Interesting Read
- Thread starter phljess
- Start date
Altpers0na
ARS Caesar
i put a 6 lamp t5 on my 75. it has 2 fans (i think) and plastic splash guards, 6x54w.
my overall water temp did not raise more than maybe 3? degrees over what i had with 3x28w stand alones with no fans.
i have not ran MH on this tank.
I think the MH create hot spots in the water where the t5s evenly heat across the whole tank.
of course those hot spots are probably also hi lumen areas...
my overall water temp did not raise more than maybe 3? degrees over what i had with 3x28w stand alones with no fans.
i have not ran MH on this tank.
I think the MH create hot spots in the water where the t5s evenly heat across the whole tank.
of course those hot spots are probably also hi lumen areas...
Tazbader
New member
ok I buy the equal heat part but I know MH will throw more light "lumens" deeper into the water.... at least that is the way it used to be.... we did measurements years ago. Thats why that guy from "Portugal" has such great success with t-5s..... really shallow tanks. Also why I think LEDs have a long way to go... just my 2cents..... nice read though.........
Altpers0na
ARS Caesar
not deep, deeper...
farther than the rest.
find one othe tank shots with par labels and connect the most 'like' numbers. color the numbers in related par levels... it should stand out that the spots under the bulbs have a higher value. those spots also probably have a higher temperature.
farther than the rest.
find one othe tank shots with par labels and connect the most 'like' numbers. color the numbers in related par levels... it should stand out that the spots under the bulbs have a higher value. those spots also probably have a higher temperature.
phljess
New member
I would consider any tank over 18 inches deep. I think t5HO will work for anything under 18 inches. The main reason I put this thread up was because ppl keep saying T5s are cooler and less expensive to run than halides. This is somewhat true depending on what type of ballast the halide is running on but not necessarily true. A watt is a watt, T5s spread them out over a longer distance. Halides focus them into a point, this is why I believe halides are better for deeper tanks.
Altpers0na
ARS Caesar
MH is better, for some tanks.
tall tanks, a MH and sunlight are the only options for >24 inch deep tanks.
for tanks under 18 inchs deep or under 3 ft long, MH is far better.
for tanks, that are 48 long and not overly deep i would use a t5 pretty much every time.
tall tanks, a MH and sunlight are the only options for >24 inch deep tanks.
for tanks under 18 inchs deep or under 3 ft long, MH is far better.
for tanks, that are 48 long and not overly deep i would use a t5 pretty much every time.
Altpers0na
ARS Caesar
a par meter?
carb850
New member
Doing a lab type comparison would be difficult IMO. You could do a single 150W MH compared to 3 - 54W T5HO tubes but the results will not mean much. The halide would likely give higher numbers directly under it but the T5's would give usable par over a much wider space. So this comparison would not help much.
I think the only fair comparison is on use by use basis. Setups such as a 65G (36"x18"x25") vs (48"x18"x24") vs (72"x24"x29") are all going to have much different results.
Lets take my tank for instance. 4'x2'x2'. If I intended on using dual 400W MH's, then no other lighting system I know of will produce equivalent par. MH wins game over. However, that is much more light than I would want over my tank, too much heat, too much electricity used, probably cook most corals. So, I would be looking at some dual 250W MH setup. I like fluorescent supplementation so I have to factor that into the cost and additional par. Several options here, but the light I ended up getting is a dual 250W HQI (14K) with electronic ballast and dual T5HO Actinics.
The challenger is an ATI Powermodule. This light has active cooling, true T5 spec ballast, and individual reflectors. You can get it in 4, 6, 8, and 10 bulb setups. I think the 8 bulb is what I would opt for over the 120G. I would use some combination of 10K, 15K, blue +, pure actinic, and procolor bulbs.
Of these 2 setups, I figure both would easily handle SPS up top and probably toward the middle of the tank. Both should give nice color but I would say the Powermodule would do a little nicer just based upon the number of bulb combinations. The halide would give the shimmer which is nice. Par, well I would love to know the difference. I think it would be very close with the ATI giving a much more even spread throughout the tank but I have no facts to back that up. The ATI would produce less heat and use less energy just based upon the 176W less electricity used.
I think the only fair comparison is on use by use basis. Setups such as a 65G (36"x18"x25") vs (48"x18"x24") vs (72"x24"x29") are all going to have much different results.
Lets take my tank for instance. 4'x2'x2'. If I intended on using dual 400W MH's, then no other lighting system I know of will produce equivalent par. MH wins game over. However, that is much more light than I would want over my tank, too much heat, too much electricity used, probably cook most corals. So, I would be looking at some dual 250W MH setup. I like fluorescent supplementation so I have to factor that into the cost and additional par. Several options here, but the light I ended up getting is a dual 250W HQI (14K) with electronic ballast and dual T5HO Actinics.
The challenger is an ATI Powermodule. This light has active cooling, true T5 spec ballast, and individual reflectors. You can get it in 4, 6, 8, and 10 bulb setups. I think the 8 bulb is what I would opt for over the 120G. I would use some combination of 10K, 15K, blue +, pure actinic, and procolor bulbs.
Of these 2 setups, I figure both would easily handle SPS up top and probably toward the middle of the tank. Both should give nice color but I would say the Powermodule would do a little nicer just based upon the number of bulb combinations. The halide would give the shimmer which is nice. Par, well I would love to know the difference. I think it would be very close with the ATI giving a much more even spread throughout the tank but I have no facts to back that up. The ATI would produce less heat and use less energy just based upon the 176W less electricity used.
carb850
New member
Oh yeah, I have another good example. I have a sumpless 30G long tank (36"x12"x16") which I'm going to use as a quarantine and frag tank. I'm thinking about a 4 - 39W T5HO retro kit for this tank. Another option would be a single 150W MH. I feel the T5's will give a much better spread and probably similar par levels.
How would you light this tank?
How would you light this tank?
carb850
New member
I don't recall the member but someone did post a test on his tank in mulitple areas of his tank. It has been some time ago but the T5's dropped off less as it traveled deeper into the tank. I think he had a 75G tank, but I don't recall none of the specifics. He has a picture posted with the par numbers imposed over the photo.
(edit to add)
Even if I did find it, someone will always poke holes in it. How old were his bulbs, what name brand, what was the ballast, etc, etc. The thing is your never going to find an apples to apples comparison.
