Some thoughts on MH vs T5....

[deepbluesea]

ditto on the 250 over a 30 breeder. i have one also workes great the edges of the tank are a little dimer but i use that part for lps frags they get good color .i only have a 6 bulb t5 ho and it does not seem to grow sps as fast as the halide. im thinking 8 bulb is probly the minimum everyone is talking about for t5 sps units.

 

[mr_X]

it's not what type of bulbs you are using for sps, it's the amount of light. if you are getting less growth out of t-5, they are not putting out the PAR the halides did.
i just checked the PAR on the sand bed of my tank. directly under a 150 watt, 14k HQI, i was getting 50 on the sand bed. with my current t-5 fixtures i am getting 220.

btw, i checked the 250 watt (20k) halide in a reef optix 3 pendant over my 30 b...the bottom of the tank is barely 100.

 

[Gazog]

I have always used T5'S on all of my tanks except for my frag tank and that going to change as soon as I have the time to put together another T5 system for it.

As far as growth I have had any of the problems some of you have listed and Par readings are as good or better even on the bottom in my 75 gallon, most likely because I have an 48" 8 bulb system.

 

[mr_X]

-i'm using 8 lamp fixtures as well. my choices were 4 x 250 watt halides (the footprint is 8' x 2') or a pair of 8 lamp, 48" fixtures @ 864 watts.
i chose the 864 watts over the 1000 watts of halide. my sps is growing much faster in this tank than the pieces in my 30b under the 250 watter.

 

[Powerman]

It seems when this comes up...most just talk about T-5s this MH that.... Yet, it has been pointed out not all T-5s are equal.

So then for those that feel T-5s can put out superior PAR, how do you go about sizing for a tank? SPS dominate... how much light?

Most fixtures I have looked at are MH w/ T-5 supplement. I have wanted to do a more balanced fixture. I would have to do my own. I'm thinking a 60x30 180g tank with two 250w MH over two islands with say 6 54w T-5s. Mhs on for 4-5 hours and T-5 on the rest. How does that sound.

I guess my point is these discussions tend to be one or the other.... why no discussion on using the best of both? MH for mid day intensity and T-5 for color and even growth? And all MH use is not equal either. Some use very high powered lights for few hours. So if I went with 2x250w for 4 hours a day, that is not near the heat and power use problems some have with 400w for 12 hours a day.

 

[stunreefer Verified Sponsor]

Great info Sunny!

I always find it hilarious when people argue over "PAR" values... "Well this creates X amount of PAR, while those only create Y." Does it grow coral? Do the colors look good? No matter which way you lean, who the heck cares what the PAR value is?!? Besides that, think of how many variables there are in taking those measurements, yet people still take them as fact...

Another one is lph/scfh regarding skimmers... does it remove nutrients and compounds before they're broken down into NO3? Is it exporting nutrients at a sufficient rate? Good, let's leave it at that.

(Some) hobbyists tend to lean onto these "values" so much, and forget (or just don't care) underlying basic principals like reasonable husbandry and maintenance to make our animals happy.

 

[650-IS350]

I think you should pick lighting ( T5/MH ) in regards to your asthetic liking and how you want your tank to look. Both do grow pretty much any coral. I've had both 8 bulb T5s and 250watt DE's. I like both.

I mean, sure you want all the par in the world but what if it gives you super yellow or super whited out look in your tank would you? go with tthat lighting or would you go with one that appeals to your eyes, makes you happy looking at it day and day out and yet gives you good par to grow the corals you have in your tank?

 

[fishypets]

Those who have gripes about T5 fixtures must have never seen a power module. I burn corals when moving from 400W metal halide tanks to my Power Module lit tank.

 

[Powerman]

Those who have gripes about T5 fixtures must have never seen a power module. I burn corals when moving from 400W metal halide tanks to my Power Module lit tank.

Which brings up another point in this conversation...photo inhibition.

How relevant do you guys think it is? Is it possible that in this conversation of which is superior, that perhaps one was not putting out less light than the other, but more? Meaning those that have switched from one to the other and noticed improvement, perhaps it was due to too much light to begin with, and the improvement was due to less light?

 

[XCrunnr36]

Which brings up another point in this conversation...photo inhibition.

How relevant do you guys think it is? Is it possible that in this conversation of which is superior, that perhaps one was not putting out less light than the other, but more? Meaning those that have switched from one to the other and noticed improvement, perhaps it was due to too much light to begin with, and the improvement was due to less light?

powerman wins. such a great point.

 

[Troylee]

powerman wins. such a great point.

+1 corals are not as obcessed over par as we are!!!! i think it's more about spectrum to be honest.. there is a thread floating around can't remember the exact one but one of the sponsers has a meter out there in the ocean to measure everything and he said the light was never the same from day to day or the temp etc etc...." i think it was the stability thread"....i mean think about about us, for example, you get a worse sunburn on overcast days than sunny days sometimes....hows that if the sun isn't blasting you????

 

[mr_X]

well, i use both and thought people needed to know what my findings were. the statement "who cares how much PAR something has" is absurd. we are talking about photosynthetic creatures. they need PAR. put a few curly-Q energy saver bulbs over your tank and see what happens to your corals.
i have increased to more light, and have noticed better results with some corals and worse with others. i already expected these results but felt they were relevant here.

if you plan to keep lps and softies, you don't have to worry much about PAR values, but if you plan to keep acropora and want maximum coloration and growth, you'll want to care about PAR.

 

[mr_X]

btw, corals look a lot better in our tank than they do in the wild for the most part. go diving just about anywhere and see a lot of browned out corals. the same corals we have in our tanks that are very colorful due to our high lighting.:wink:

 

[stunreefer Verified Sponsor]

well, i use both and thought people needed to know what my findings were.

Touche, and I agree that it should be given some thought, but to many hobbyists I see caring about these levels that are so aptly discussed they simply lack proper husbandry, or don't sufficiently export nutrients, or... etc., etc. and should not be arguing over which bulb or what kind of lighting is better. Get back to basics (if they've ever been there).

Not saying you're one of these people at all, and I'm sure you've seen the kind of posts I'm talking about ;)

the statement "who cares how much PAR something has" is absurd.

The way you read it/took it, it likely is (absurd)... I should've worded it more along the lines of "many hobbyists care way too much about things like PAR values".

we are talking about photosynthetic creatures. they need PAR.

Well, FWIW, all of my corals are non-photosynthetic... but that's besides the point.

btw, corals look a lot better in our tank than they do in the wild for the most part. go diving just about anywhere and see a lot of browned out corals. the same corals we have in our tanks that are very colorful due to our high lighting.

I agree to a degree, but it highly depends on the locale we would be discussing. Are you going to see gorgeous bright colored Acropora species in the Bahamas? No, they hardly exist there anymore. You're very right in that many areas that are easily accessible have been destroyed and overrun by industry (tourism, boating, fishing, run-off, etc.), but when you come across a pristine reef, there's nothing like it.

We can control everything in our reefs, from nutrient import and export, to lighting, to flow, etc. which of course points towards the resons we can create reefs that look much better than many natural reefs, not to mention the diversity of species we can fit in our little glass boxes.

The point of my post was pushing the fact that people get caught up on one thing all too often, and don't focus on the overall (basic) aspects of reefing.

 

[scrapz]

i love my t5s. growth and color is great. I miss the shimmer, that said nothing will beat the color of a 400w Radium 20k. I will not be switching back to MH.

 

[mr_X]

gotcha stun. a combination of husbandry, and correct components like the right lighting, are what makes a reef tank succeed. the reason i am passionate about the lighting is because i used to be an advocate for "most of us use too much light", until i witnessed what a little more PAR did for my sps.
i know a guy that uses 400 watt halides in lumenbrite reflectors over approximately 12" of water and keeps an impressive amount of sps colonies. he swears by super high lighting for the small polyp stuff.
i'm surprised he's not chiming in here...lol.

 

[fab1971]

I use all 3 lighting fixtures on my small tank and try to please all my little creatures.

T5 ho - 8hrs,

mh - 6 hrs

led - 3-4 hours.

 

[schminksbro]

I find it interesting that nobody is talking about reflectors. Halides are point source lights but with a quality reflector they spread much more. T5s in low quality reflectors don't punch worth beans. There are currently studies going on in reference to shimmer and its' effects on corals. The shimmer fluctuates the amount of radiation that any point on the coral receives at any given second. I won't argue that T5s can't grow corals. They can. However the notion that they are somehow more natural is IMHO a little bit absurd. I also don't buy the argument that they are cheaper. Bulb cost alone defeats that argument. If I need 8 $25-$30 bulbs to cover what 2 $60-$75 bulbs cover, how am I saving money? I used to run T5s and the growth was great....about 6-8" below the surface. The tank didn't run any cooler and my electric bill didn't change noticeably when I switched to halides. You can overdrive the T5s and get more puch but then you get more heat and consume more electricity. The appearance of T5s is completely unnatural. Having done a fair amount of scuba diving I can tell you that I never saw super blue shimmerless light. Of course to be fair I also didn't see the spectrum of color that we see in our tanks either. I think most of the color benefit people see with T5s is due to the broader spectrum of unnatural light that they provide. One of the most beautiful SPS tanks I have ever seen had T5s over it. Unfortunately it looked more like a picture that a reef. No shimmer, no shadow, just a bright box of light. IMHO halides on a light mover with quality reflectors is as close to natural sunlight as one can get. It surprises me that light movers don't get more use in this hobby. You could light a 6' tank with one 250 and get more of a natural cycle than with stationary T5s or halides. Of course you would still need supplements to light the tank evenly for aesthetics. I don't have a light mover yet but I would like to move in that direction in the future. I also think growth form as a measurement of light quality is painting with a broad brush. I think flow plays a major role in terms of branch thickness and growth form. You can take the same pumps placed in the same place in 2 identical tanks and the rock and corals will change the flow. These things are impossible to measure. You can get fantastic results with T5s as Sunny has proven but the light that they provide is not nor does it appear to be, natural. We have seen great advancements in the equipment we use in this hobby over the last 20 years. I hope that we see equal or greater advancement in the next 20. Personally I think the lighting that we have at our disposal is still sorely lacking.

 

[wireefman]

i love my t5s. growth and color is great. I miss the shimmer, that said nothing will beat the color of a 400w Radium 20k. I will not be switching back to MH.

and i will never be switching from my 400w 20k radium mh

 

[schminksbro]

I have logged 19 dives on the Great Barrier Reef including several days on a live aboard diving pristine acro reefs. The color under natural sunlight is not what we see in our tanks. Not even close. Beautiful? Absolutely. Just not nearly the contrast and bright color that 20k lighting produces.

I agree to a degree, but it highly depends on the locale we would be discussing. Are you going to see gorgeous bright colored Acropora species in the Bahamas? No, they hardly exist there anymore. You're very right in that many areas that are easily accessible have been destroyed and overrun by industry (tourism, boating, fishing, run-off, etc.), but when you come across a pristine reef, there's nothing like it.