sal-t-dawg
Registered Nut Job
Do you have to run MH lights if you have corals? Are T-5's enough? How do you figure out exactly what kind of MH's you need?
Are MH lights a must???
- Thread starter sal-t-dawg
- Start date
sandalscout
New member
T5s are more than adequate for everything in my tank, and I do have some SPS with really good growth.
casademurphy
New member
T5s are fine for a tank with corals. I think it comes down to personal preference. Do you want the shimmer look? I chose MHs and will probably stay with MHs forever because of the shimmer look. There's just nothing like it!
sal-t-dawg
Registered Nut Job
So they have the same benefits as T5's but give a different look?
casademurphy
New member
Here's a link to some information. Should help you out. I like the MHs better because of the shimmer look. It looks more like the ocean. Also, I think the colors in my SPS corals pop a little more than they do under T5s (compared to a friend's tank).
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/subject/lighting.php
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/subject/lighting.php
poolkeeper1
New member
While T5s are sufficient in numbers ( enough bulbs ) They just Don't give off as much light as MH do in general! MH have been the staple for many years, T5s are relatively new compared to the Halides and success is not proven absolutely IMHO. All corals do not have the same light requirements so it depends on what you want to have in your tank. I am a shimmer guy myself! But supplement with T5s, Around 1100w total then you can grow almost all.
sal-t-dawg
Registered Nut Job
So....What Im understanding is that some corals do better with MH's. But for the most part the major difference is the look?
supertech99
New member
IMO, mh with t5 is the best of both worlds. MH's draw a lot of electricity and create a bit of heat. t5's light anything if you have enough of them but are cooler, cheeper to run and cheeper to buy. Its kinda of a preference and money thing. I would suggest that if you have not seen many tanks with the different lighting types you should look around and see some different setups to develope your own preference. most aquarists love to show off their tanks! Just so you know I run t5's because of cost and coral type (only 1 sps). If i had the funds i would run a setup more like bills with t5's and MH. They are sharp, shimmer and nice blue color!
casademurphy
New member
I only use MHs. I don't have any supplement lighting and my tank is doing great!
sandalscout
New member
I only use T5s, I don't have any supplement lighting, I bet I pay a lower electric rate, have no cooling issues, and my tank is doing great too!
casademurphy
New member
I bet you pay a lower electric rate too! 
SoCal electricity rates are through the roof! I don't have any cooling issues though. I think I got lucky.
SoCal electricity rates are through the roof! I don't have any cooling issues though. I think I got lucky.
Last edited:
sandalscout
New member
haha, I meant I bet I have less electric draw from my lights, but yeah, I bet I pay a much lower kw/h rate also! haha
NeveSSL
Got tubes?
I run T5s and have great success with them. Many people switch from MH because of the heat and, thus, the expense to run them.
Also, I've not heard of ANY thing that will grow under MH that won't grow under T5s. There are some things that may grow better or have more color under either, but T5HOs are more than adequate to have anything you want in your tank in my experience. I even have a crocea clam (the absolute most light-love clam of the tridacnids) and it will actually bleach out due to too much light if I move it up in my tank. I keep it perfectly healthy and growing on the bottom of my 25" deep tank with T5HOs.
Just curious, Bill... why do you say they don't put out as much light?
Also, what will it take for them to be "absolutely proven IYHO?
Just curious.
Brandon
Also, I've not heard of ANY thing that will grow under MH that won't grow under T5s. There are some things that may grow better or have more color under either, but T5HOs are more than adequate to have anything you want in your tank in my experience. I even have a crocea clam (the absolute most light-love clam of the tridacnids) and it will actually bleach out due to too much light if I move it up in my tank. I keep it perfectly healthy and growing on the bottom of my 25" deep tank with T5HOs.
Just curious, Bill... why do you say they don't put out as much light?
Also, what will it take for them to be "absolutely proven IYHO?
Just curious.
Brandon
waynesworld
Premium Member
Well I have used MH 400 and 250 and also t5 in various numbers and will say that they both work and you can do t5 with sps on 30" tanks and get growth. I think that for most people starting out should do t5 because of the benefits out weigh the cons as most people that go with the MH say the shimmer is why they stay with MH and I think it is overrated.
poolkeeper1
New member
I said in general they don't give off as much light as T5s.
A 5ft x 24" tank can hold, Lets say 6x80w T5s = 480w total
That same tank If i wanted I could put 8 x 400w MH = 3200w total
That is what I meant in general, never said anything about absolutes Brandon.
I'm sure in time that T5s will either be proven as good or not as good in growing all corals, but I personally don't think that is Fact as of yet.
There's a lot of opinions out there but it seems if you state one your there's always someone who mistakenly thinks your stating gospel!
It's an opinion Brandon, give me yours but please don't criticize me for mine.
A clam in the wild in shallow water will get more light from the sun than it ever will from a T5, Do you think there is any proof your clam bleaches from too much light or just the wrong kind of light.
I'll wait to hear your proof in this area of expertise my friend!
I guess when T5s are the only lights sold for Aquariums I'll be convinced there the best, But until ?
A 5ft x 24" tank can hold, Lets say 6x80w T5s = 480w total
That same tank If i wanted I could put 8 x 400w MH = 3200w total
That is what I meant in general, never said anything about absolutes Brandon.
I'm sure in time that T5s will either be proven as good or not as good in growing all corals, but I personally don't think that is Fact as of yet.
There's a lot of opinions out there but it seems if you state one your there's always someone who mistakenly thinks your stating gospel!
It's an opinion Brandon, give me yours but please don't criticize me for mine.
A clam in the wild in shallow water will get more light from the sun than it ever will from a T5, Do you think there is any proof your clam bleaches from too much light or just the wrong kind of light.
I'll wait to hear your proof in this area of expertise my friend!
I guess when T5s are the only lights sold for Aquariums I'll be convinced there the best, But until ?
NeveSSL
Got tubes?
Bill, buddy, I never criticized you for your opinion. I simply asked you a question. I'm not sure at all why you took offense to this. Did I miss something?
As far as the clam goes, I tried twice to move him up closer to the lights... both times he bleached out until he was moved to the sand. Could it have been something else? Most definitely. The consistent factor seemed to be the light.
Brandon
As far as the clam goes, I tried twice to move him up closer to the lights... both times he bleached out until he was moved to the sand. Could it have been something else? Most definitely. The consistent factor seemed to be the light.
Brandon
Interesting thread.
I would like to throw out another factor.
To me, the amount of dropoff over time is a big key. When both MH and T5 bulbs are new (provided they are of good quality), I bet the difference is minimal in relation to ouput. MH penetrates a little better, and T5 cover area a little more evenly.
The one thing that makes me hestiate with T5's on a larger tank is that the dropoff occurs faster. In industrial lighting, Flourescents start dropping off sooner and have a fairly steady decline (I was told this by a lighting engineer FWIW). MH (incandescent style) drops off slower at first, but as the fillament burns up towards the end of it's cycle the dropoff increases at a faster rate.
So my decison was T5's are perfectly fine for low-mid light level needs, and MH better for tanks that have light sensitive and large light requirement habitants. I take the best of both worlds and run both.
Lets keep the discussion up becasue I would like to udnerstand more about lighting charcteristics and differences. Actinics would be a good subject too since Actininc was developed for commercial application for curing UV plastics (like liquid acrylic), and now some aquaium light manufactures are starting to tout their actinics are built for aquarium use and are slightly different in spectral output.
I would like to throw out another factor.
To me, the amount of dropoff over time is a big key. When both MH and T5 bulbs are new (provided they are of good quality), I bet the difference is minimal in relation to ouput. MH penetrates a little better, and T5 cover area a little more evenly.
The one thing that makes me hestiate with T5's on a larger tank is that the dropoff occurs faster. In industrial lighting, Flourescents start dropping off sooner and have a fairly steady decline (I was told this by a lighting engineer FWIW). MH (incandescent style) drops off slower at first, but as the fillament burns up towards the end of it's cycle the dropoff increases at a faster rate.
So my decison was T5's are perfectly fine for low-mid light level needs, and MH better for tanks that have light sensitive and large light requirement habitants. I take the best of both worlds and run both.
Lets keep the discussion up becasue I would like to udnerstand more about lighting charcteristics and differences. Actinics would be a good subject too since Actininc was developed for commercial application for curing UV plastics (like liquid acrylic), and now some aquaium light manufactures are starting to tout their actinics are built for aquarium use and are slightly different in spectral output.
