T5 lighting for Anemones?

E

eppersonm16

Member
Just wondering whether anybody has been successfully keeping anemones using only T5 lighting. I currently have long tentacle and sebae anemones that are doing ok under T5's, however, I have only had them a couple of months.
I do have metal halide lighting I could use such as a Radium 250w, and a Iwasaki 175w 15K bulb, but I was trying to cut down on my electric bill.
Thanks,
Michael
 
I'm going to be trying to keep a few BTAs under T5s in the very near future, but the upshot is that I will have them in a very shallow tank (probably 10" of water!).
 
eppersonm16 said:
Just wondering whether anybody has been successfully keeping anemones using only T5 lighting. I currently have long tentacle and sebae anemones that are doing ok under T5's, however, I have only had them a couple of months.
I do have metal halide lighting I could use such as a Radium 250w, and a Iwasaki 175w 15K bulb, but I was trying to cut down on my electric bill.
Thanks,
Michael
Click to expand...

Short Answer: Yes!

Long answer:

I'm still surprised that these questions exist - T5 HO lighting has proven to put out significantly more light than many MH options - SPS, clams, anenomes, etc. have all thrived under T5 HO light!

Not only will anenome's thrive under T5 lighting, but if they have been used under lesser MH lighting (175 or 250 W 20K lighting), there will be some significant acclimation necessary, so that you dont damage the animals from too much light.

Eg: RBTA - 24" under an ATI powermodule - mix of 1:1 Blue+: aquablue special
DSC_0429.JPG


Best,
-Kyle
 
kvosstra said:
I'm still surprised that these questions exist - T5 HO lighting has proven to put out significantly more light than many MH options
Click to expand...

While I agree with the conclusion - that T5 HO bulbs can be used for most reef systems - I do not agree with the comment about T5 HO putting out "significantly more light" than metal halides.

Much depends on the type of bulbs used, the type of ballast, and the operating temperature of the environment. I think it might be more correct to say that a correctly designed T5 HO system can be created that delivers similar results to a low-wattage, middle-of-the-road metal halide setup. For larger tanks, deeper tanks, or other "extreme lighting" uses, a T5 HO setup does not (in my opinion) exist that will achieve the same results as a high-end metal halide setup - either in terms of overall light intensity, or efficiency (lumens per watt).

Here is a nice link for everything you ever wanted to know about T5 lighting:

http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/nlpip/lightingAnswers/lat5/abstract.asp

A huge advantage the metal halide has over T5's is its intensity. Metal halides generate much more light in a smaller package than T5 HO's. As a quick comparison, imagine packing 12 x 46" T5 HO bulbs in an aquarium hood. For purposes of comparison, assume all light generated is reflected downwards 100% efficiently (same assumption impacts metal halides as well as T5). In terms of lumens generated, the 46" HO bulbs will each generate approximately 5000 lumens. Total lumens generated over approximately 4 square feet lighting hood (bulbs placed 1" apart, center on center) would be 60,000 lumens (672 watt total fixture draw). Now imagine if you replaced that bulb array with 2 x 400 watt metal halides. Total light generated with two bulbs - 72,000 lumens, 800 watt total fixture draw. Somewhat comparable efficiency - but only two MH bulbs needed to produce MORE than what an entire hood full of T5 HO bulbs can produce. If you wanted, in the same 4' hood you could easily pack in 4 x 400 watt metal halides - and destroy any T5 HO array by generating almost 3x as much light in the same space (and comparable efficiency) - though you would be burning 3x as much electricity to generate 3x as much light.

So it all comes down to what you want to achieve. Of course, with the advent of LED's, the days of both T5 HO and Metal Halide technology are numbered. LED cost continues to drop 50% every three years. Within a decade people will wonder what a fluorescent bulb used to look like :)
 
Last edited:
T-5s are more efficient then Halides on a small scale. If we want to take everyones post soo literally, then halides are not the best option for a larger, deeper or extreme lighting uses. A quality 600 watt high pressure sodium bulbs have the best lumen per watt rate then any halide system and with suplemental actinics, they would be a more appropriate substitute.
 
While I agree with the conclusion - that T5 HO bulbs can be used for most reef systems - I do not agree with the comment about T5 HO putting out "significantly more light" than metal halides.
Click to expand...

Bonzai - you cut my quote! Jk! My comments clearly stated that some T5 options have proven to put out more light than many MH options.

Using similar wattage, in my experience, T5 is brighter than MH.

-Kyle
 
kvosstra said:
Bonzai - you cut my quote! Jk! My comments clearly stated that some T5 options have proven to put out more light than many MH options.

Using similar wattage, in my experience, T5 is brighter than MH.

-Kyle
Click to expand...

I cut your quote to get to the point of my comment, which is:

"Depends on the bulb, ballast and operating temperature." Find your best, most optimal T5 HO bulb, and I will show you a metal halide that watt for watt, is brighter.

Additionally, you go so far as to claim that animals kept under metal halides will need to be acclimatized to T5 lighting(?) Is this hyperbole, or do you really believe this? Perhaps you can share a specific instance when you believe this would be the case? Not trying to be a jerk - perhaps there is some super T5 HO combo out there that I am not aware of. I thought their efficiency maxed out at about 90 lumens per watt...
 
natep206 said:
T-5s are more efficient then Halides on a small scale. If we want to take everyones post soo literally, then halides are not the best option for a larger, deeper or extreme lighting uses. A quality 600 watt high pressure sodium bulbs have the best lumen per watt rate then any halide system and with suplemental actinics, they would be a more appropriate substitute.
Click to expand...

Why don't you provide your "most efficient" T5 HO system and I will provide my most efficient metal halide setup and we'll see who wins :)

At the same time while I agree that high-pressure sodiums generate more lumens, their color spectrum, at 2000K, does not fulfill the needs of a marine aquarium (to say nothing of how it makes your tank appear to the human eye). How much actinic lighting do you need to add to your HPS setup to get up to the same PAR values as a 2 x 400 watt 12K MH setup? I actually haven't run the math. Maybe it is better, maybe not. In my mind's eye I see at least two 110 watt VHO actinics... maybe more... but I am just guessing and could easily be wrong.
 
...Look, I'm not trying to start a ****ing contest here - just providing my experiences - I have used both MH and T5 over numerous tanks, and in my experience, T5 has been brighter than the MH I used.
Additionally, you go so far as to claim that animals kept under metal halides will need to be acclimatized to T5 lighting(?) Is this hyperbole, or do you really believe this? Perhaps you can share a specific instance when you believe this would be the case? Not trying to be a jerk - perhaps there is some super T5 HO combo out there that I am not aware of. I thought their efficiency maxed out at about 90 lumens per watt...
Click to expand...

Sure - exactly as I stated before - from my own personal experience - 2x400W 20K halides were much dimmer than the 10x54 ATI powermodule that I used on my tank - My corals noticeably bleached out from too much light.
I personally use a 1:1 combo of Blue+ and aquablue special - its a very similar light to the 20K. Again, I dont have PAR readings for my tanks - just my experience.

..............
Back to the point of the original post. Anenome's can be kept successfully under T5 HO, many reefers are currently using T5 with great success, and some are also using MH with great success. In my experience, all animals that can be kept with MH can also be kept with T5's.

Best,
-Kyle
 
IME limited experience, T5 is a pain with some anemone species, gigantea, magnifica and E. quads to start. It was not a lack of PAR, it was a the linear coverage allowing the anemones to wander vs. staying under a point source of proper intensity.

I have both lighting systems, but my mobile species get MH to help keep them in place.
 
Small tank, 34g, probably about 25g of water volume when you add in the LR, sand, corals, anemones, and all the other stuff. I have 110w Fluorescent PC 1" or less from the water surface. I was wrong about tank dimensions, it is about 17" high, and the feet of the anemones are 12" below the surface. The photoperiod is 9 hours 30 minutes and the blue LEDs are on for the rest of the night. There is also light coming into the tank from the room, so add like 100w+ that are 5' or so from the tank. That is the absolute minimum lighting I would suggest an anemone being OK in. For my Christmas present I'm thinking of getting the BioCube 29 with 150w HQI to move my B&W Ocellaris pair and all of their anemones into and make a little breeding set-up. :)
 
For the OP. Although I dont have the same anemone you mentioned but I do have 5 rbta's under six T5HO on a 75 gallon tank.

FULLSHOT_2009-10_T5HOX6.jpg


Hope this helps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Alternative Lighting for Biocube 29
Replies
0
Views
18
thommyboy12183
T
Emanuel92
What lighting for S. haddoni and E. quadricolor?
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
Hong Kong
Hong Kong
A
How to Install Linear Actuators for Easy Lifting of Your Reef Tank SPS Light
Replies
4
Views
2K
oreo57
oreo57
S
Looking for a t5 mh combo light 48”
Replies
0
Views
365
sanchezd74
S
pblogic
Returning to the hobby - could use tank suggestions
Replies
11
Views
2K
Reefing102
Reefing102
Back
Top