Solaris Led lighting systems
- Thread starter jmccalip
- Start date
- Status
Hi all,
Look at this : http://forum.aceboard.net/4978-1215-19349-7-Solaris.htm
Look at this : http://forum.aceboard.net/4978-1215-19349-7-Solaris.htm
Entire luxeon K2 project
Entire luxeon K2 project
http://translate.google.com/transla...&hl=fr&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=/language_tools
Entire luxeon K2 project
http://translate.google.com/transla...&hl=fr&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=/language_tools
Ok 35 pages later Im still interested even if you all verbally beat ole Rich to death lol.
On a serious note, I have a 96 x 24 x 30. 300 gal. Im looking at buying one of these for it. They only make a 72" that Ive seen. Would this be good enough or would I need 2 units?
Also do these things need timers or are they part of the logic controller?
I was thinking of buying 2-48" units to get the spread I need?
Or I buy a 72" unit and a 60" and put it between the overflows in the back? Any suggestions?
Big bucks, but if it serves the purpose and saves a tree, last longer, and is clean and neat how can one discount the benefits?
Im with Cindy on the upgrade issues. Lets say these are the cats meow with the latest greatest LED'S available.
When the next best thing does come out most likely it will be cheaper, and most likely it wont be that much better than whats out now. So to dismiss the whole picture would be silly. I also read into alot of lighting threads gingerly. Most likely the arguments about lighting are based on personal expieriences but for the most part I tend to believe we over light our tanks with the MH lighting. It would make sense that the LED lighting would be designed to encompass the widest most common corals needs for lighting or why bother spending the R & D in the first place.
What really bothers me is the quality issues Ive read about. We sent a man to the moon with a slide rule and in a room filled with cigarette smoke and black coffee yet we cant seem to get a light to the market without loose part floating around in it.
Forget the bells and whistles if you cant put a screw in a hole correctly. JMO. Im slightly old school I suppose.
One other thing since I got the floor, This really tweaked me, Rich stated that the spectrum or output of these LED'S wasnt to par with MH. What he failed to recognize is that these lights work. I could careless if they arent equal to MH in oputput as long as my corals are thriving who cares. That too me tells me one thing and thats you dont need MH's and the high heat and electric they produce to achieve success.
Do all the math you want but if I can raise a thouroughbred on a nags diet then Its the nags diet.
One more thing since I cant shut up, I think the less heat issue has more benefits than anyone here has realized. Top offs are reduced from less evap. Thats less fluctuation in chemistry, thats less stress and thats more benefits. THeres a multitude of benefits other than cost associated with less heat especailly for us hot weather reefers.
If you look at the big picture then these are one of the best innovations that has come along in a long time.
On a serious note, I have a 96 x 24 x 30. 300 gal. Im looking at buying one of these for it. They only make a 72" that Ive seen. Would this be good enough or would I need 2 units?
Also do these things need timers or are they part of the logic controller?
I was thinking of buying 2-48" units to get the spread I need?
Or I buy a 72" unit and a 60" and put it between the overflows in the back? Any suggestions?
Big bucks, but if it serves the purpose and saves a tree, last longer, and is clean and neat how can one discount the benefits?
Im with Cindy on the upgrade issues. Lets say these are the cats meow with the latest greatest LED'S available.
When the next best thing does come out most likely it will be cheaper, and most likely it wont be that much better than whats out now. So to dismiss the whole picture would be silly. I also read into alot of lighting threads gingerly. Most likely the arguments about lighting are based on personal expieriences but for the most part I tend to believe we over light our tanks with the MH lighting. It would make sense that the LED lighting would be designed to encompass the widest most common corals needs for lighting or why bother spending the R & D in the first place.
What really bothers me is the quality issues Ive read about. We sent a man to the moon with a slide rule and in a room filled with cigarette smoke and black coffee yet we cant seem to get a light to the market without loose part floating around in it.
Forget the bells and whistles if you cant put a screw in a hole correctly. JMO. Im slightly old school I suppose.
One other thing since I got the floor, This really tweaked me, Rich stated that the spectrum or output of these LED'S wasnt to par with MH. What he failed to recognize is that these lights work. I could careless if they arent equal to MH in oputput as long as my corals are thriving who cares. That too me tells me one thing and thats you dont need MH's and the high heat and electric they produce to achieve success.
Do all the math you want but if I can raise a thouroughbred on a nags diet then Its the nags diet.
One more thing since I cant shut up, I think the less heat issue has more benefits than anyone here has realized. Top offs are reduced from less evap. Thats less fluctuation in chemistry, thats less stress and thats more benefits. THeres a multitude of benefits other than cost associated with less heat especailly for us hot weather reefers.
If you look at the big picture then these are one of the best innovations that has come along in a long time.
Last edited:
badpacket
Premium Member
Well...
Well...
Well Biggie, you ask some good questions however:
"Big bucks, but if it serves the purpose and saves a tree, last longer, and is clean and neat how can one discount the benefits?"
Not too sound like a tree-hugger, however how would spending $4K+ for a couple of units really 'save a tree' ? I would expect the raw materials, electricity to manf. etc for a couple of these would far outweigh that of a couple of MH and ballasts. So, no savings there. Last longer? The jury is out, however my understanding is that the oft quoted 100K hours is a technical comment only, and not representative of the actual life of the LED's in this application. What exactly will you have saved if your efficiency and output in PAR/PUR drops to 70% or lower within a couple of years?
This isn't an exercise in bashing the Solaris as much as using common sense regarding current known lifespan and deratings of output.
"It would make sense that the LED lighting would be designed to encompass the widest most common corals needs for lighting or why bother spending the R & D in the first place."
I may very well be wrong, however my understanding is that this fixture uses both white and blue. The blue is at 1 nominal spectral output only, the white probably encompasess several. I will have to check Sanjay's site too see if he did an spectral graph of the output, however Sanjay's comments are not too be taken lightly, his reputation for thoroughness and attention too detail attest too that. Not that he might not be wrong, however if he ranks it close to a 175w, then I'd bet on him being at least rather closer to the truth than not. The difference that may not be mentioned is that he didn't really clarify whether the fact that the LED is a flat source providing a much greater swath of 175w equivilent light compared too just plunking a 175w MH above a tank. I think that is quite likely why many people seem rather happy with them.
"Do all the math you want but if I can raise a thouroughbred on a nags diet then Its the nags diet."
$4000-4500 for tank lighting is not really a 'nags diet', by anyone's assessment. Even you mentioned 'big bucks', no? I think a number of your comments are rather blithely dismissing the main fundamentals of the current discussions regarding LED's and the current fixtures available.
They are insanely expensive, even for the reef hobby.
They don't really have a track record to back-up the investment. And make no mistake about it, this kind of money is an investment, not a simply 300-400 purchase. They probably use more raw materials and electricity and fuel to manf. and ship than alternatives. At this point, I would consider it bleeding edge technology, at a bleeding edge price. If one wants to jump on the train, more power to you. But lets not start spinning yarns about how they are 'currently' much better than MH which have a proven track record, or will save the Earth because they are somehow 'greener'.
I fully expect breakthroughs to continue to come, and probably much more and faster than they have in the past 5 years, considering energy awareness and costs. But they are currently not much more than a very expensive, lower power-lower efficiency lighting source experiment. In a couple of years, most of us will probably have similar 'mainstream' fixtures at 1/3 the cost, with more expensive ones available using 10-15 LED's for enthusiasts.
Well...
Well Biggie, you ask some good questions however:
"Big bucks, but if it serves the purpose and saves a tree, last longer, and is clean and neat how can one discount the benefits?"
Not too sound like a tree-hugger, however how would spending $4K+ for a couple of units really 'save a tree' ? I would expect the raw materials, electricity to manf. etc for a couple of these would far outweigh that of a couple of MH and ballasts. So, no savings there. Last longer? The jury is out, however my understanding is that the oft quoted 100K hours is a technical comment only, and not representative of the actual life of the LED's in this application. What exactly will you have saved if your efficiency and output in PAR/PUR drops to 70% or lower within a couple of years?
This isn't an exercise in bashing the Solaris as much as using common sense regarding current known lifespan and deratings of output.
"It would make sense that the LED lighting would be designed to encompass the widest most common corals needs for lighting or why bother spending the R & D in the first place."
I may very well be wrong, however my understanding is that this fixture uses both white and blue. The blue is at 1 nominal spectral output only, the white probably encompasess several. I will have to check Sanjay's site too see if he did an spectral graph of the output, however Sanjay's comments are not too be taken lightly, his reputation for thoroughness and attention too detail attest too that. Not that he might not be wrong, however if he ranks it close to a 175w, then I'd bet on him being at least rather closer to the truth than not. The difference that may not be mentioned is that he didn't really clarify whether the fact that the LED is a flat source providing a much greater swath of 175w equivilent light compared too just plunking a 175w MH above a tank. I think that is quite likely why many people seem rather happy with them.
"Do all the math you want but if I can raise a thouroughbred on a nags diet then Its the nags diet."
$4000-4500 for tank lighting is not really a 'nags diet', by anyone's assessment. Even you mentioned 'big bucks', no? I think a number of your comments are rather blithely dismissing the main fundamentals of the current discussions regarding LED's and the current fixtures available.
They are insanely expensive, even for the reef hobby.
They don't really have a track record to back-up the investment. And make no mistake about it, this kind of money is an investment, not a simply 300-400 purchase. They probably use more raw materials and electricity and fuel to manf. and ship than alternatives. At this point, I would consider it bleeding edge technology, at a bleeding edge price. If one wants to jump on the train, more power to you. But lets not start spinning yarns about how they are 'currently' much better than MH which have a proven track record, or will save the Earth because they are somehow 'greener'.
I fully expect breakthroughs to continue to come, and probably much more and faster than they have in the past 5 years, considering energy awareness and costs. But they are currently not much more than a very expensive, lower power-lower efficiency lighting source experiment. In a couple of years, most of us will probably have similar 'mainstream' fixtures at 1/3 the cost, with more expensive ones available using 10-15 LED's for enthusiasts.
Badpacket, With all due respect, some of the reasons you gave make sense while others still stir my ambitions to investigate further.
Let me just ASK instead of argue here since after all Im not a lighting engineer nor do I wish to give the illusion of being one. To me its not worth my poor typing skills to try and keep up an argument online so again let me ask you or lets say explain further why this product is/isnt benefical.
You said, "Not too sound like a tree-hugger, however how would spending $4K+ for a couple of units really 'save a tree' ? I would expect the raw materials, electricity to manf. etc for a couple of these would far outweigh that of a couple of MH and ballasts" How so? 4-5 MH units verse 1 or 2 LED units? Manufacturing is something I know about and material cost alone for 4-5 MH's and seperate ballasts seems quite a bit more materials, man power, and for the sake of discusion waste involved. Cost of final product has nothing to do with that. Chinese can manufacture everything cheaper but look at the pollution they create doing so.
Further more: you stated, "What exactly will you have saved if your efficiency and output in PAR/PUR drops to 70% or lower within a couple of years?" I havent seen this data to prove this as of yet. PFO claims the lights are replaceable and they last 10 years. Other than that I have saved enough in electricity rising energy costs over that 10 years to afford to replace the bulbs and continue to utilize the fixture (I would hope). I dont see electric service getting cheaper... This is of course theory as is yours a theory. However my theory is based on the last 100 years of energy costs. If i just saved $10/month for 10 years thats $1200. One user claims it saved her $50/month after 10 years thats $6000. Even if these claims are inflated I could surely pop for $500 to replace the LED's and still show savings if the PAR was not sufficent after 5 years at todays inflated LED price also?
You qouted me here saying ""Do all the math you want but if I can raise a thouroughbred on a nags diet then Its the nags diet."
"4000-4500 for tank lighting is not really a 'nags diet', by anyone's assessment."
This was related to the ability to raise your corals on a dimished light output of todays LED's not the price of the units. "Nags diet" as in spectrum or MH verse LED to use the comparison.
You qouted:
"They don't really have a track record to back-up the investment."
Your possible correct here and I cant disagree with that. However I can tell you that neither do hybrid cars and they arent any cheaper than there rival gas powered cars. In fact they have hardly beat the compact diesel cars of Europe in MPG comparison yet the sales are skyrocketing due to fuel cost. This isnt that much differnt in terms of product $'s verse energy consumption.
As you stated :
"I fully expect breakthroughs to continue to come, and probably much more and faster than they have in the past 5 years, considering energy awareness and costs."
As do I, but the facts present themselves in todays dollars that they are beneficial to me over the long haul now.
Im not an impulse buyer and Im still looking for further reviews and users who step up tot he plate and report the positives and negatives of these LED lights. So far I havent seen much to deter me.
Let me just ASK instead of argue here since after all Im not a lighting engineer nor do I wish to give the illusion of being one. To me its not worth my poor typing skills to try and keep up an argument online so again let me ask you or lets say explain further why this product is/isnt benefical.
You said, "Not too sound like a tree-hugger, however how would spending $4K+ for a couple of units really 'save a tree' ? I would expect the raw materials, electricity to manf. etc for a couple of these would far outweigh that of a couple of MH and ballasts" How so? 4-5 MH units verse 1 or 2 LED units? Manufacturing is something I know about and material cost alone for 4-5 MH's and seperate ballasts seems quite a bit more materials, man power, and for the sake of discusion waste involved. Cost of final product has nothing to do with that. Chinese can manufacture everything cheaper but look at the pollution they create doing so.
Further more: you stated, "What exactly will you have saved if your efficiency and output in PAR/PUR drops to 70% or lower within a couple of years?" I havent seen this data to prove this as of yet. PFO claims the lights are replaceable and they last 10 years. Other than that I have saved enough in electricity rising energy costs over that 10 years to afford to replace the bulbs and continue to utilize the fixture (I would hope). I dont see electric service getting cheaper... This is of course theory as is yours a theory. However my theory is based on the last 100 years of energy costs. If i just saved $10/month for 10 years thats $1200. One user claims it saved her $50/month after 10 years thats $6000. Even if these claims are inflated I could surely pop for $500 to replace the LED's and still show savings if the PAR was not sufficent after 5 years at todays inflated LED price also?
You qouted me here saying ""Do all the math you want but if I can raise a thouroughbred on a nags diet then Its the nags diet."
"4000-4500 for tank lighting is not really a 'nags diet', by anyone's assessment."
This was related to the ability to raise your corals on a dimished light output of todays LED's not the price of the units. "Nags diet" as in spectrum or MH verse LED to use the comparison.
You qouted:
"They don't really have a track record to back-up the investment."
Your possible correct here and I cant disagree with that. However I can tell you that neither do hybrid cars and they arent any cheaper than there rival gas powered cars. In fact they have hardly beat the compact diesel cars of Europe in MPG comparison yet the sales are skyrocketing due to fuel cost. This isnt that much differnt in terms of product $'s verse energy consumption.
As you stated :
"I fully expect breakthroughs to continue to come, and probably much more and faster than they have in the past 5 years, considering energy awareness and costs."
As do I, but the facts present themselves in todays dollars that they are beneficial to me over the long haul now.
Im not an impulse buyer and Im still looking for further reviews and users who step up tot he plate and report the positives and negatives of these LED lights. So far I havent seen much to deter me.
steve the plumb
In Memoriam
In a 300 gal system I think the cost of having 2 units is high.If you look at other high end units(elos, guismen etc) the price for the solaris isn't crazy overpriced.I am not saying these units are cheap but I have run a mh system and either my a/c had to run 24/7 or I needed a chiller.Its about $500 to$1000 more than a high priced mh system.But with the need of 2 units on a tank thats where you are starting to get into way overpriced,I like the lights but I am thinking of getting the same size tank as you. 2 x 48 units is $5000 CDN its way to expensive
YEa your point is one of concern. Money is always the issue in this hobby. If it was highly known the real overages on this stuff most people wouldnt probabaly get into it in the first place.
I kinda got sucked in like a vortex along time ago.
Something keeps me going with it. We just got nailed with 8 tornados within 5 miles of my house. 14 people killed. My work place is reeling back with people who just lost there homes, boats, cars, pets, ect. With all that in mind theonly thing I can think of is, I hope my juice is still on so my fish are ok.
Ive looked at the high end MH's the Geisman units and alike. The prices dont justify the means if its not giving something back thats gonna be beneficial in the long run. I expect Ill always have a tank and there will always be some new adn improved piece of equipment that stikes up this kind of debate.
Im well within a year of completion on my 300 gal. With that in mind Who knows. I may put all my eggs i the LED basket and just be a guinea pig or I may jsut buy up a couple of yused MH's and sit back and wait to see what else LED has to offer in the very near future.
One things for sure, Thy will be better in time. One thing isnt for sure and thats the price of the better one to come. Then again if LED becomes the rage then what will happen to the price of MH?
Surely MH will have to plummet. All the low end users may drive those prices into the dirt who cant afford to switch to LED. Id still like to see some competition on these things.
Just a suggestion I though of jsut buying one 72" and centering my rock to keep from having to buy 2 units int he first place. thats leaving only 12 inches on each side fromt he glass. Id want room there for cleanign anyhow and the light would be better utilized. JMO. 2- 48" is alot of $ no argument there. You can slice it up alot of ways I suppose but the bottom line is alot of money for new technology is a scary.
Last edited:
Untamed12
New member
My tank required 3 x 48" fixtures...or 2 x 72" fixtures. Since the 72" fixtures were too long to fit, 3 x 48" was the only choice.
Solaris was going to cost me over $7000. As is, I decided to purchase 3 x 48" 2x250MH w/T5 combos for under $2400.
I fully expect to replace these with LEDs in a few years...but right now the entry cost was too high.
Solaris was going to cost me over $7000. As is, I decided to purchase 3 x 48" 2x250MH w/T5 combos for under $2400.
I fully expect to replace these with LEDs in a few years...but right now the entry cost was too high.
ppht
Premium Member
I am a newbie owner, About 2 weeks. I dont have alot of SPS about 3 frags I do have softie's and anenome's. So far hear is what I can say honestly. As far as my visual satisfaction they give a great depth of color. like HD for my tank. They programs for light changes are great as I feel there is always something new to look at... As far as the inhabitants. My Zoo's where closed for 3-4 months and are more open than ever. My aneneme's are the same but look better in the light. My new frags have extended polyps and I see small but positive results so far. My fish look great. I have less of a PH swing as the lights generate near zero heat.
Awesome, thanks for the feedback. I was reading another thread and there were some quality issues with the lights out of the box. Something about the heatsink screws floating around in the case. You can encourage me further if you tell me yours wasnt one of those units that had some issues.
- Status
Similar threads
