150 watt DE MH lamps compared

reefman33 said:
dont worry about the delays. these things always have kinks to work out i am just really excited to see how these things compare to 250watt bulbs and how much light they really put out.

Glad you wont be burning anythign down lol
Click to expand...
I am excited as well :D
gcarroll said:
Just wondering if you will be using the UV shield in your test?
Click to expand...
Yes. I am using the shield from an AB aquaspacelight.

I have a PFO mini-Pendant shields as well but the AB shield fits the 23" wide box better soooo :)

Side note to all. I know I am going to be using the results to make decisions on my purchases so, like JB's test, I am being very careful to get it right instead of just getting it done. Good news is it appears it is looking pretty good. Checking off one more variable to be sure.

Thanks for the patience and the support.

Scott
 
Once again THX for all your time and effort for this test...

SOunds like you will pick the winner for my next set up... an oceanic 37g Cube... 24x20x20...
 
gcarroll said:
Just wondering if you will be using the UV shield in your test?
Click to expand...
good question, it would also be interesting to see how the shield affects readings. you know, one set with shield, and one set without. not that you would ever run a DE without one, but still would be cool to see.
 
traveller7,

Maybe I missed the discussion in this rather long thread, but I was wondering if you were going to do some kind of evaluation of the color of these bulbs, either subjective or objective, along with testing their intensity, etc..

I am currently using the 150W AB 10000K DE bulb without supplimental actinics (no room in canopy), and while the color is OK, I would like to find a bulb that is a bit bluer without sacrificing too much PAR. I am interested in what you find out about the Giesemann Megachrome Marine TS 150 watt 13000K, for example.

This looks to be a huge undertaking on your part... and much appreciated by your fellow reefers.

~Rick~
 
rbonin,

The intent is to post representative pics of the bulbs in use over the same tank position. In tinkering, I prefer the side by side comparison using the 2x150 fixture. I have not been able to capture and edit the photo to what I feel is color accurate, but the side by side seems to give a reasonable indicator of scale.

We'll see. At the moment I am focused on verifying measurements for accuracy of the test set up.

Welcome aboard and thank you.

Scott
 
i would be interested in some PAR comparisons against some CF bulbs for a sense of scale as well. ive been comparing my 130w pc to my 150w pfo 20k pendant. and what i know in my head and what i see are 2 different things. maybe some number would convince my eyes lol.
 
unsped said:
i would be interested in some PAR comparisons against some CF bulbs for a sense of scale as well. ive been comparing my 130w pc to my 150w pfo 20k pendant. and what i know in my head and what i see are 2 different things. maybe some number would convince my eyes lol.
Click to expand...
unsped, I imagine you are referring to power compact bulbs which are going to be a whole other animal. After I get through the growing pile of 150's and then the 70's we can see ;>) Lots of issues in testing PC setups though and the gear I have will not likely be representative :(

Scott
 
unsped said:
i would be interested in some PAR comparisons against some CF bulbs for a sense of scale as well. ive been comparing my 130w pc to my 150w pfo 20k pendant. and what i know in my head and what i see are 2 different things. maybe some number would convince my eyes lol.
Click to expand...

I imagine what you are saying unsped is that 130w PC "looks" brighter to you than 150w 20k right? That's entirely possible depending on which 20k bulb you're using and what combo of PC bulbs. The 20k bulbs are not all the same, and they are in general always "dim" appearing to the eye. pop a iwasaki 6500k in that pendant and you'll have no doubts in your mind.
 
Ok hereââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢s a question for anyone willing. Itââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢s said that 65K bulbs are the brightest looking and 20K bulbs are the dimmest looking. Are the 20Kââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢s dim because people donââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢t see blue light as well as green, yellow? Putting it another way is the total amount of light from either bulb the same and we just perceive one as being brighter or does one really put out more total light than the other. Thanks

Colin
 
Uhm....the short answer to you Colin is yes. The long answer is that 20k's also prolly don't put out as much absolute light so it's a factor of what our eyes perceive as well as absolute light output. Also some of this factors into PAR readings vs lumens etc...if you look at JBNY's work on 250w bulbs, you'll notice that across the board the 20k bulbs put out much less par than the 6.5ks and 10ks. But the difference is magnified by what our eyes perceive as well I believe.
 
Thank you very much Moonpod for your answer. Thatââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢s what I thought.

Colin
 
CCG said:
Ok hereââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢s a question for anyone willing. Itââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢s said that 65K bulbs are the brightest looking and 20K bulbs are the dimmest looking. Are the 20Kââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢s dim because people donââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢t see blue light as well as green, yellow? Putting it another way is the total amount of light from either bulb the same and we just perceive one as being brighter or does one really put out more total light than the other. Thanks

Colin
Click to expand...

I believe that one of Sanjay's earliest tests (years ago, if it was even Sanjay... maybe Dana Riddle, published in SeaNotes) showed that the Iwasaki 250w 6500K lamp actually put out MORE blue than, IIRC, the 250w Coralife 20kK, but that because it's yellow/green output was so high, your eyes didn't see the blue.
 
I'm cuting and pasting from another dicussion I was having.

Radium/xm type blue bulbs provide almost all their intensity in one small band 450nm, and two other bands, 412nm and 546nm. Both these other two bands are aprox. 25% and 19% the intensity of the 450nm band. Still this is only three bands in the entire spectrum. The rest of the spectrum, not including those three mentioned, irradiate only about 11% in the radium and 3% in the XM, of the intensity of that 450nm peak.

Now if you look at the Iwasaki, it's two peaks in the 400-500nm range are at 420nm and 490nm. but the average of almost the entire band from 400-500nm is about 80% of the peak value seen at 420nm. With the lowest point of the Iwasaki being 40% of the peak at 420nm.
 
PRRD said:
any prgoress here?
Click to expand...
Yes and
<img src="/images/welcome.gif" width="500" height="62"><br><b><i><big><big>To Reef Central</b></i></big></big>

....a bit more tweaking and some real life activity required.
 
i imagine part of the reason pc's might look brighter somewhat is due to the added sub surface scattering due to a longer fixture.

gives the tank much more of a radiosity effect, whereas MH's focused source of light produces more intense but less scattered light. hence the shimmer, and increased shadow/light contrast.

just a guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

wishntoboutside
Giesemann lights fixtures for sale. All hybrid Led or MH with T5s
Replies
9
Views
2K
classictint
C
P
Classroom Aquarium/Pets Have to Go :( 70Gallon Reef/50 gallon sump CompleteSetup, Max
Replies
1
Views
723
phatsonate
P
golfish
250 watt HQI DE ballst
Replies
10
Views
1K
golfish
golfish
A
Does anyone still run XM 10k 250 watts bulbs ?
Replies
2
Views
909
abhishek@1985
A
psykokid
FS: 250W DE MH Ballast and bulbs
Replies
1
Views
461
five.five-six
five.five-six
Back
Top