Solaris Led lighting systems

Eric - which one were they showing at IMAC?

DezNutz - I agree. Promising, but nobody's convinced me yet.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10096117#post10096117 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SWSaltwater
If you wanted a good opposing point of view you need to find someone that used it and did not like it. To accept the opinion of someone that has never owned it and posted negative things on it before it was on the market long enough to formulate an opinion is quite concerning. Maybe I can get a new carrer offering up my opinion and review on a lamborghini or a 5,000,000 dollar yacht. About whats happening here.

If you want to critic it "unbaiased"(which is likely too late) then buy one and use it for a year. Chart growth etc. I have seen growth, and a customer of mine OWSI can attest to SPS growth on his unit. His colors are way better as well. I will be the first one to bash it if it was bad, I paid a ton of money for these lights and if they did not work I would have yelled it on the hilltops. Luckily it has beat all expectations.......
Click to expand...

You can't stop people from attacking with facts they believe are true, whether they use the product or not, the only thing you can do is to offer facts of your own to make counter argument. So far I have not seen the manufacture actively defending their own PAR test, nor displaying coral growth comparison. The impression then is they didn't have their own facts straight.

In fact insisting that people must use the product for a year before criticizing it, is in itself a sign of lack of arguments and being cornered and becoming argumentative.
 
the dissenting opinion is great, but to follow a thread for a product you don't own or plan to own for months goes a bit far IMO. Dissenting opinion for a product you don't own and have not owned in the past means very little however. I don't see any complaints from my customers that purchased the solaris, and I don't see many online complaints besides a few expect QC issues in the beggining. If you purchased procduct, had it fail or fall short, then tried to warn others thats a different issue all together.
Click to expand...
 Some of us have a bit higher level understanding of things than YOU may want to believe. You may not like it, but many of don't have to test drive something to understand it or the science that makes it tick.

Ownership of a product is NOT the delimiter for understanding of, or knowledge about the product and how or why it functions in a given manner. YOUR understanding of the mechanics may not be the same as mine or somebody else's. What you consider "fact" may certainly not be "fact" at all, but rather an opinion based on observation or LACK of understanding.

You are confusing technical discussion with owner satisfaction and feedback. If you told me that that "lamborghini" did 320 M.P.H I would call BS and tell you WHY it is BS, no matter what you or your customer thought he observed.

The science and mechanics of the situation just do not allow for it. You or the customer MAY NOT understand WHY you are wrong.. but you would be wrong.

Nonetheless, "bashing" is certainly not what has transpired here. I don't think you really understand what "bashing" somebody or something is, and I honestly hope that you never have to actually endure the pain and anguish that a true "bashing" can cause.

If you wish to defend a product or an idea, use logic and facts to back up your argument. If you want to expose the flaws or shortcomings of a product you should do the same. When somebody shows YOUR arguments to be wrong, either come up with better data and back up your arguement or concede your defeat and change your working knowledge. That is how we learn.
 
Last edited:
Interesting. I just received an email from one of the two folks in this contest, that I believe agrees to take me up on my offer. I need to iron out the details AND compose a test. They are confident enough in their product that they believe it will compete with their competitor AND my 400w DE MH.

Now, if only the other player in this game will play...

BTW, I'm a molecular biologist by education, and I've been in this hobby for a long, long time. I do know how to put together a valid test. This won't be a subjective kind of thing.
 
I think what will make it hard is the footprint of the LED fixture VS that of the MH. Dana's tried to take this into account, but I think his method was somewhat flawed.
 
Bean,

What I'm talking about is a 2-3 month test with a bunch of identical SPS frags, at various positions and depths. My tank is 29" deep, and 24" wide. All in the same tank, with the same parameters. Growth and color. Forget PAR, forget Lumens. If it grows like crazy and is BROWN, who cares? If it's gorgeous and doesn't grow, who cares?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10098879#post10098879 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bstreep
Bean,

What I'm talking about is a 2-3 month test with a bunch of identical SPS frags, at various positions and depths. My tank is 29" deep, and 24" wide. All in the same tank, with the same parameters. Growth and color. Forget PAR, forget Lumens. If it grows like crazy and is BROWN, who cares? If it's gorgeous and doesn't grow, who cares?
Click to expand...

Because we know corals grow great under MH, and that PAR is the major factor. These can barely top a 70w MH as far as par goes... so why spend $2K on a fixture when a fixture you can put together for $100 will outperform it?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10099126#post10099126 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
Because we know corals grow great under MH, and that PAR is the major factor. These can barely top a 70w MH as far as par goes... so why spend $2K on a fixture when a fixture you can put together for $100 will outperform it?
Click to expand...

Those are some bold statements.

Has anyone done some independant testing to verify that the LED lights are that bad/good?
 
Dana Riddle had that article, but there are a few things that I take issue with as far as his conclusions go. To argue that the PUR is better than the PAR because the output was so much in the blue range was a stretch for me. I know blue is important, but I think the effects of too much blue in the spectrum 'washing out' colors is the most evident. Wasnt it just a year or so ago that Dana did a test with Xenia under reddish lights, then blue lights, and determined that the coral was able to adapt and grow under both conditions equally? This would disprove the whole idea of blue light being more important. And besides, even if it was... your corals wouldnt look as good because according to the recent articles on 'excitation of pigments', all spectra, red through UV-A, are important for pigmentation depending on the coral.

And facts are facts... a Solaris might have a 40 degree patch that competes with a mere bottom-line 20,000K bulb, but a good 20,000K bulb will have a 360 light patch like that.
 
Photosynthetically Usable Radiation (PUR) vs. Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR)
There is much to be said about the two. The differences vary from plants, to corals, to types of.
As far as most hobbiest go, we only have access to LUX meters. And what do we get from that? A standardized model of human brightness perception.

I don't understand the degree patch you are referring to. Please explain.
 
My problem with Dana's articles are that he comes up with a "theory" and sets out to find test results to prove it. His is very obviously a smart guy and an interesting read. I just have a problem with the "science". The LED article was more aimed at concluding that intense light is not needed for corals and that MH of course have more UV. Therefore the conclusions (and testing) was already skewed in that direction. Not very scientific. Sadly, this is "modern" science. Look at all the silly global warming "science" that is nothing more than wild speculation and peer review pawned off as real SCIENCE.
 
I would agree that some on this forum seem a little more "active" in attacking the LED lights without definitive proof otherwise as well. I am not a fanboy of either technology, and am just looking for the best possible solution (money aside).

hahnmeister - What are your facts for stating opposing view of PUR vs PAR? All I see is you do not like the emphasis on Blue light. So just due to you not liking it, have you done any research to support or disprove the statements? If not, than it is more just your unbacked opinon.

I would just love to see some actual readings from these bulbs over time. So I can compare them to metal halide bulbs already known.

The whole built in moon lights and adjusting timers on the LED is a big selling point as well. I love the ability to have all the control features built into the same product.

I think the whole heat dispursion is overlooked as well. The less things I can put into a tank (i.e. chiller) the more positive it is for me. Less to break down, own, operate, ect...
 
I just put my new H4 60" on my 120 today to compare it with the Current Outer Orbit 2x 250w Metal Halide fixture I had before. The fixture has all Geissman bulbs with 8 custom blue moonlights built in. And the H4 blows it away. The color is as bright as my previous fixture and I really like the flexibility of the system. It as been up and running at 50% power, to not shock the corals to much, and the temperature is holding steady at 94 degress internally. I have already noticed that my chiller has not kicked in today. So far I am extremely satified with the product, I will post some pictures in the future of the differences
 
Intense light is not needed for corals, Mine have grown fine with LED's over the last year. I think we can put that as fact and Dana was correct.

I had to delete my thoughts on the Global warming comment lol. Pittsburg coal miners opinion maybe......

Well I was able to find a LUX tester in Phoenix but no one had a Par tester. I will try to get one online and post both Lux and PAR within my tank.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10103052#post10103052 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SWSaltwater
Intense light is not needed for corals, Mine have grown fine with LED's over the last year. I think we can put that as fact and Dana was correct. .
Click to expand...

Then why not save $2k and run 70w MHs? They put out just as much light as the solaris.
 
and as much heat as a MH. Still use more power as well. And I do not think they are near as good as solaris. Once I get a PAR meter and run the numbers you will see. Remember the solaris light is focused, the MH is not. Reflectors help but not 100%. My solaris ran fine on a 32" deep tank. A 70w MH would never have gotten to the bottom.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10103628#post10103628 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SWSaltwater
and as much heat as a MH. Still use more power as well.
Click to expand...

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.


Current MH bulbs are 2-3 times as efficient as the LEDs the solaris uses. They use LESS electricity. They produce more light, and less heat per watt.

Please, stop pedalling this misinformation.





I'm looking at pics of your tank (nice, btw). The problem is, theres nothing in your tank (that I can see) that can't be kept under Normal Output fluoros. Its all Euphyllia and softies. These are the sorts of things I keep under overhangs in my tank.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sickman
Juwel Lido 200 - really reef tank ready all in one? Really Really?
2
Replies
39
Views
986
Reefing102
Reefing102
K
Radion time help. (Long post)
Replies
2
Views
138
kj swans
K
S
Lighting Question - Glass penetration
Replies
7
Views
284
xabo
xabo
davisl
SOLARIS PFOaquatics with I5 Power Supply - AUTO settings question, there a manual?
Replies
5
Views
602
oreo57
oreo57
K
Fluval Reef 4.0 LED Nano Power Level for 15G?
Replies
3
Views
241
kingyking888
K
Back
Top