a little complicated. For example, the 50 watt gu10 fixture I made packs about the same punch as my 160w Razor, but covers less area. OTOH, many big name vendors have settled on 90° or 120° lenses, so they should be easier to compare watt-for-watt.

 

[ca2or]

People tend to over complicate this issue so I totally understand your post!

All you're trying to do, in a nutshell, is simulate sunlight over the reef. This is easy with most lights and a lux meter. Tune your lights to anywhere between 30,000 and 80,000 lx at the water surface and you're golden. What happens beneath the water is exactly the same as what happens beneath the water in the ocean.

This applies to any reef lighting, not just LED's. Accuracy of lux does not matter here.

And watts do matter - anyone saying they don't simply doesn't understand or are selling something. ;) The use of differing lenses and other factors can make comparisons a little complicated. For example, the 50 watt gu10 fixture I made packs about the same punch as my 160w Razor, but covers less area. OTOH, many big name vendors have settled on 90° or 120° lenses, so they should be easier to compare watt-for-watt.

Now that's an interesting approach. So a lux meter is what one would need?

 

[WetWhistle]

It really comes down to personal preference between the different lighting options nowadays. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. Switching from MH to LED is not to complicated but people make it out to be. Because you can adjust the color temp of LED they think it is. If I am switching light sources I set the LED to the color temperature I plan to use and I turn down the intensity or raise the fixture. Over the next month or so I slowly turn up the intensity or lower the fixture. I find if the new coral came from a hight light source I was safely able to put it at mid tank level with no issues for the most part.

 

[ca2or]

Well....I have decided to start up a YouTube channel dedicated to reviewing reef equipment in efforts to provide more insight and exposure to different options out there. Hopefully this will help others in the future. Let's hope this works.

 

[Harold Green]

People tend to over complicate this issue so I totally understand your post!

All you're trying to do, in a nutshell, is simulate sunlight over the reef. This is easy with most lights and a lux meter. Tune your lights to anywhere between 30,000 and 80,000 lx at the water surface and you're golden. What happens beneath the water is exactly the same as what happens beneath the water in the ocean.

This applies to any reef lighting, not just LED's. Accuracy of lux does not matter here.

And watts do matter - anyone saying they don't simply doesn't understand or are selling something. ;) The use of differing lenses and other factors can make comparisons a little complicated. For example, the 50 watt gu10 fixture I made packs about the same punch as my 160w Razor, but covers less area. OTOH, many big name vendors have settled on 90° or 120° lenses, so they should be easier to compare watt-for-watt.

As much as I'd like to agree with you I can't. I quoted watts in how many led's I use but in all honesty there is only a casual relationship between watts and lux. You can take two led fixtures that pull the same wattage and yet produce different amounts of lux. Same goes to comparing a 400watt MH to a 400watt led. Lux is probably going to be quite different. The thing is watts is a measure of energy used and not a measure of light output. One of the selling points to high end led's is that they are more efficient producing more lux per watt than low end fixtures. All this makes comparing different lights almost impossible without a listing of the lux output not to mention comparing pinpoint lux values to overall spread. So you need to know the height above water and the actual area being lit and the average lux over the entire area and that doesn't include penetration depth in each individual tank. Lux meters can be a very useful tool but many of us simply rely on watching the corals and seeing how they react to the tank lighting to decide if the lux value is high enough.

 

[Devlin]

I'm just getting into the hobby. I purchased the ai prime for my 15 g. Everything I have put in my tank has flourished so far. I'm running whites at 35 blues,uv at 90 and red/ green at 15 each. I have no clue when it comes to lighting. But seem to have it right for now. I have a very mixed tank. Glad I came across this thread. Very informative. Thanks guys!

 

[reefaboo]

REgardless of what led make i used .. i always ramped up the blues all the way to 100 and always ran blues atleast 10 hrs at 100% ... never had a problem with it .. however was never able to ramp whites to 100% without having atleast few corals bleach on me ..

 

[Harold Green]

Devlin you'll find that any topic here will give you a wide range of views. This can come in handy especially if you have an issue with your tank. As always research from as many sources as you can find and then take your best guess. It's what we all do at one time or another. I listen to everyone, even those I don't agree with, and the only ones I ignore are those who'll tell you up front that their way is the only way you should be doing something.

 

[Harold Green]

REgardless of what led make i used .. i always ramped up the blues all the way to 100 and always ran blues atleast 10 hrs at 100% ... never had a problem with it .. however was never able to ramp whites to 100% without having atleast few corals bleach on me ..

I've had the same experience but you can run the white higher if you lower the blues so you're keeping the total intensity lower.