[Flear]

what are peoples preferences & reasons behind their answers ?

for the longest time ive been very pro-fluorescent, only thinking about LED as an alternative (an alternative i wasn't very keen on)

i still haven't looked into LED very well, i still consider the technology to be rather ... too young to consider fully endorsing it. ... just personal preferences - every "new" power efficient source seems to be very ... the draw-backs outweigh the benefits"

today i was looking at the life of lights and that got me thinking about these metal Halide bulbs.

i'm thinking about the cost of Metal Halide vs the cost of maintaining Fluorescent lights.

metal halide seems cheaper both initially and long-term, the draw-back being a 4200K spectrum vs a 6500K spectrum.

lumens per watt (once 400watts is reached) ... metal halide wins

---

but all this is a cost of operations.

there is more importantly a cost of production to consider

-what are peoples experiences that tend to move them from one into the other ?
-is there a "i tried X and i'm never going back" ? universal experience from many people maybe ?

... i can look at all kinds of pages on the net about data and spectrum's, but what about peoples experiences ???

 

[atwilson1972]

i have no experience with halid.
i like my t5 set up.
just my opinion.
but i too am considering led as an alternative.

 

[Flear]

personal research since i started this thread.

if you can afford it i would recommend induction over both.

 

[avraptorhal]

personal research since i started this thread.

if you can afford it i would recommend induction over both.

I'm confused - What is induction in reference to aquarium lighting?

 

[Flear]

induction lights, they last longer than LED
same phosphorous technology as fluorescent lights
similar light intensity out put per watt as LED

price of induction vs. LED i'm not sure what is more expensive for initial cost.

it's not sold for aquarium lighting, for the most part the companies producing these lights are trying to sell to cities for street lighting.

but while not sold in the aquarium hobby, ... it's still a light, simple truth, it's a light, can be used for whatever application lights need be used for.

 

[sandybottom]

have you looked at the finnex fugeray planted plus with 660nm red leds? i know it can grow baby tears and keep red plants red. my regular fugeray can give me a nice pink on my hygro. skyleds are about the same from what i have gathered.

i know leds seem like they are in their infancy,so i understand your apprehension.

i have seen wonderful growth from my little leds.so i urge you not to dismiss them completely.
i plan on getting the fugeray planted plus in the next 6 months.when i have had it for a bit i will write up a review.

what are you looking for your lights to provide? are you going high light with co2?you seem like you are after very strong lighting.

while lighting is important,it is not the only limiting factor.
ferts are just as important. are you planning anything on this front? dosing dry ferts perhaps?

 

[Flear]

i dono why it occupies my mind to get lighting as high as possible.

competing with a similar intensity to sunlight i think is about max, ... no idea what lux or par that is.

sandybottom, ... if LED is growing your baby tears well, ... that's a pretty light demanding plant isn't it ?, ... sounds decent to me then

then the only difference between LED & induction is cost, ... prices for induction are really hard to figure out as the manufacturers aren't selling them for customers by preference it seems

 

[sandybottom]

yes,baby tears is light demanding.but i do not have it.a friend of mine runs the fugeray planted plus and the finnex ray 2.both are higher light than my fugeray.mine is for low-medium light requirements. they are supposed to run up to 40,000 hours,which breaks down to 10 years normal usage.
par is photosynthetically active radiation.it is a band of solar radiation 400-700 nm.it is basically the light that is seen by the human eye and that plants use to photosynthesize.
lux is light intensity and how much area it covers. it is a more reliable way to measure instead of the antiquated lights per gallon formula.

 

[Tazman]

Natural daylight is about 120,000 Lux.

 

[jpepe1]

I'm usually very low-tech and set in my ways but I think the LEDS are stunning ,love the changing cloud cover effects and so forth.I don't worry about growing specific types of plants so I really like them.The next time I need to buy lights for a tank they'll be LEDS

 

[yippee]

As far as lighting x vs lighting y debates, I think it's always going to be a matter of personal opinion - no matter what. Every type of light has it's ups and downs, it just depends what light fits your needs.

Metal Halide
Pros - Very intense light, great penetration, decent range of bulbs/spectrum.
Cons - High energy consumption, high heat output, some bulbs can be costly, typically replace bulbs 6-12 months.

T5ho
Pros - Intense light, good penetration, more bulb choices than you can shake a stick at, great color range/bulb combos.
Cons - Bulbs can be expensive to replace especially the more you have, 6-12 month bulb life, generates some heat.

I'm sure there are tons of pros/cons of each, but that's a general idea. Right now T5ho are my personal favorite. Like i said, that's completely personal preference though. Both of the lights will grow a mean planted tank given all other requirements are met.