T5 lighting

[Chin_Lee]

Has any aquarist ever been able to successfully debate the pros of having multiple T5's that are equivalent in wattages comparable to that of metal halides?
I just cannot see the logic of having to buy 8 T5 bulbs to get 800 watts of lighting when you can achieve the same or better lighting with 3x250W or 3x150 MH bulbs?

Originally Posted by Tom R

In the tank info posted it says that the tank is approx 225G (72x30x24) he is using 10 T5's 6 @ 80 watt and 4 @ 54 watt half of them are Actinic. He replaces them every 8 months. Excluding the heat problems with MH the cost of replacing these lights over say 3 250w MH would be substantial (approx $800 over $400)

It also says he is using a number of additives that sound a lot like the Polyp Lab's Reef-Resh system.

Tom R

[albert_dao]

Here's a bit of a comparrision of some popular metal halide bulbs (all bulbs are SE 250 watts - Source Sanjay's website/Advanced Aquarist):

Iwasaki 6500K - 705 PAR

Ushio 10000K - 495 PAR

AB 13000K 250 - 577 PAR

XM 10000K 250 - 612 PAR

Here's a breakdown of the ATI brand T5's (all bulbs are 3' 39 watts - Source Grim_Reefer/RC):

Sun Pro - 357

Aquablue - 336

Blue Plus - 311

Actinic - 137

I think those numbers are pretty convincing...

[albert_dao]

Originally Posted by Chin_Lee

Has any aquarist ever been able to successfully debate the pros of having multiple T5's that are equivalent in wattages comparable to that of metal halides?
I just cannot see the logic of having to buy 8 T5 bulbs to get 800 watts of lighting when you can achieve the same or better lighting with 3x250W or 3x150 MH bulbs?

Iwan has a lot more light over his tank than he needs.

Also, Europeans replace their bulbs well before they start to have even the slightest change in performance. Kinda like how the Japanese replace their car engines at extremely low mileage (something like 50,000 km's if I recall correctly). A lot of people, namely Americans, run their bulbs for 12-14 months with very little decline in performance. Me, my Infiniti has over 180, 000 kms on it and I don't plan to throw it out anytime soon...

[fkshiu]

Originally Posted by albert_dao

Here's a bit of a comparrision of some popular metal halide bulbs (all bulbs are SE 250 watts - Source Sanjay's website/Advanced Aquarist):

Iwasaki 6500K - 705 PAR

Ushio 10000K - 495 PAR

AB 13000K 250 - 577 PAR

XM 10000K 250 - 612 PAR

Here's a breakdown of the ATI brand T5's (all bulbs are 3' 39 watts - Source Grim_Reefer/RC):

Sun Pro - 357

Aquablue - 336

Blue Plus - 311

Actinic - 137

I think those numbers are pretty convincing...

A more fair comparison would be 250W MH versus 54w T5 HO (the 4-footers) as most 250W MH bulbs are employed over 4' and longer tanks. I do recall Grim Reefer (who is a strong t5 HO proponent) doing a PAR comparison of certain 250W MH bulbs head to head with Ice Cap overdriven 54" T5 HO using his own equipment (not Joshi's results). Although the MH bulbs weren't the highest PAR bulbs around (i.e. the Iwasaki 6500K), the T5s did come out on top.

For the record, I'm running a 3x39W T5-HO teklight over a 46 gallon bow over mainly LPS. I've been completely satisfied with their performance thus far. It's been 13 months since the current bulbs have been in and I have not noticed any drop-off at least with the naked eye or coral growth/behaviour.

[Chin_Lee]

Originally Posted by fkshiu

A more fair comparison would be 250W MH versus 54w T5 HO (the 4-footers) as most 250W MH bulbs are employed over 4' and longer tanks. I do recall Grim Reefer (who is a strong t5 HO proponent) doing a PAR comparison of certain 250W MH bulbs head to head with Ice Cap overdriven 54" T5 HO using his own equipment (not Joshi's results). Although the MH bulbs weren't the highest PAR bulbs around (i.e. the Iwasaki 6500K), the T5s did come out on top.

For the record, I'm running a 3x39W T5-HO teklight over a 46 gallon bow over mainly LPS. I've been completely satisfied with their performance thus far. It's been 13 months since the current bulbs have been in and I have not noticed any drop-off at least with the naked eye or coral growth/behaviour.

Actually most 250W MH are employed over 2 feet and usually a maximum of 3 feet. Anything over 3 feet you will experience a distinct spotlighting effect.

[albert_dao]

Originally Posted by Chin_Lee

Actually most 250W MH are employed over 2 feet and usually a maximum of 3 feet. Anything over 3 feet you will experience a distinct spotlighting effect.

Agreed.

Anyway, Grim_Reefer has stated that the PAR outputs between the 39 and 54 watt bulbs should be VERY similar.

[albert_dao]

Originally Posted by fkshiu

A more fair comparison would be 250W MH versus 54w T5 HO (the 4-footers) as most 250W MH bulbs are employed over 4' and longer tanks. I do recall Grim Reefer (who is a strong t5 HO proponent) doing a PAR comparison of certain 250W MH bulbs head to head with Ice Cap overdriven 54" T5 HO using his own equipment (not Joshi's results). Although the MH bulbs weren't the highest PAR bulbs around (i.e. the Iwasaki 6500K), the T5s did come out on top.

For the record, I'm running a 3x39W T5-HO teklight over a 46 gallon bow over mainly LPS. I've been completely satisfied with their performance thus far. It's been 13 months since the current bulbs have been in and I have not noticed any drop-off at least with the naked eye or coral growth/behaviour.

I don't think Grim's advocation of HO T5 is overly biased. He does recommend MH when the applications are more suited to the need. But yeah, I grabbed the results for the halide bulbs from Sanjay's article.

Grim has stated in his thread that the T5 PAR results are not from overdriven bulbs.

[Reefer Rob]

One thing you will get with T5s is a very even distibution of light, since the whole top of your tank is covered with tubes. Very little shadowing in the tank, and the corals receive light on all sides, more similar to what would happen in nature. To duplicate this with a single point light you would need to move it across the top of the tank during the course of the day to simulate the movement of the sun.

[fkshiu]

Originally Posted by Chin_Lee

Actually most 250W MH are employed over 2 feet and usually a maximum of 3 feet. Anything over 3 feet you will experience a distinct spotlighting effect.

Sorry, I should have been more clear. What I meant was that people with LONGER tanks (which tend to be DEEPER) are more likely to use 250W MH because of the greater penetrating power over 150W. These same people would also be looking at the LONGER lengths of T5s (e.g. 54W 4-footers) if they were comparison shopping simply because of their LONGER tanks.

Anyway, here's Grim Reefer's thread on 54W t5 PAR vs. 250W DE MH:

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/sh...hreadid=724967

[niloc16]

wow thanks for the input guys. the one reason i was questioning going to T5's is because i have bought a profilux controller, the second one in north america and it has the capabilities of dimming t5's to give more realistic sunset, sunrise and a ton of other options with the lighting. marc (Fudge) has been running a post on the performance of the controller for further info. but from what i have found i'm sticking with the 3 250w setup for now.