Awsome T5 Pendants By Fauna Marin

[Aqua-Digital]

Ok sorry i dont understand, if I am saying the lamps will be launched in january then they will be released in january wont they? or am i miss understanding?

I will work as fast as possible to meet your requirements

I should have ALL details by the end of next week.

[Canadian]

I think I see where the confusion is:

When you say "lamps" I'm reading that as "bulbs" (because a fluorescent tube is not a "bulb" and is referred to as a "lamp" by many - I never incorrectly call a fluorescent "tube" or "lamp" a "bulb"). But I guess when you say "lamp" you mean "fixture" or "light".

Does that sound right and does it clarify things?

[Aqua-Digital]

Hiya

yes i mean fixture

Off home now, have a good weekend will catch up with news next week

[trilinearmipmap]

Originally Posted by Canadian

As far as GrimReefer's "testing" goes I'd forget it. If you look back on the history of the "testing" done by Hahn and Grim on RC you'll see that they've made so many mistakes that it's impossible to draw any conclusions from their results.

Well I have to disagree.

Of course if I had 100 identical reef tanks and could randomly assign different lighting units to the different tanks and compare them for PAR and coral growth that would be great. Since no one has the money or time to do that we have to settle for the next best thing. Grim's testing, although imperfect, is a valid source of information. Another source of information is people's experience with a piece of equipment. For example if you read 500 postings stating that brand X skimmer is a good skimmer then you can be pretty confident in buying brand X skimmer. However there won't be much accumulated experience with these new light fixtures until a year or two has gone by.

We lack objective scientific information about most of the equipment we buy. Anecdotal reports by other hobbyists, and testing such as has been done by GrimReefer, is the best we have to go on. And I won't be buying any expensive equipment for my tank unless it has either been endorsed by many other hobbyists, or had some comparative testing done, or both.

[muck]

Originally Posted by Aqua-Digital

And there are many that still sell lamps like this!

Fauna is NOT one of them

Does that mean these are discontinued?

http://www.aqua-digital.com/index.ph...t5-system.html

[Aqua-Digital]

Yep, web site is still being updated, very soon we will have the new info.

I am actually waiting for my web designer to give me access!!!

[Canadian]

Originally Posted by trilinearmipmap

Well I have to disagree.

Grim's testing, although imperfect, is a valid source of information.

We lack objective scientific information about most of the equipment we buy. Anecdotal reports by other hobbyists, and testing such as has been done by GrimReefer, is the best we have to go on. And I won't be buying any expensive equipment for my tank unless it has either been endorsed by many other hobbyists, or had some comparative testing done, or both.

By definition Grim's tests can't be deemed valid considering how unreliable they are. Grim's tests have been so "imperfect" that they are essentially useless. Go back on RC and see where Grim, himself, has recognized that he needs to re-do his lamp "testing" to make it more reliable and valid. I appreciate that hobbyists take it upon themselves to try to objectively measure some of the things in our hobby but they tend to just bolster the perpetuation of misinformation under the guise of being "facts" obtained from "testing".

I don't expect to see randomized controlled trials for any of our equipment. But given the sketchy history of misinformation and poor "testing" done by many hobbyists I would be more inclined to base an equipment choice on anecdotal reports than misguided "testing". At least I know I won't be deluding myself into believing something that is dogma and I'll know that my decision is simply based on recommendations.

[Melonbob]

Originally Posted by Canadian

By definition Grim's tests can't be deemed valid considering how unreliable they are. Grim's tests have been so "imperfect" that they are essentially useless. Go back on RC and see where Grim, himself, has recognized that he needs to re-do his lamp "testing" to make it more reliable and valid. I appreciate that hobbyists take it upon themselves to try to objectively measure some of the things in our hobby but they tend to just bolster the perpetuation of misinformation under the guise of being "facts" obtained from "testing".

I don't expect to see randomized controlled trials for any of our equipment. But given the sketchy history of misinformation and poor "testing" done by many hobbyists I would be more inclined to base an equipment choice on anecdotal reports than misguided "testing". At least I know I won't be deluding myself into believing something that is dogma and I'll know that my decision is simply based on recommendations.

I see your point, but people like grim, although flawed in their research, have no financial incentive for skewing results. Give a light to a dealer to test, and hes gonna sit down and go, "Which one of these lights gives me the largest profit?" Every dealer I've EVER dealt with assures me their product is better than the other guys, and if he sells both, he'll tell you the more expensive one is better without fail

[Canadian]

Originally Posted by Melonbob

I see your point, but people like grim, although flawed in their research, have no financial incentive for skewing results. Give a light to a dealer to test, and hes gonna sit down and go, "Which one of these lights gives me the largest profit?" Every dealer I've EVER dealt with assures me their product is better than the other guys, and if he sells both, he'll tell you the more expensive one is better without fail

I agree. But you know to expect this. And you know to take a dealer's recommendations with some skepticism. My concern is that people see "testing" done by "unbiased" hobbyists and quickly latch onto the results as being points of "fact" when the test results are usually invariably flawed or simply false. Then the problem becomes that those faulty test results get punted around on discussion boards (for example) as being based on strict unbiased testing despite the results being invalid. This makes those results more dangerous than the recommendations of the dealer, who most know to take with a grain of salt.

[Telford]

What are the dimensions of the fixtures going to be?