Radion Pro worth it? Overkill?

[that Fish Guy]

I have talked to a few people that say the Radion G2 is a great light but the Pro is not worth it.

They say things like "What is the point of paying 300 extra for a light with more power. Nobody uses them (Radions) at full power anyways because you will cook your corals."

People I talk to say they run their Radion G2 at around 40%

If that is true then their is no need for the Pro.

You would probably have to run it at 35% and pay an additional 300 per light and be left with the same light as the G2.

Is this true?

 

[cakemanPA]

Not overkill for me... I am running mine at 90% for about 4 hours a day. Great growth, awesome colors, and nothing cooked in almost 2 months. I love the features and the extra spectrums

 

[Clownin Aroun]

Its not about the wattage for me it is about the UV, MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE IN THE WORLD

 

[that Fish Guy]

Not overkill for me... I am running mine at 90% for about 4 hours a day. Great growth, awesome colors, and nothing cooked in almost 2 months. I love the features and the extra spectrums

So what features does the Pro have that the regular G2 does not have?

 

[that Fish Guy]

Its not about the wattage for me it is about the UV, MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE IN THE WORLD

What does UV do?

 

[Ron Reefman]

Its not about the wattage for me it is about the UV, MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE IN THE WORLD

Just what advantage do you think the UV is? What makes UV so important?

To the OP: Looking at your signature, what tank are you going to use the Radion over (the 55g reef)? Do you think 1 will be enough? My 55g is 4' long and I needed 2. I didn't want to spend $1500 so I switched brands.

 

[TimeConsumer]

Eh, considering the Radion Pro retails for $900/each and just about any 4ft tank would need two I think there are better options in that price range.

This comes to mind: http://www.reefgeek.com/lighting/led-lighting/ati-led-powermodule/48-3x75w-led-4x54w-t5-led-powermodule.html

 

[mikeatjac]

Yes I think it is worth it. I run mine at 80% for just few hours and the rest of the time at 30%. The corals are growing like crazy. The pro has several more LEDs than the G2.

I am sure the G2 would work too.

 

[Clownin Aroun]

Just what advantage do you think the UV is? What makes UV so important?

To the OP: Looking at your signature, what tank are you going to use the Radion over (the 55g reef)? Do you think 1 will be enough? My 55g is 4' long and I needed 2. I didn't want to spend $1500 so I switched brands.

HAHAHAHA, your right the UV has NO effect at all. Thats why even people who order your beloved reef breeders lights are putting in UV or HV or whatever you want to call them.

It makes an INCREDIBLE difference when you see that POP in your corals and even fish! Read my review on Mitras vs Radion Pro and youll see what i mean. The radion pro makes my corals AND fish GLOW and it is an amazing thing to watch especially in the early morning and late nights of my tank!

You think the two most expensive lights on the market (mitras and Pro) have UV or HV becasue they have no "advantage"? lol

Radion Pro is well worth it even if you have to run the light at 20%. You can grow into it! If you upgrade to a deeper tank or start having more spa and need a little bit stronger of a light you just bump it up a little. It is well worth it IN MY OPNION!

And his question is is the pro worth the money over the G2 not Vs ANOTHER LIGHT

Good Luck! Any radion you get will be great!

 

[that Fish Guy]

OK, so the difference is more led's, more watts, and the addition of UV lights.

Is that it?

It is not like you are paying extra for more "Thunderstorm" gimmicks with the PRO or that sort of thing is it?

They use the same computer program and both have all the same features in that sense right?

Just the physical features are different.

The people I talked told me it just had more LED's so it was more powerful.

They made no mention of beneficial UV LED's.

They just said it was overkill because it was more powerful but you never run the Radions at full power so there is no point getting one as you are getting the same light once they are powered down.

The point they were trying to make is bigger is not always better.

Kind of like every year a digital camera company adds 1 megapixel to their old model to raise the price of it assuming unknowing consumers think it will take a better picture.

Well the truth is is MP only makes pictures look better according to size of the print.

And today with the 20 MP cameras unless you are putting a picture on the side of a building MP will not make a difference.

If you are going to look at all your pictures on you computer or print traditional 4X6 prints 4 MP will look the same as 20 MP.

And in most cases like that getting the 20 MP camera is worse because you are paying more money for something you do not need as well as taking up more space on your hard drive for the same picture.

But Americans are dumb and do not realize that so they assume more MP is better.

But what you want to look at is the Lens size and the quality of the lens something most camera companies do not advertise.

 

[smkooq]

OK, so the difference is more led's, more watts, and the addition of UV lights.

Is that it?

It is not like you are paying extra for more "Thunderstorm" gimmicks with the PRO or that sort of thing is it?

They use the same computer program and both have all the same features in that sense right?

Just the physical features are different.

Thunderstorm is not a gimmick. They are not selling the fixture off thunderstorms. That is just one of the features they offer that you have the option to use or not.

The only real difference between the pros and Gen2 is the Pros offer indigo and yellow LEDs. It is completely up to you whether you want the extras or not. They are just offering a fuller spectrum.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[that Fish Guy]

Thunderstorm is not a gimmick. They are not selling the fixture off thunderstorms. That is just one of the features they offer that you have the option to use or not.

The only real difference between the pros and Gen2 is the Pros offer indigo and yellow LEDs. It is completely up to you whether you want the extras or not. They are just offering a fuller spectrum.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

So why are you paying 300 more for just colored LED's then?

I was at a show and went to a lecture on LED lighting.

They said corals just need blue and white LED's and all the other colors were basically worthless to corals and just a way to try to get people to buy companies lights. (Kind of like the megapixel example I mentioned above with digital cameras).

Does anybody have any facts to back this up?

 

[smkooq]

So why are you paying 300 more for just colored LED's then?

I was at a show and went to a lecture on LED lighting.

They said corals just need blue and white LED's and all the other colors were basically worthless to corals and just a way to try to get people to buy companies lights. (Kind of like the megapixel example I mentioned above with digital cameras).

Does anybody have any facts to back this up?

Yea. There is a debate whether full spectrum is just marketing. But it is what it is and honestly a larger spectrum does look better then limiting yourself to just a blue and white tank.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[AMDphenomx4]

So why are you paying 300 more for just colored LED's then?

I was at a show and went to a lecture on LED lighting.

They said corals just need blue and white LED's and all the other colors were basically worthless to corals and just a way to try to get people to buy companies lights. (Kind of like the megapixel example I mentioned above with digital cameras).

Does anybody have any facts to back this up?

Because people buy them. In the white LED, you already have a lot of 590nm light so in the end, you're spending 300 dollars to have violet LEDs added, not UV, but violet. UV is under 400nm but violet LEDs are constantly mislabeled in the aquarium LED industry. It is true, violet makes corals and fish glow, but you could add some violet strips if you really want it.

 

[CHSUB]

So why are you paying 300 more for just colored LED's then?

I was at a show and went to a lecture on LED lighting.

They said corals just need blue and white LED's and all the other colors were basically worthless to corals and just a way to try to get people to buy companies lights. (Kind of like the megapixel example I mentioned above with digital cameras).

Does anybody have any facts to back this up?

ime, i believe this to be 100% true, the full spectum leds are worthless, as far as the corals are concerned. in fact, red leds bleach sps'. i had better success with an Acan blue and white led lamp than a Pacific Sun led, even though i felt the Pacific Sun was a much better lamp.

 

[Clownin Aroun]

The indigo and other colors are not for the corals they are for you! They make the corals and fish pop and look incredible which is why we got into this hobby in the first place right? Cause it looks awesome. So why not spend more money on something that makes everything look even cooler. Lol.

If you don't think it's worth the money that's one thing. But to say they are useless for looks is simply wrong. Useless for coral growth maybe but that's not why I got the pro. I got it for looks. I know it grows my corals, but it looks amazing too

 

[Squidmotron]

There is a whole pile of data suggesting the TV data may help coloration. Just look around on the Internet. Whether or not it's true is another matter. Who knows? This is a hotly debated topic.

All I know is I have had a metal halide/t5 fixture and radion pros. The former looked great. He latter looks even better.

 

[CHSUB]

The indigo and other colors are not for the corals they are for you! They make the corals and fish pop and look incredible which is why we got into this hobby in the first place right? Cause it looks awesome. So why not spend more money on something that makes everything look even cooler. Lol.

If you don't think it's worth the money that's one thing. But to say they are useless for looks is simply wrong. Useless for coral growth maybe but that's not why I got the pro. I got it for looks. I know it grows my corals, but it looks amazing too

There is a whole pile of data suggesting the TV data may help coloration. Just look around on the Internet. Whether or not it's true is another matter. Who knows? This is a hotly debated topic.

All I know is I have had a metal halide/t5 fixture and radion pros. The former looked great. He latter looks even better.

imo the problem with leds is color/growth of sps' not how they look, but MH/t5s have LEDs beat on both. you and Ron Reefman can debate which lamps are better for leather/softie dominated tanks.

 

[mikeatjac]

CHSUB, at least you said IMO! The problems with LEDs is not growth and colors are far more fluorescent and colorful. Rather the the problem is taking pictures of your tank. That I was shown how to tonight.

As a former user of radiums and ATI T5 I can say my pros are better for growth and color. If you have have not tried a premium LED fixtures and I assume not, please look at some results reefers have out there.

 

[mikeatjac]

Gee I am agreeing with Ron Reefman, I must have a fever