Light Test Results - Kessil, AI Hydra 52, Ecotech & more

[Reef2Land]

I started another thread where I said I'd put this up once we found time to do the testing cause the shop is ridiculously busy all the time. This was with an Apogee 520, which is one of the best meters we've ever seen. Did as much testing up and down, left and right, just everywhere in order to try to get the best results.

All lights were hung 9 inches off the water surface. We used a medium amount of surface agitation (pictured) since most reefers do. The results were kind of shocking for the first two lights we did today. These are the results between the Hydra 52 and the AP700. We'll let other be the judge of this.

Forgive the tank appearance as it was primarily set up for this purpose lol

Aqua Illumination Hydra 52

Light 9 inches off water surface. Light meter 6 inches submerged directly under the LEDs 515.

4 inches to the left or right of the edge of the light 6 inches submerged 200-215.

9 inches below water surface directly under the LEDs 285-295

9-13 inches meter submerged the numbers*remained consistent

16 inches below water surface directly under the LEDs 255-285

20 inches deep directly under the LEDs 145-155


Kessil AP700

Light 9 inches off water surface and submerged inches below water surface directly under the LEDs 285-305

4 inches to the left or right of the edge of the light and 6 inches below the water surface 175-185

8 inches below the water water surface the numbers remained fairly consistent.

10 inches below the water surface directly under the LEDs - 200-215

17 inches below the water surface directly under LEDs 205-225

20 inches below the water surface directly under the LEDs 175-185

 

[Reef2Land]

One thing I should mention is the AP700 was set manually to the highest light intensity that can be achieved through the manual setting on the unit itself. Mainly because of this. Uh, no. This shop has had the same WiFi password for years that everyone uses. I'm not resetting it and removing F,K, or P so I can connect to the Kessil App. We are not sure if a higher intensity can be achieved using the app itself.

 

[Reef2Land]

And done with Ecotech XR30 Gen 4 Pro testing.

The first thing I'd like to mention is these lights were an inch HIGHER above the water surface then the AI or Kessil AP700.

This light was absolutely amazing. PAR strength was so impressive that we're going to be switching most of the coral tanks in the shop over to them. We didn't expect to see such a huge difference between the top of the line Ecotech and Kessil lights, but there was. For what's supposed to be 15 watts more on the Ecotech there was a massive increase in light levels. The cost isn't much more, but the PAR numbers averaged 20-40% higher. Amazing LEDs.

The one thing we don't really understand is why the numbers are so much lower on the Kessil AP700 - we tested 2 LEDs. One of the employees here was wondering if it's actually due to the "Dense Matrix". The employee here was thinking maybe since the beam is so direct or "concentrated", and not as spread out, that the medium amount of water surface agitation is causing it to break the light strength up more. We don't actually know though.

Again, this was a lighting text tank, so excuse the algae lol

Ecotech XR30 Gen 4 Pro

Light 10 inches off water surface and submerged 6 inches below water surface directly under the LEDs 500-515

4 inches to the left or right of the edge of the light and 6 inches below the water surface 285-305

10-13 inches below the water surface directly under the LEDs - 340-350

17 inches below the water surface directly under LEDs 350-370

20 inches below the water surface directly under the LEDs 270-280

 

[Vinny Kreyling]

I thought to test PAR the pumps should be OFF.

 

[Reef2Land]

Are your pumps OFF all the time? We wanted what our corals are actually getting when our tanks are operating under their regular conditions.

 

[biecacka]

Interesting results. I am surprised at the AP700 numbers myself.


Corey

 

[Green Chromis]

I started another thread where I said I'd put this up once we found time to do the testing cause the shop is ridiculously busy all the time. This was with an Apogee 520, which is one of the best meters we've ever seen. Did as much testing up and down, left and right, just everywhere in order to try to get the best results.

All lights were hung 9 inches off the water surface. We used a medium amount of surface agitation (pictured) since most reefers do. The results were kind of shocking for the first two lights we did today. These are the results between the Hydra 52 and the AP700. We'll let other be the judge of this.

Forgive the tank appearance as it was primarily set up for this purpose lol

Aqua Illumination Hydra 52

Light 9 inches off water surface. Light meter 6 inches submerged directly under the LEDs 515.

4 inches to the left or right of the edge of the light 6 inches submerged 200-215.

9 inches below water surface directly under the LEDs 285-295

9-13 inches meter submerged the numbers*remained consistent

16 inches below water surface directly under the LEDs 255-285

20 inches deep directly under the LEDs 145-155


Kessil AP700

Light 9 inches off water surface and submerged inches below water surface directly under the LEDs 285-305

4 inches to the left or right of the edge of the light and 6 inches below the water surface 175-185

8 inches below the water water surface the numbers remained fairly consistent.

10 inches below the water surface directly under the LEDs - 200-215

17 inches below the water surface directly under LEDs 205-225

20 inches below the water surface directly under the LEDs 175-185

:fish1: Thanks for the reviews, will you be able to test the Mitra LX 7206 lights or the new Orphek Atlantic V4 lights? :fish1:

 

[zip70]

Thanks for sharing. good to know

 

[Kevin Guthrie]

Thanks for the data, but do you know how long each of the fixtures has been running? All else being equal I would expect a brand new light to be the brightest because the output drops off over time.

 

[Reef2Land]

:fish1: Thanks for the reviews, will you be able to test the Mitra LX 7206 lights or the new Orphek Atlantic V4 lights? :fish1:

Yes. We're going to be testing at least the Orphek as well.

 

[Reef2Land]

Thanks for the data, but do you know how long each of the fixtures has been running? All else being equal I would expect a brand new light to be the brightest because the output drops off over time.

We only did all brand new lights right out of the box.

 

[Reef2Land]

Maxspect Curve & Recurve (testing was done with the lights set to deepest penetration)

Light 9 inches off water surface and submerged inches below water surface directly under the LEDs 185-215

4 inches to the left or right of the edge of the light and 6 inches below the water surface 135-145

8 inches below the water surface the numbers remained consistent.

10 inches below the water surface directly under the LEDs 165-175

17 inches below the water surface directly under LEDs 125-145

20 inches below the water surface directly under the LEDs 115-135

We don't offer another LED brand

We purchased one of these and were not too impressed at all. The larger form factor lights seem to be going extinct, which is why we couldn't understand why Maxspect wouldn't stick with smaller lights (such as the Ethereal) over these larger bodies. The Ethereal was a solid seller. None of the employees here like larger lights anymore. When so much can be accomplished with something such as the Radions of Kessils, why even engineer lights of this nature? We can't figure out what benefit it might have.

We couldn't get the PAR levels to top 225 when the light is supposed to be pushing over 300 watts. We're wondering if it may have been a defective light, but we don't want to pay to find that out.

Another thing we didn't care for when it came to these lights was, in general, what most hobbyists have come to know as "œstandards regarding warranty issues". Most of the smaller body lights want us reefers to hang our lights almost a foot off the water surface to ensure condensation doesn't ruin the valuable components. With both the Curve and Recurve there seemed to be a decent amount of condensation that would form of especially the LED shields when the stock tank mount brackets were used.

With the smaller form LED lights atleast the power supplies were enclosed for the most part. These have what looks like a CPU housing with a "œscreen" over it. After only 90-days the power supply was almost completely suffocated by dust and lint (but this is Colorado). We don't want to pull it apart to view the inside because it will likely void the warranty, but adding dust and moisture can't be good for a unit like this.

 

[JustinWI]

Do you know approximately how much less the XR15 G4 pro puts out compared to that XR30? I'd love to see the results from XR15 if possible.
BTW Great work on this testing.

 

[lancesmith1]

Recurve PAR

Recurve PAR

Wow! The par numbers for the Recurve are poor at best. If I had bought one of these I would feel like I had been shafted.

 

[Reef2Land]

Wow! The par numbers for the Recurve are poor at best. If I had bought one of these I would feel like I had been shafted.

We all were kind of stunned by how low there were too. Then I watched some YouTube videos where a couple people saw the same numbers. It might have been a defective light, which is why I mentioned that. Cause those numbers were super low. But I also thought the AP700 would be higher also.

 

[lancesmith1]

BTW - Thanks for doing this. I like the way you are explaining the PAR readings. It is simple and easy to understand. Keep them coming if you can!

 

[Reef2Land]

I'm trying to get ahold of a C-Ray to test. Hopefully those will be coming soon. ATI Powermodule should be done in a week. We actually do days of testing and check the PAR throughout the day with all these tests.

 

[rodneyri]

AWESOME thanks for sharing!!

here are some readings of the Radion G4 Pro with diffusers...and yes there was water and wavemakers on for the readings

 

[Big E]

Yes. We're going to be testing at least the Orphek as well.

One thing lost in your testing is coverage..........a lot depends on how many of the units are used over the space you're trying to cover. You don't want hot spots and or low par gaps.

For another data point for comparison I took this snapshot from the BRS video on the OrphekV4.

This is two Orpheks units at 12" over a 48x24" area vs an 8x54w Sunpower......can't match the Sunpower.

If you did this same test with two Radions I'd be willing to bet it won't even match the Orpheks.

 

[acesq]

I went back and looked at BRS Investigates videos for the Orphek, Sunpower and Radion XR30 G4. They are all within a percentage or two of each other if you keep in mind the height at which the fixtures are hung in the BRS videos. The Orpheks are hung at 12", the Sunpower at 8.5" and the Radions at 9". That puts the Orpheks at a good sized disadvantage yet the numbers were still very close.

The Radions put out slightly less par than the other two, but they are only 190W each while the Orphek is 235 and the Sunpower is 432. Given the power difference, the Radions seem to be slightly more efficient than the other two in generating par.

I've had all three units at one time or another (Orphek Atlantik V1) and they are all great lights. I've settled on the Radion XR30 G4s with T5 supplements and love the color I'm pulling and the quality of the light.