O.C. Nano display tank

[Canadian]

Here's a review of the PAR38 lamp and its PAR coverage at varying distances THROUGH THE AIR:

http://glassbox-design.com/2010/par-...led-spotlight/

FWIW, the coverage is pretty pathetic but would suffice for spotlighting - certainly not a MH replacement.

[Ron99]

i don't think it's fair to say coverage is pathetic or to compare them directly to MH as they aren't intended to replace MH over larger tanks. LED's can produce performance equal to MH over a small area which is why you need a large array of LEDs to cover a larger tank (I'm using 80 LEDs to cover my 48"x18" 75 gallon). But for nano tanks or spotlighting these Par38 type bulbs are a great option.

[TheMikey]

That LED spotlight looks really cool. Any word on getting any that have more blue colour? It's kinda white for my liking.

[OceanicCorals-Eugene-]

Originally Posted by Canadian

Here's a review of the PAR38 lamp and its PAR coverage at varying distances THROUGH THE AIR:

http://glassbox-design.com/2010/par-...led-spotlight/

FWIW, the coverage is pretty pathetic but would suffice for spotlighting - certainly not a MH replacement.

If you look into the PAR38 lamps by evil66 those are 15W Bulbs, they are not comparable to MH much in terms of PAR value as well as coverage. Since they do roughly 10" x 10" and right after that the PAR value pretty much becomes non existent for a large tank 1 bulb will not cut it to replace MH, and its not made for that as Ron has pointed out. Also the test in the glassbox design was done with 40degree optics which isnt really all that useful for reefing applications. The O.C ICE CooL.E.D comes standard with 60degree optics and they have a much better coverage area compared to the standard evil66 PAR38s. If you look at the nano tank above, lite by the 27W version the footprint of the tank is 14"L x 8.5"W x 10"H and we have about 1" on both sides thats a little bit shaded, so these are definitely able to power bigger tanks just not so much tall tanks.

Now looking over across the ocean to Japan/Taiwan/Hong Kong, Spotlights has been used with great success, they use less power, injecting less heat into the system and most tanks you see thats 50-60gallons or above has at least 5+ on them. If we were to guess at the wattage total i would say 5 spotlights would only use no more then 250W(and this is over rating them) over a 3ft tank, are the tanks in Japan able to keep SPS or any coral they want? I think we all know that answer, but these bulbs were not made to replace MH by each bulb and if you do plan to use spotlights as the main lighting system multiple would be needed, either that or as Ron has already mentioned earlier in order to light up a system thats big, you would build a big enough array that would allow it to illuminate the footprint of the tank like a MH system would.

I am personally debating whether to switch over my 2x150W MH + 4x T5HO lighting setup over to these spotlights, as im running 2 over my frag tank at home and couldnt be happier with the way that its bringing the colors out of the corals.

Originally Posted by TheMikey

That LED spotlight looks really cool. Any word on getting any that have more blue colour? It's kinda white for my liking.

The Spotlights come in 2 colors right now, a 12K which is what the latest photos were taken with. and a 14K which unfortunately we dont have a bulb right now to show. I would say the 14K bulb is an ice white color, meaning that its white with a tint of light blue to it.

we are going to get a sample of a 20K bulb to see how blue it will get, but we are afraid that since there will be too many blue LED and not enough white ones that the brightness (lumens) to the human eye will seen dim. So we have to test it out first to see if we will bring one but definitely we are looking into a 20K version

[Canadian]

The only reason I commented on the comparison to MH is because it was already being done in this thread with statements like:

"Considering MH coverage is roughly 24-30" depending on the reflector, these little bulbs are pretty up to par(no pun intended) in terms of area of coverage and PAR value(almost equal to a 250W if not equal)."

The numbers for the PAR38 light clearly show they aren't comparable and would be good for very small tanks or for spotlighting. In this form factor they certainly are not a panacea of LED lighting - they are good for their intended purpose - spotlighting small areas; not being comparable at all to MH.

If you look into the PAR38 lamps by evil66 those are 15W Bulbs . . .

What makes you conclude this? The new lamps are 21W ("NOW 21w for more PAR"). Apparently Nanocustoms is just slow about editing their old literature so there's a mix of old 15W stuff included in the 21W stuff.

The PAR38 light in the review used 40 degree optics and through the air lit a 7" circle at 200 µmol/sec/m2 at 18" THROUGH THE AIR (repeated for emphasis). The narrower optics would be expected to provide more "punch" than 60 or 80 degree optics. Therefore the usable light for moderately light demanding corals is about a 7" circle fewer than 18" away from the light THROUGH THE AIR (corals would probably have to be even closer due to PAR loss if measured through water). If we assume PAR is lost through the water and need to bring the PAR values up while still using the single light the light would need to moved closer to the tank making the irradiated area even smaller (based on the bell shaped dispersion of light probably closer to a 5" diameter).

I understand and appreciate that the 27W O.C ICE CooL.E.D utilizes more LEDs with wider optics than the reviewed 21W PAR38 but until real data are compiled an assumption about superiority is just that - an assumption. PAR values through water depicting spread and intensity at varying depths (similar to that done in the above noted review) would certainly help legitimize this light if indeed it does provide substantially greater PAR with wider coverage than the PAR38

So again, I think the lights are useful for spot lighting small areas probably no larger than a single "large" colony of 7" in diameter with usable PAR. And again, the comparison to MH was already being made and I was simply pointing out that actual data don't support the claims being made. This form factor for LEDs is good for spotlighting small areas. An array of LEDs is certainly a better bet for more typical display sizes. Unfortunately there has been a lot of unsubstantiated hype about LEDs and now that real data are starting to become available broad sweeping claims with comparison to MH need to be tempered. I've been excited to use LEDs and had wanted to buy one of these spotlights about a year ago but decided not to be a guinea pig as an early adopter and wait until real data became available. As it stands now it looks like the best bet for me is something like the AI modules as I don't have the desire to go the DIY route.

[wayner]

Andrew:

You probably already know about the Maxspect, just another option if you want to give LEDs a shot and don't want to break the bank.

I don't know, people using them seem to be getting pretty good results.

I'm sure there will be many more companies coming out with fixtures over the next couple of years, I'm anxious to try them myself, just holding off for a while.

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1817995

[Ron99]

A bunch of good points from everybody. As I see it if you want high PAR in a fairly deep tank then 400W MH is probably the best option. for tanks up to 24" deep I feel that LEDs can be set up to perform as well or better than many MH setups. The performance of MH is dependent on the bulbs and reflectors used and some are better than others. Same thing with LEDs. Depending on the LEDs used, the spacing of the emitters and the optics used you get varying performance. The thing about LEDs with good optics is that it looks like the penetration is actually better than MH because the lenses focus the light better than a reflector reflecting the light into the tank. What that means is that the drop off in PAR vs. depth can be less in LEDs than MH with the use of optics.

Of course, the real performance advantage of LEDS is in lower energy consumption and not adding heat to the tank. I am fairly confident my array will perform as well a a 2 x 250W MH setup would while using only 240W of LEDs and adding less heat to the tank then MH would or even my current 8 bulb T5HO set up which uses 432W of T5.

As for the Maxspect, they look okay but I'm not sold on the use of a few super high wattage LEDs rather than an array of 3W emitters with optics. They create some big hotspots under those LEDs while also being far less efficient in output per watt then the smaller LEDs. I would like to see some real independent PAR numbers etc. on them. Anybody in the Lower Mainland have one for testing?

[OceanicCorals-Eugene-]

The only reason a comparison was given is because people like to reference existing technology to new ones currently coming out, it gives them a benchmark to see where it stands compared to what we know. However like mentioned in earlier posts 1 LED spotlight would never be able to replace a 250W MH in terms of coverage and still get the proper PAR value. Now with that said, i have to agree with you that the LEDs in the form of spotlights are not the best forum to light bigger tanks in, but anything up to 60-70 gallon range is still doable as long as the depth of the tank doesnt exceed 24". Evil66 himself uses i believe 4~5 bulbs over his 40g tank and he said hes been getting good results from them.

What makes me conclude that the PAR38 bulbs provide 15W of lighting is the fact that they are 3W LEDs x 5, the driver provides 700mA which takes roughly another 6W bringing the total up to 21W. (evil66 pointed this out as well in his own thread about the PAR38 spotlights) So from the very beginning there has always been 21W bulbs and never any 15W PAR38s. So if we were to test the wattage utilized by the 27W version of the O.C ICE CooL.E.D we would most likely see it pulling in the 33-35W range as it also utilizes a PAR38 driver.

Great points you guys are bring out! keep this discussion rolling.

[Ron99]

+1 on Eugene's analysis of the Nano Customs Par38 bulbs. It's a bit of clever marketing on the part of Nano Customs to quote total energy consumption rather then the actual wattage of the LEDs. Any light system will have energy losses so a 250W MH looses some at the ballast and is drawing more than 250W of electricity to drive the bulb at 250W. They have 15W of LED lighting in their bulb and use 40 degree optics to get higher PAR and penetration but in a smaller footprint. The 60 degree optics in the OC lights give a bit wider coverage but a bit lower penetration and PAR.

So for LED output count the number of emitters and multiply by the wattage they're driven at. To further complicate things some light fixtures drive 3W bulbs at 2W etc. so you aren't getting the full 3 watts of power. The whole LED thing is pretty complicated right now with many manufacturers trying different things in terms of how they drive LEDs and what LEDs are used and what optics if any. There is some hype and some BS out there but also some very good products.

For a top of the line it's probably the AI units right now for larger arrays as they use the best Cree emitters with optics and put out lots of PAR. The PAR38 spots are also excellent for smaller tanks or spotlighting. You can also use a larger number of them for the bigger tanks and that will work too but you probably need at least one spotlight for each square foot or so of tank.

It's a complicated right now as there are many options to work with and it is difficult to make direct comparisons with existing technologies like MH because of the wide variability in LED implementation.