Anyone Thinking of Dumping LEDS and going back to Halides

This is copy of a post in the ATI thread, but I figured it was relevant to the discussion here. The main point is that even at very low levels (35%) I found that running LEDs for too many hours was detrimental to some color and health . . . .



FTSJan2016_zpsw6bjpolr.jpg


I'm sorry, perhaps I didn't read closely enough. But based on those pictures, if the tank owner is critical of his own colors...I can't help but equate that to an anorexic thinking they're fat. It's just nonsense. That tank looks like an ultimate end point goal of growth and color. Lighting debate aside.
 
I'm sorry, perhaps I didn't read closely enough. But based on those pictures, if the tank owner is critical of his own colors...I can't help but equate that to an anorexic thinking they're fat. It's just nonsense. That tank looks like an ultimate end point goal of growth and color. Lighting debate aside.

Why is it nonsense? He is noticing negative effects of the LED on his corals, I don't think he said he tank looks horrible. Its nonsense to discredit someones observations when hes so very clearly in-tune with his tank and the effects of new equipment.
 
Personally I would
Like to keep some LEDs in my mix for the money savings of switching bulbs. So I woul like to know if you guys think the mix t5 led is a better combo than led mh? I woul like to reduce the amount of time the t5 or mh run by using the LEDs to do the sunrise and set setting and minimize bulbs. So what do you think t5 led or my led.

Thanks
 
I like the rapid growth and heat generation from my MH (yes- if I'm going to have heaters, I might as well have MH). I like the color (how it looks) and pigmentation (actual coral color change) from low wavelength LEDs.

Low wavelength LEDs also give me the option to use low K MHs (like 10K) to save on replacement cost.
 
Too cool, too long, too led

Too cool, too long, too led

Two questions and personal reports.

1) We are getting too much light with many common LED configurations. It's been my experience that a LED fixture with a significant number of royal blue leds will look rather dim, but will actually put out more photosynthetically active energy than reefers anticipate. You see it all the time, people put LEDs over their tank and bleach all of their coral. The coral bleaches because its receiving too much energy and dumps its zoox - coral does not bleach within days when it receives too little light. IT may fade over time, but does not bleach within days. The reefer then turns down the LED, but it takes months for coral to recover from an event like this. Go low with LEDs and you'll be rewarded - seriously, the lowest levels that you think couldn't possibly be bright enough for your tank. LEDs are putting out a lot less green light than halides, and don't look nearly as bright. But to the coral, that royal blue is often blinding.


2) LEDs put out no infra-red light / radiated heat compared with halides. If you stand in front of a halide, you'll feel the heat. LEDs commonly used put out no IR energy and I often wonder if this is the missing ingredient. To be specific, this is IR energy which directly imparts heat on the solid material it interacts with (coral tissue) think IR sauna. The metabolic rates of the coral we keep is very dependent on tissue temperature. My first guess is that people with warmer tanks have better luck with LEDs (80-82 degrees) - along with this, anyone with a tank at 75-76 degrees is going to have a lot of trouble with LEDs). I'd be very much interested in seeing people increase their tank temps or run IR leds to compensate.
 
elos-20k-14k-metal-halide.jpg


Check that it+far it. I'm willing to bet that this bumps coral tissue temp up at least 3-5 degrees over LEDs.

It may be as simple as running our tanks 3-5 degrees warmer during the day if we're using LEDs. However, it may be that coral which requires more light also does better with a higher tissue temperature. It may also be that the water being cooler than the coral allows it to regulate its internal temp in some way, so IR may be the only answer.
 
Higher temp also means faster proliferation of bacteria - which can take out frags with unclean wounds.

I am very curious about tissue temp vs water temp though. Wondering if someone with a laser thermometer could do some high light vs low light surface temp comparisons under LED and Halide (IE top side of a rock vs underside of a rock).
 
21 months LED and still not changing. I am still going to stick with LEDs work well once you dial them in for your tank. Definitely not plug and play.
 
Two questions and personal reports.

1) We are getting too much light with many common LED configurations. It's been my experience that a LED fixture with a significant number of royal blue leds will look rather dim, but will actually put out more photosynthetically active energy than reefers anticipate. You see it all the time, people put LEDs over their tank and bleach all of their coral. The coral bleaches because its receiving too much energy and dumps its zoox - coral does not bleach within days when it receives too little light. IT may fade over time, but does not bleach within days. The reefer then turns down the LED, but it takes months for coral to recover from an event like this. Go low with LEDs and you'll be rewarded - seriously, the lowest levels that you think couldn't possibly be bright enough for your tank. LEDs are putting out a lot less green light than halides, and don't look nearly as bright. But to the coral, that royal blue is often blinding.


2) LEDs put out no infra-red light / radiated heat compared with halides. If you stand in front of a halide, you'll feel the heat. LEDs commonly used put out no IR energy and I often wonder if this is the missing ingredient. To be specific, this is IR energy which directly imparts heat on the solid material it interacts with (coral tissue) think IR sauna. The metabolic rates of the coral we keep is very dependent on tissue temperature. My first guess is that people with warmer tanks have better luck with LEDs (80-82 degrees) - along with this, anyone with a tank at 75-76 degrees is going to have a lot of trouble with LEDs). I'd be very much interested in seeing people increase their tank temps or run IR leds to compensate.

This I have always been curious about, direct radiated heat would also be true in the wild too, what is the real effect of that heat on coral tissue. Indeed could be what we are missing in LED tanks.
 
Two questions and personal reports.

1) We are getting too much light with many common LED configurations. It's been my experience that a LED fixture with a significant number of royal blue leds will look rather dim, but will actually put out more photosynthetically active energy than reefers anticipate. You see it all the time, people put LEDs over their tank and bleach all of their coral. The coral bleaches because its receiving too much energy and dumps its zoox - coral does not bleach within days when it receives too little light. IT may fade over time, but does not bleach within days. The reefer then turns down the LED, but it takes months for coral to recover from an event like this. Go low with LEDs and you'll be rewarded - seriously, the lowest levels that you think couldn't possibly be bright enough for your tank. LEDs are putting out a lot less green light than halides, and don't look nearly as bright. But to the coral, that royal blue is often blinding.


2) LEDs put out no infra-red light / radiated heat compared with halides. If you stand in front of a halide, you'll feel the heat. LEDs commonly used put out no IR energy and I often wonder if this is the missing ingredient. To be specific, this is IR energy which directly imparts heat on the solid material it interacts with (coral tissue) think IR sauna. The metabolic rates of the coral we keep is very dependent on tissue temperature. My first guess is that people with warmer tanks have better luck with LEDs (80-82 degrees) - along with this, anyone with a tank at 75-76 degrees is going to have a lot of trouble with LEDs). I'd be very much interested in seeing people increase their tank temps or run IR leds to compensate.
I've thought of #2 before, yet when you consider T5 sps tanks they lack the radiant heat of MH's and can grow sps just as good.
 
I've thought of #2 before, yet when you consider T5 sps tanks they lack the radiant heat of MH's and can grow sps just as good.

Ahh, true, but then T5s do have a tiny UV output. Personally I don't think that is the primary issue, but I do think it is a sub-text to the issue of spectrum. LED manufacturers love to show nice smooth colorful curves representing the spectrum of their "white" LEDs, but the truth is if they used expensive equipment that measured each individual wavelength the spectral plot would appear digital with lots of spikes and lots of gaps.

Bottom Line: For me, results matter. Here's a one year progression of my reef under MH and T5. I lost some colonies and rearranged several colonies, but there are enough colonies that stayed put to be a good example of how effective MH and T5 are at growing colorful coral. I would note the GARF Bonsai, the purple humilis, Blue Stag, Purple Slimer, a. Microlados, and others all of which show awesome color and growth.

I think the best is the purple humilis. You see a tiny colony in the top right in the first photo and a year later it's a beautiful purple colony with perfect growth form.


IMG_1917_zpsunu3fxzu.jpg


IMG_3471_zps7tjessj4.jpg



IMG_3477_zpsigse6egt.jpg
 
Back
Top