luther1200
Premium Member
I agree I have seen them and the 150 w 14000K one sI have seen look nothing like a 6500K lamp. Maybe its a typo or something. Or the wrong spectral plot was posted by mistake.
Last edited:
Phoenix Bulb vs. Ushio Bulb
- Thread starter moevilla
- Start date
I agree I have seen them and the 150 w 14000K one sI have seen look nothing like a 6500K lamp. Maybe its a typo or something. Or the wrong spectral plot was posted by mistake.
luther1200
Premium Member
double
luther1200
Premium Member
The Ice Cap bulb in the first link says 6500K right over it. So why would you say its a 14000K lamp. Its labeled as a 6500K lamp. Obviously its 2 different lamps were talking about here.
It says Table 6: Ice Cap 6500K, not Ice Cap 14000K, son I don't see why anybody would say Ice Cap is trying to pass of a 6500K lamp as a 14000K lamp when it is clearly labeled 6500K.
And there is a completely different plot on the second link that is actually labeled 14000K.
It says Table 6: Ice Cap 6500K, not Ice Cap 14000K, son I don't see why anybody would say Ice Cap is trying to pass of a 6500K lamp as a 14000K lamp when it is clearly labeled 6500K.
And there is a completely different plot on the second link that is actually labeled 14000K.
The Icecap lamps tested in the 2004 article are long discontinued. The 6500 K Icecaps measured around 7K in that article. They arent the same lamps and two different lamps of close to the same color temperature dont have to have identical spectrums.
The 2008 article, table 8 is supposed to be for the Icecap 14000K lamp. It is NOT at plot for a 14K lamp. Look at the plot and the CCT numbers which show the lamps measured color temp ... they range from about 5900 to 6400 depending on ballast. The plot shows a lamp with essentially full spectrum output with a lot of energy all the way from just above 400nm through 700nm with the highest peaks just under 550 nm which is in the Green.
The spectral plot shown corresponds to the recorded color temperature. Check Sanjays site and look at the plots for lamps that measured in the 6K - 7K range and you will see SIMILIAR (not identical) plots in that they will mostly be close to full spectrum with a lot of energy throughout the 400 - 700nm range. Then look at the lamps that actually measure around 14K and you will see similiar (not identical) plots. Lots of energy in the blue range with much smaller peaks in the warmer, higher portion of the spectrum.
I have NO doubt that the spectral plot for the Icecap 14K shown in the second article and the measured CCT is NOT actually that of the Icecap 14K. Obviously a mistake was made and data was mixed up when the article was published or some other error was made ... I have already stated this more than once and you concurred. Regardless the plot and measurments published are clearly those of a different lamp, not a 14K Icecap lamp.
The last paragraph of my initial post on the discrepency wasnt meant to be taken literally, I was being very sarcastic ... It was obvious to me that a mistake was made. I incorrectly assumed that it would be obvious to everyone after I posted the comments.
Even with my "poster child" comment, I should have realized that
ones intent doesnt necessarily come across in writing. I am sorry that it came across as it did, I apologize.
But the point was and is very simple ... a link was posted to that article and numbers posted to back up the par of the 14K Icecap lamp were taken from the data in that link ... BUT those par values are NOT for the Icecap 14K lamp that is actually being sold because the par values, spectral plot and the measured color temp. are those of a 6000K lamp ... a mistake was clearly made and it is obvious that the wrong data is shown in the article for the Icecap 14K.
In other words, the high par numbers stated by skeptic for the Icecap 14K lamps are not accurate, they are not those of the actual Icecap 14K ... because he took them from the data in the article in which an obvious error was made. He's stating par numbers off the data, for the 6K lamp, that was mistakenly published in place of the actual 14K Icecap lamps data.
That is ALL I was trying to point out. If anyone cares to do a little research instead of assuming or telling me that "I dont know what Im talking about" Im sure that they will be able to see that a mistake was made in the article.
As a side note ... There was an additional, more minor mistake made in table 9 regarding the Icecap 20K ... the plot itself is titled as Icecap 10K but the plot is clearly that of 20K lamp.
One more thing that might be worth checking into for some ... Besides the obvious mistake, I am not sure if the Icecap lamps listed in the 2008 article linked in the thread are supposed to be those of the current lamps available from Icecap. Icecap came out with new lamps maybe two years ago ... since the 2004 lamp data was published. But they more recently came out with the Calfo series lamps that are being sold now. So I am not sure if the Icecap lamps listed in Sanjays 2008 article are for the newer Anthony Calfo series lamps that are currently out.
This could be relevant for those looking at, mainly the 20K and possibly the 10K assuming the plots and data are correct for these Icecap lamps in the article. Obviously if one uses this data to help choose a lamp and the data isnt that of the current lamps in production, the data isnt applicable.
Last edited:
luther1200
Premium Member
Thanks, DarG. I wasn't trying to be rude either. And if I came acroos that way I sorry. I have read many of your posts and value youir opnion. I do agree that there is some kind of mis information on the links. For what evere reason. But the new Ice Cap lamps, the Calfo series are the ones I am considering buying. I have seen them and they look pretty goodto the eye,(at least I think they do).
Its not a big deal, and thanks.
Ive seen a few positive reviews of the newer Calfo series Icecaps. Im sure they would be worth a try. I would expect them, like most other lamps, to have some users that like them and some that werent crazy about them.
I wonder where Icecap is having them made? Do you happen to know? I may give one of the 150 watters a try myself at some point if the 14K doesnt seen to be too warm (or too blue) or possibly the 20K if it is a whiter lamp like the German 20K's tend to be.
luther1200
Premium Member
No I am not sure where they are being made.
I found this link, could you give me your take on these spectral plots, and do you think they are more accurate? Or do you think they are just generic plots?
http://www.customaquatic.com/images/webstore/content/c_lt.html
I found this link, could you give me your take on these spectral plots, and do you think they are more accurate? Or do you think they are just generic plots?
http://www.customaquatic.com/images/webstore/content/c_lt.html
I would think that they are from actual measurements of the lamps. They might vary some if they were tested independently but I highly doubt that Icecap would be showing the spectral plots of the lamps unless they were real/actual.
The only thing that sticks out as being a little unique is that usually the spectral plots dont show much actinic energy with the bluer lamps. And the 20K shows even more than the 14K in the Icecap plots. But there are other lamps out there that are similiar like the Iwasaki 50K and the Helios 20K which both show a decent amount of energy around 420nm along with all the blue.
And the Icecap 10K looks like it has more energy in the blue range than some 10K's. Many have a good amount of energy around 420nm but lack much around 450nm and then they have a lot in the warmer spectrums. So the Icecap 10K may be whiter than some other 10Ks.
But all in all, they look pretty much as expected for the different K rated lamps just based on the plots. That's not to say that the K ratings are absolutely accurate and they dont list them. But the spectral plots look pretty typical. This is based on my interest/experience as a hobbyist, Im not a lighting guru and dont do this stuff for a living.
That said ... it is a perfect example for how the data in question that was published the article was not that of a 14K lamp. The plot for the 14K Calfo IC lamp here looks typical of a 14K RATED lamp and compared with the plot in the article, you can see how they are completely different.
It's not possible to know exactly what the lamps will look like from the plots. But the 14K I would expect to be crisp white/blue and the 20K with more of a blue tint and less par as it has less energy in the warmer portion of the spectrum and more 420nm energy. And they both appear like they would have enough actinic energy around 420nm for it to have a nice influence on the blueish tint of the lamp so they dont have such a monotone blue look. But that would just be a very general guess relative to the spectral graphs. I dont think you can ever really know whether you will like a lamp based on anything other than trying it. I would assume these were tested with the Icecap electronic ballast so with ballasts having an impact, they would probably be a little bit warmer looking on the HQI ballasts for the DE versions.
If I wanted to try something different, I would consider the 14K or 20K based on the plots and what other info/reviews/descriptions that I could find.
It really helps even more to be able to use Sanjays database to compare a lamp that you are familiar with to a lamp that you are interested in by overlaying the two plots. Still doesnt guarantee you a lamp that you will love but it gives you an even better, general sense of what the color will look like. It would be really great if he were able to keep up with testing all the new lamps and reflectors etc. and update his database whenever there was something new but it would be selfish to ask him for more than he has already done for the hobby. Anything he contributes is a bonus.
The only thing that sticks out as being a little unique is that usually the spectral plots dont show much actinic energy with the bluer lamps. And the 20K shows even more than the 14K in the Icecap plots. But there are other lamps out there that are similiar like the Iwasaki 50K and the Helios 20K which both show a decent amount of energy around 420nm along with all the blue.
And the Icecap 10K looks like it has more energy in the blue range than some 10K's. Many have a good amount of energy around 420nm but lack much around 450nm and then they have a lot in the warmer spectrums. So the Icecap 10K may be whiter than some other 10Ks.
But all in all, they look pretty much as expected for the different K rated lamps just based on the plots. That's not to say that the K ratings are absolutely accurate and they dont list them. But the spectral plots look pretty typical. This is based on my interest/experience as a hobbyist, Im not a lighting guru and dont do this stuff for a living.
That said ... it is a perfect example for how the data in question that was published the article was not that of a 14K lamp. The plot for the 14K Calfo IC lamp here looks typical of a 14K RATED lamp and compared with the plot in the article, you can see how they are completely different.
It's not possible to know exactly what the lamps will look like from the plots. But the 14K I would expect to be crisp white/blue and the 20K with more of a blue tint and less par as it has less energy in the warmer portion of the spectrum and more 420nm energy. And they both appear like they would have enough actinic energy around 420nm for it to have a nice influence on the blueish tint of the lamp so they dont have such a monotone blue look. But that would just be a very general guess relative to the spectral graphs. I dont think you can ever really know whether you will like a lamp based on anything other than trying it. I would assume these were tested with the Icecap electronic ballast so with ballasts having an impact, they would probably be a little bit warmer looking on the HQI ballasts for the DE versions.
If I wanted to try something different, I would consider the 14K or 20K based on the plots and what other info/reviews/descriptions that I could find.
It really helps even more to be able to use Sanjays database to compare a lamp that you are familiar with to a lamp that you are interested in by overlaying the two plots. Still doesnt guarantee you a lamp that you will love but it gives you an even better, general sense of what the color will look like. It would be really great if he were able to keep up with testing all the new lamps and reflectors etc. and update his database whenever there was something new but it would be selfish to ask him for more than he has already done for the hobby. Anything he contributes is a bonus.
luther1200
Premium Member
I agree that Sanjay's site and work is a tremendous help to all hobbyist. All in all I do think I will be getting the 14000K IC Calfo series bulbs next time I need them. But it won't be for a few months, unless I get the itch to try them like I do now from talking about them so much,lol. If/when I do get them I will post some pics, and compare them to the Pheonix pics I have now. I am guessing they will be a little whiter, but its hard to say unless you actually see them side by side or in 2 pics next to each other. Even if they do turn out to be much less blue looking than I think because my ballasts are magnetic its OK, because I have a bunch of frags that I would like to grow out and get the tank full looking again, and then I can go back to the Pheonix or try the Radiums.
My guess would be that they wont be as blue as the Phoenix, but thats just a guess. The Radium is a really nice lamp with good par for the color considering they are 150 watt. I like the Ushio 20Ks but they dont have a lot of par. Great value though ... quality German made lamps, very consistent and they cost less than many of the chinese made name brand lamps.
I'd be really interested in what you think of the Icecaps when you try them.
luther1200
Premium Member
I'll let you know. I think I might get the in a week or 2 when I get paid.
Similar threads
