Anyone Thinking of Dumping LEDS and going back to Halides

cambo123 said:
In conclusion, I feel I can safely say that MH has edged out on top. But it is not leaps and bounds. For this reason, my new setup will be LED lit for the main display with a independent quarantine/frag tank lit with MH. AEFW WILL BE DESTROYED!!!!!
Click to expand...

As you found out, you can't do a proper comparison when you have other issues.
When everything else is perfect, lighting can have a profound effect.
Like I've said before, if you are having coral issues with MH, lighting is not your problem and you need to look elsewhere.
I'd also give it at least 6 months with each type of lighting before drawing any conclusions, and not changing anything else. When you keep changing things, you have no idea what's causing what.

I don't know why you would light a QT with mh???
 
Absolutely, I am simply pointing out that it is easy for us to diagnose the wrong issue as I did and use lighting as a scape goat for other issues. I have no doubt that MH is still the best, however at least for the corals I am keeping I feel the difference is not very significant. I will be running MH in my quarantine because I have it and it will double as a frag tank :)
 
Last edited:
mhucasey said:
This is one of the few pictures of yours that even has SPS in it:
Newfragson12-31-13004_zpsec7cc5fb.jpg
Click to expand...

LMFAO!!:lolspin::lolspin::lolspin:
 
Wow...I just wanted to post to thank all of you for your feedback. I've been somewhat neglecting my tank over the past couple of years, and have just really been on cruise mode. I'm overdue for a T5 / VHO bulb replacement, so I figured now would be the time to upgrade the tank lighting to LEDs. After reading 10 - 15 pages of this thread, I've decided I'm sticking with what I've got. Overall, my corals are fairly healthy, and I know that any issues I have with my tank are due to my lack of routine maintenance, not because I don't have the latest & greatest in lighting.

As a side note, I work for a company that manufactures LED lights for commercial and industrial applications, and was going to have them make me some type of custom strip light that I could install under my canopy in place of the T5s (I was going to continue to run the VHOs for my actinics). But, the risk of that just isn't worth it to me if I don't get the color spectrum right, particularly after reading all of your comments regarding LED lighting in general.

But, I probably am going to need to do something with the wiring of my lights, as I almost burnt the house down the other day as one of my NON-high flex wires finally gave way and shorted out. So, I guess I will spend the money I was going to spend on the LED upgrade to fix my wiring, and maybe do some other upgrades that would make my life easier (auto-doser, relocating the sump to the basement, battery backup for my MP40s, etc.)

Regardless, thanks again for all of your feedback in this thread. I truly appreciate it (I knew ReefCentral wouldn't steer me wrong!)

Jason
 
You can add me to this list. 2 years ago I got the itch to switch to this LED craze. I had been running 250 watt radium 20k bulbs on electronic ballasts in lumenarc mini reflectors with t5 supplements and getting very respectable par and insane growth and color. So I got 3 24" photon fixtures from reef breeders for my 72x24x30 220 gallon sps dominated reef tank. It was a down spiral since then. Colors faded, growth was slowed a lot. So I thought I didnt have enough light so I added 2 more of the value fixtures behind the other fixtures left and right of the center overflow to fully cover everything. Still the same. Now Im running a ton of LEDs, for 13 hours a day at a pretty high setting just to have anything happen. Plus now my heaters run way more. So Im losing money on the electrical savings in my situation (not saying others dont save). Sps suffered bad. Lps and softies took it in stride, but I still am not getting the growth from them that I had. Clams did terribly, 1 that I have had for years died. That was the last straw. So now I have coming 3 lumen bright mini pendant style reflectors, 3 250 watt radium bulbs and luxcore 250-400 watt adjustable electronic ballast. I got great par running the radiums well below spec voltage, and now this ballast has the 250 hqi setting so I should do even better. I wan to eventually figure a way to squeeze in a few T5 bulbs again for actinic and sunrise/set but with a better method than I had before. Time to sell some LEDs.
 
Mh vs LED

Mh vs LED

Nothing beats MH, T-5 is close but sorry. I tried LED myself twice and sure they use less power. That's important but Nothing beats Metal Halide. I had 2 x 250s 20k Ushio bulbs over my 120 and a Hot Tub running and it wasn't really that bad. I loved that set-up. Best set-up I ever had, Calcium Reactor was better than the Dosing system I have now. Yes there has been great strides in this Great Hobby for Power Heads, Reactors, Testing Equipment, GFO, and many other attributes But MH seems to keep our interests.
 
Wazzel said:
At one time 6.5k and lots of actinc tubes was considered the "gold standard" and radium lamps were considered by many to be garbage. Oh how times have changed.
Click to expand...

Sort of. Everyone was trying to emulate sunlight and get as much light as they could, attempting to mimic noon sunlight at the surface in the tropics. Then Steve Tyree started using Radiums, and everyone's first reaction was "they are too blue! And "they don't have enough power!". I vaguely remember Tyree using scientific explanations of why he wanted to use a light with such a limited spectrum. Now we know more about what light hits the corals that are collected for the hobby it seems like a no brainer to not use 6500ks.
...at least that's how I remember the transition.

Something similar happened when the first reports of use of T5s came out. The tanks were from Europe and American reef keepers immediately dismissed that T5s could put out enough power to grow SPS. The proof was in the tanks though, lush tanks with wall to wall colorful SPS. Obviously we caught on.

Now I hear the LED crowd saying "see? The same thing happened to Radiums and t5's! You're just haven't caught up yet!" Sorry, it's not the same yet. Those other lighting systems were proven by the tanks that grew under them. Not spectral charts, not mfg claims, not flashy packaging. It is a very few tanks with very expensive installations of LEDs that have shown similar results to the better MH and T5 tanks. The very best LED grown tanks still can't match the best of the traditional tech tanks.
 
mhucasey said:
Sort of. Everyone was trying to emulate sunlight and get as much light as they could, attempting to mimic noon sunlight at the surface in the tropics. Then Steve Tyree started using Radiums, and everyone's first reaction was "they are too blue! And "they don't have enough power!". I vaguely remember Tyree using scientific explanations of why he wanted to use a light with such a limited spectrum. Now we know more about what light hits the corals that are collected for the hobby it seems like a no brainer to not use 6500ks.
...at least that's how I remember the transition.

Something similar happened when the first reports of use of T5s came out. The tanks were from Europe and American reef keepers immediately dismissed that T5s could put out enough power to grow SPS. The proof was in the tanks though, lush tanks with wall to wall colorful SPS. Obviously we caught on.

Now I hear the LED crowd saying "see? The same thing happened to Radiums and t5's! You're just haven't caught up yet!" Sorry, it's not the same yet. Those other lighting systems were proven by the tanks that grew under them. Not spectral charts, not mfg claims, not flashy packaging. It is a very few tanks with very expensive installations of LEDs that have shown similar results to the better MH and T5 tanks. The very best LED grown tanks still can't match the best of the traditional tech tanks.
Click to expand...

I kind of remember those first two points kind of like that. I have seen some LED tanks that are as good as MH or T-5. Definitely taking longer for the hobby to get them sorted out than MH or T-5. Sometimes I think the controllability is a detriment. I am still happy with my LED unit. Given time it will get sorted, just like Mh and T-5 did.
 
Jim.mer said:
Nothing beats MH, T-5 is close but sorry. I tried LED myself twice and sure they use less power. That's important but Nothing beats Metal Halide. I had 2 x 250s 20k Ushio bulbs over my 120 and a Hot Tub running and it wasn't really that bad. I loved that set-up. Best set-up I ever had, Calcium Reactor was better than the Dosing system I have now. Yes there has been great strides in this Great Hobby for Power Heads, Reactors, Testing Equipment, GFO, and many other attributes But MH seems to keep our interests.
Click to expand...
+1 on all your comments and observations!
Read the sig below!
 
Wazzel said:
At one time 6.5k and lots of actinc tubes was considered the "gold standard" and radium lamps were considered by many to be garbage. Oh how times have changed.
Click to expand...

Not to date myself, but... 6.5k? That was the future! 5k was where it was at! That and VHO tubes!
 
Member No. 1 said:
Not to date myself, but... 6.5k? That was the future! 5k was where it was at! That and VHO tubes!
Click to expand...

Hey now, I still think T-12 VHOs > T-5s when it comes to supplemental lighting for halides.
Problem is only vho/halide combo fixtures these days are bulky and have reflectors consisting of the inside of the fixture itself being painted white and thats about it.

I was actually getting awesome growth rates with acros back in the day using 2 48" URI VHOs over 33L prop tanks, the color was not anything special but the growth rate was astonishing.
 
mhucasey said:
Sort of. Everyone was trying to emulate sunlight and get as much light as they could, attempting to mimic noon sunlight at the surface in the tropics. Then Steve Tyree started using Radiums, and everyone's first reaction was "they are too blue! And "they don't have enough power!". I vaguely remember Tyree using scientific explanations of why he wanted to use a light with such a limited spectrum. Now we know more about what light hits the corals that are collected for the hobby it seems like a no brainer to not use 6500ks.
...at least that's how I remember the transition.

Something similar happened when the first reports of use of T5s came out. The tanks were from Europe and American reef keepers immediately dismissed that T5s could put out enough power to grow SPS. The proof was in the tanks though, lush tanks with wall to wall colorful SPS. Obviously we caught on.

Now I hear the LED crowd saying "see? The same thing happened to Radiums and t5's! You're just haven't caught up yet!" Sorry, it's not the same yet. Those other lighting systems were proven by the tanks that grew under them. Not spectral charts, not mfg claims, not flashy packaging. It is a very few tanks with very expensive installations of LEDs that have shown similar results to the better MH and T5 tanks. The very best LED grown tanks still can't match the best of the traditional tech tanks.
Click to expand...

Its not that LEDS cant grow corals because they can, It is the fact that leds dont do UV yet. There are leds that do UV but they cost more than a fixture.

The thing about corals is the colors pigments/proteins in corals are not only produced for the spectrum of light the coral likes or need but by the spectrum of light it hates. Lots of those pigments are produce to act as a sunscreen against UV. What happens with those pigments or proteins if you remove the UV? I remember working on my tank with 6500 k Iwaskis for a hour and getting a sunburn, would that ever happen under leds?

So basically some corals that come shallow water may loose color under led. Some of these pigments/protiens are made to change a spectrum of light it hates into something it can use too or simply to just block it.

Speaking of 6500 k lamps, they are still the best for shallow water corals less than something like 15 feet of water . That is the color of light where they come from so would it not be best to give those corals the same color of light where they come from? For some corals this is still the best. When I ran Iwasakis I had more wows that light is awsume then when everyone went bluer. We are brain washed to think bluer is better. Sun light is 5,500 k and when you got out side on a sunny day do you go aw man its sunny I would rather have it cloudy?. The whole blue thing is because people like to see corals fluoresce and it does not mean it is better for corals colors. A lot of corals from shallow water my look good fluorescing but they loose color under more blue light and that is also what we see with led. A lot of people run leds two blue because they love that fluorescing because led sis great at that and make it worse.

The biggest problem with all of it is we kept a mixture of corals from all different depth in our tanks.. So halides might be best for shallow water corals or corals that bake in the sun that are used to lots of UV but corals from deeper depths have no uv protection a 6500 k and other halides lamp can be hard on them and led will be better.

Every type of light has its advantages and disadvantages and are better for different corals.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
LED fixture lighting help (replacing old T5 HO)
Replies
5
Views
521
griss
griss
C
Maxspect jump led issue
Replies
0
Views
297
Cruzersmith
C
L
Equipment help
Replies
9
Views
263
oliver729
O
M
Can't find 60"VHO Actinics anymore... LED recommendations
2
Replies
23
Views
1K
griss
griss
S
Waterbox 35.2 AIO Water Flow
Replies
1
Views
248
griss
griss
Back
Top