I'm not anti LED, I run LEDs right now on a nano and I'm considering LEDs on my 100 gallon. I just look at things from both sides rather than forming bias opinions and examples to prove a point. You need 1 LED for every 12 square inches, 3 400W halides can easily light a 9 foot x 3 foot area with the right reflectors and you could keep anything you want under that. You would need 324 LEDs to replace that and that's 900W. So it's all on how you look at it and how you compare, very easy to come up with bias examples to support either side. Here's another one:
Quote:
|
Reflector design for reef aquariums has improved considerably allowing for more efficient use of light. With these reflectors we can now light reef aquarium with fewer lamps, get deeper light penetration over larger areas. As an example, I am currently lighting my 500G reef aquarium (84"LX48"WX30"D) with just 3 400W metal halide lamps in Lumenarc reflectors with no supplemental lighting.
|
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/1/review
That tank will require on the low side 1 LED per 15sqin meaning close to 270 LEDs or 810W
I think it's just hilarious how some people worship LEDs like it's the second coming of Christ, they just simply aren't as good as some people seem to think. Yes they are a good option but certainly not the only one or always the best.
I'm not trying to support or not support LEDs, OP asked about LEDs for a 100 gallon, since I'm considering the same thing and have experience with almost all forms of lighting I simply stated the saving will not be "huge" and it may not be worth while if the tank won't be kept for long term and if the goal is better color for SPS.
Steve, do you even currently run an LED setup on one of your tanks? Has anyone run an LED fixture for 11 years and compared PAR ratings?