Anyone Thinking of Dumping LEDS and going back to Halides
- Thread starter Goldcoastreefs
- Start date
If that is all you are after, you can buy Luxeon K 8 and 16 up royal blues silly cheap now.
In an apartment with no air (and no desire to put it in or use a chiller) where it gets hot in the summer.
I've had plenty of interaction with people, who are not you, who have had experience with all forms of lighting who happen to have a very different opinion than you.
I'm quite capable of figuring out what I like by looking at tanks, in person, that are running LED.
Sorry to see that you are so closed minded. Now I know how to interpret your posts. Thanks for that bit of info. :rolleye1:
Uncle Salty 05
New member
Build an enclosed fixture and vent the heat outdoors.
It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure that out.
It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure that out.
Uncle Salty 05
New member
Wrong spectrum.
Big difference between 5000K and 6500K and big difference between 4000K and 453nm, plus the spread does not come close to being comparable.
MedRed
Active member
By the way some posters have represented LEDs you would think that they did not exist prior to their introduction to the aquarium industry.
The concept was first demonstrated in a lab in 1907, over 100 years ago. The first commercial LEDs were produced 52 years ago in 1962. The first high brightness LEDs were produced for the fiber optic industry in 1972.
LEDs may be new to the commercial lighting industry, but they have been around a long time. Long enough to establish credible MTBF numbers and to determine things like rate of decay and spectral shift.
Of course, that does not stop some manufacturers from driving their LEDs at or beyond their proper operating specifications.
It's really not an argument of good and bad. The argument is good, better, best for specific attributes. LEDs are hands down the best in efficiency, functionality, and heat reduction.
They are decent in coverage
Off the shelf units are high on initial cost but could be the lowest on longterm hardware cost IF their output and spectrum today won't necessitate bulb replacement, additions, or fixture replacement in the future.
They can offer adequate to good coral color and growth. But I don't feel they are the best lighting source for this. This here is where I feel the decision has to be made for individuals. Do all of the pluses of LEDs make them the best option if you are looking for the best color and growth that you can get with your lighting fixture?
For me, I need the best in color rendition.
d2mini
Premium Member
Yes, i'm obviously close minded speaking from personal experience. I wish I could be as open minded as you and argue for something I have zero experience with.
Uncle Salty 05
New member
It boils down to priorities. If your tank/s are the number one priority then MH simply cannot be outdone by LEDs or any other light source.
But people with families and other responsibilities have to compromise sometimes. LEDs are the closest thing there is to MHs and they are cheaper and easier to run and maintain.
If I won the lottery I would have 250 and 400 watt MHs all over the place, but sadly that is not very likely to happen.
But people with families and other responsibilities have to compromise sometimes. LEDs are the closest thing there is to MHs and they are cheaper and easier to run and maintain.
If I won the lottery I would have 250 and 400 watt MHs all over the place, but sadly that is not very likely to happen.
Stlouphil
Member
I respect the openness and honesty. I'm building a canopy right now. Hate it. I would love to drop 500-600 on a custom built canopy. Can't priorities.
We all make decisions on where we draw the line. Budget is one of them. You acknowledge MHs are superior, but go with LEDs because of budget. I'm cool with that. I think everybody is cool with that.
I think where a lot of the people have a problem is when people justify their use of LEDs as the superior choice and shout it from the roof tops not because LEDs are superior, but because they fit into their budget.
Last edited:
Stlouphil
Member
Sure I could, but why exactly would I want to run venting across a hallway and 20 feet of living room just to get to an outside wall when I can use LEDs that do not require venting?
Your response here really puzzles me.
I saw that Vivid tank in person 3 different times when one side was metal halide and one side was LEDs.
The difference was much more clear than on the video.
Both sides looked nice but in person, the metal halide side was clearly showing better growth and better color.
It wasn't just me, my friends thought the same. Even when I would speak with Jesus who works at Vivid, he would say the same that the corals looked better under the metal halides.
Last edited:
d2mini
Premium Member
I respect the openness and honesty. I'm building a canopy right now. Hate it. I would love to drop 500-600 on a custom built canopy. Can't priorities.
We all make decisions on where we draw the line. Budget is one of them. You acknowledge MHs are superior, but go with LEDs because of budget. I'm cool with that. I think everybody is cool with that.
I think where a lot of the people have a problem is when people justify their use of LEDs as the superior choice and shout it from the roof tops not because LEDs are superior, but because they fit into their budget.
Agreed. Even those of us who prefer MH can all agree that saving cash on electricity or even bulbs is nice. Especially for those in tiered sectors.
I think we all find ourselves compromising somewhere in this hobby. Nothing wrong with that.
You and I are pretty much in agreement on this. For me, I need reduced heat. Well, and I like to play with new stuff.
Not sure what pics of any tank I've run would prove. The last one was seahorses with Fluorescents over them. Hey, the components were free and they worked just fine for that application.
The pedant in me just keeps objecting to the blanket statements that come up every couple of pages in this thread.
??? The luxeon K Royal Blue spectrum is centered on 450 nm, only a hair of 453. Sure, the spread is not the same, but then a narrow spectrum 453K T5 does not exist. I only suggested it because the 8 and 16 up give you a lot of light output for the cost. The 8 up is $12, or $1.50 per emitter.
Really??? Geez I must be lucky. I've spent most of my career working with stuff I've had zero experience with and been quite successful.
Khemul
New member
Because the whole point of the LED vs MH debate is appearances and color.
It has nothing to do with cooling, savings, cost, whatever. It entirely has to do with getting the best possible color, which is determined by a rather small subset of a rather small hobby. Which essentially means, pics or it didn't happen. :bounce1:
But in all seriousness. The crux of the debate really is aesthetics. If those aren't your number 1 priority, or you aren't concerned with getting to to the rather strict standard of a small subset of the hobby, then there isn't much point in the debate to begin with. It's apples to oranges really.
Mikefromaz
New member
I couldnt agree with you more about the benefit of programs which help in custom tailoring lighting by species, depth, etc. It is ironic considering the rancor about "coloring up" corals that LED nor MH do not mimic the natural coloration. For example a lot of deep water critters are bright red. At the depths they live at these animals look black becsuse the complete absence of red spectrum makes them invisible to preditors. We as reefers defer to our egos and try to create what we want to see not necessarily what is correct. The only real concern should be whatever spectrum it takes to support growth. The underwater glowing light show is entirely personal preference and should take a second consideration to whatever spectrum supplies the corals needs.
Similar threads
