Lighting: T5 vs Metal Halide???

[JDigital]

Originally Posted by Aquattro

It's not the dark side, we have really bright lights here!! You NEED MH!!

I said the same thing...

[Myka]

Originally Posted by lorenz0

imo if your comparing a TEK or powermodual they are basically the same as MH. I did a par test comparing the 2 and they both put out similar numbers.

It's not all about PAR in the end. IME, it seems like the quality of the light that comes from MH exceeds that of T5s. I don't know why as all the little numbers we can test for seem to indicate that they are essentially the same kind of light. I have definitely noticed that newbies have an easier time accomplishing great color and growth with their corals using MH lighting than T5s. I really can't explain, but it's a trend I have really started picking up on in the last couple years as T5s have become more and more popular.

I used to be a diehard MH, then I was diehard T5, and now I think there's a place for each type of lighting.

[Aquattro]

Originally Posted by Myka

I used to be a diehard MH, then I was diehard T5, and now I think there's a place for each type of lighting.

I agree. MH over you tank, T5 in the garage for shop lights

For me, there is no alternative to MH. To replicate the lighting you see on a real reef, T5 doesn't cut it. The sharp contrast and the glitter lines make the reef, IMO.

[fkshiu]

MH for me if only for the glittering. Numerous tanks in Europe have proven that you can grow anything well under T5HO provided you've jammed enough tubes under your hood.

Why not just get the best of both worlds? MH with T5 supplementation?

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by lorenz0

imo if your comparing a TEK or powermodual they are basically the same as MH. I did a par test comparing the 2 and they both put out similar numbers.

weird, I have never found a T5 that puts out anywhere near at 250 watt MH, but I am doing testing through water at a distance of 18".

and yes I have tested a Tek. problem is if you are testing a 10K MH then you need to have 10K bulbs only in the T5. actinic give a false high reading pn PAR meters.

Steve

[lorenz0]

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

weird, I have never found a T5 that puts out anywhere near at 250 watt MH, but I am doing testing through water at a distance of 18".

well the fact that in our house we have a strictly T5 tank and (during the tests) a 2x250watt MH set up. The t5's were slightly lower in par but comparable. Personally, i prefer the look of t5's. And imo, t5's bring out the color of sps. I could care less about growth in my tank as long as the color's produced are amazing.

but this isn't another t5 vs MH thread. let the OP say what they want for lighting

[lobsterboy]

i found that when using MH, i had deeper and shimmering colors on the corals.
with t5;s the corals have great color, but are more pastel, so it depends on what colors you are looking for.
myself i wouldnt mind trying the combo of t5s and MH, but for now i just have t5;s, and....THEY RULE THE DINOSAURS, YEAH!

[hslee]

*disclaimer - I've never tested numbers personally and am basing my entire post on the countless threads on this topic that I've read recently as I'm setting up my first SW setup... take what I say with a grain of salt*

It really does depend on preference - depending on what your particular needs are, one may be more suitable than the other.

MH definitely is better for depth, T5's for length (MH sort of has a spotlight effect, where as T5 spreads light more evenly). You can still get around this using T5's with good aquascaping and planning, if you place more light loving corals closer to the top.

As Myka said, for a deeper corner tank MH might be more appropriate just because of the shape of the tank.

I don't really buy into the cost savings idea with either fixture, since this'll depend on how often you actually change the bulbs (some change T5 bulbs every 6 months religiously, some let them go for over a year) and how many bulbs you decide to use (T5 fixtures go up to 8 bulbs, so changing them every 6 months makes it hard to have any savings)

As for power savings, yes T5 fixtures generally use less power, but this isn't a concern to everyone and I really don't know how noticeable of a difference it would be on your bill.

More choices in bulbs for T5 could be a blessing or a curse - there's a chance what you end up with after many different combinations (and $ out your pocket) could be the same or close to what you would've gotten with MH. With so many options, there's also the risk that you're running a combination that isn't ideal for your stock, and never knowing what you're missing out on.

As fkshiu said, it's hard to argue against using both, you can get the best of both worlds. If you weigh out pros/cons in your situation and decide you can't choose which one, choose both!

After all that... I could've summed it up with - either/or works, it's your choice and there are plenty of people happy on both sides

[loveless]

I am currently in the process of building a 330gal tank in wall. Atm I have a 180gal lit with 2x400w MH. and plan on using these same lights with better reflectors and light movers to light a 90x30 tank. If this works well enough then I am thinking on going to 250watt lights and seeing what those can do. This will give me MH lighting for less consumption than an LED setup, but not the initial cost of thousands of dollars. Will see if it works but this is and has been used for years in the hydroponic grow industry with great success.

[Myka]

Originally Posted by StirCrazy

weird, I have never found a T5 that puts out anywhere near at 250 watt MH, but I am doing testing through water at a distance of 18".

and yes I have tested a Tek. problem is if you are testing a 10K MH then you need to have 10K bulbs only in the T5. actinic give a false high reading pn PAR meters.

Steve

You make some very good points. When you take away all the variables, and actually compare them on fair grounds T5s just won't keep up to MH - especially when you get a bit of depth to the water.

Why do actinics give a false high reading on PAR meters?