The T5 Q&a Thread

[LittleBlueGT]

I should read the whole thread, but I don't have time.

Right now I have 2 ATI 11k Aquablues and 2 ATI blue+ (450Nm) T5s.

I need to replace them.


Should I get the Geissman? (Same as ATI I think)
Any other manufacturers that are as good?

I overdrive with icecap btw.

 

[NorthernCF]

More adventures in T-5 PAR testing:

http://thereeftank.com/forums/showthread.php?t=76743

 

[NorthernCF]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7605724#post7605724 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by LittleBlueGT
I should read the whole thread, but I don't have time.

Right now I have 2 ATI 11k Aquablues and 2 ATI blue+ (450Nm) T5s.

I need to replace them.


Should I get the Geissman? (Same as ATI I think)
Any other manufacturers that are as good?

I overdrive with icecap btw.

Geissman = ATI

If you like the look of VHO better it is worth a look. at the other brand at reefgeek... but, the bulbs you have are still my favorite.

 

[hahnmeister]

wow, the 11,000K beat the GE, and the UVL is about 2x the output of the G-man's actinic. I figured. These findings seem to conflict with Grim's finding very much...esp the actinic. I gotta say, those numbers for actinic do look about right since I dont see any way how my G-man actinics come close to the output of the blue+.

 

[hlama]

ok i am changing up my bulbs. i am running 6X80watt T5's on 2 icecap 660 ballast. what i want to do is tone it down a little. tank is 72X18X20. redoing the tank for lps and zoos mostly. couple less demanding sps. i had to stagger the bulbs to give me coverage. the bulb config i am thinking of is:

front; what i am thinking front; what i have
1.____---actinicblue+---::::::::::1.____---actinicblue---
2.---actinicblue+---____::::::::::2.---actinicblue---
3.____-----aquablue----::::::::::3.____----aquablue---
4.-----aquablue----____::::::::::4.----aquablue---
5.____---actinicblue+---::::::::::5.____---actinicblue---
6.---actinicblue+---____::::::::::6.----aquablue---

or any other ideas. need to think about the stagger. i have 12" extra room as bulbs are 60" and tank is 72". so thats 6" on each side. can not put everyother type bulb config, cause would end up with all blue on one side of the tank and all white on the other side.

i am also thinking maybe this one:
1.::::::::---actinicblue---
2.---actinicblue---
3.::::----aquablue---..........centered not staggered
4.---actinicblue---
5.::::----aquablue---...........centered not staggered
6.::::::::---actinicblue---........*note my overflow is in this corner.

or anything you guys can come up with.
only issue is not sure if this is enough lighting. with mostly actinicblues. thoughts????

 

[snaza]

do BLUE+(20k) bulbs help with coral growth or just used for looks?

 

[hlama]

blue+20K never heard of those. are you talking about the ati blue + bulbs. that is the same thing as the Giesemann atinic/blue plus i am refering to, on the wannabe schematic, "actinicblue". are these the bulbs you are talking about??

 

[snaza]

different name here in australia but yes the would be roughly the same as the ati blue +

 

[horkn]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7602924#post7602924 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by The Grim Reefer
That should be fine. I'd stay away from the GE daylight. They might be too intense.

yes thorsky, i would steer clear of the GE day bulb as well on that tank.

i run a 3x39 retro o my similarly sized 35g, and the ge day bulb (with 2 ati blues) is too much on mine. yet zoos dont care one way or another.

 

[thorsky]

Cool. I ordered the setup Grim recommended last night. I'll let everyone know how it works out.

Thanks for the help guys!

 

[The Grim Reefer]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7606149#post7606149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hahnmeister
wow, the 11,000K beat the GE, and the UVL is about 2x the output of the G-man's actinic. I figured. These findings seem to conflict with Grim's finding very much...esp the actinic. I gotta say, those numbers for actinic do look about right since I dont see any way how my G-man actinics come close to the output of the blue+.

If you read the thread all is revealed grasshopper

"I did not test the 6k I have because it is old and ugly, I did test the GA, but it has been burning for about three years. The GE 6.5k (not listed in the first post) tested was also black on the ends and very old. I have tested these before against the 11k. New, it has consistently come up brighter."

The ATI actinic wasn't even included in my tests. I had measured PAR on them and it wasn't much (about half if memory serves)compaired to the Actinic Plus(blue plus) which leaves the UVL lamp screaming like a little girl when it comes to PAR output. After hearing about the color of the UVL super actinic I wasn't surprised by the results, It is obviously closer to a true actinic than a AP lamp. What I found interesting is a "black on the ends and very old" GE Daylight was still nearly as strong in output as UVL's 10K sun lamp.

For reference testing new lamps I had around 1150 for a 11K and 1500 for the GE. GE was 25% stronger than aquablue. After being ran maybe 3 years (assuming the lamp went in with the 3 year old Actinic) the GE was 25% less intense than a new Aquablue.

Here are his readings

BULB NR... SS... IC

11K.....98...201...264 (Aquablue)
B+......83...163...213 (Actinic Plus/Old ATI Blue Plus)
GA......13.....26.....34 (Pure Actinic/old ATI Blue 03)

GE.......83...153...210

10K.....79....158...214 (UVL Sun)
12K.....77....161...205 (50/50)
UVA.....57....117....60 (Super Actinic)


What this says to me (if these readings are accurate) is the only UVL lamp worth considering is the Super Actinic. People don't seem to impressed with the looks of the 10 or 12K UVL lamp and considering the lower output there is no reason to run them. I am still waiting for UVL lamps but I have D&D, Aquaz and the new ATI's here to measure. Got some different T5 spec ballasts to compair as well. I just about got all my stuff unpacked from the move so I should be ready to start measuring these things in a few days.

 

[NorthernCF]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7606149#post7606149 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by hahnmeister
wow, the 11,000K beat the GE, and the UVL is about 2x the output of the G-man's actinic. I figured. These findings seem to conflict with Grim's finding very much...esp the actinic. I gotta say, those numbers for actinic do look about right since I don't see any way how my G-man actinics come close to the output of the blue+.

If you read it again the GE and old full atinic were used for 3 years or so. I didn't buy new ones for the test, because I am sure I will not be using them. I don't prefer the look on either.

The GE gets the most par when 2 new bulbs are tested. But it is followed by the 11k which is the best looking whiteish bulb available IMO.

I have been mixing a GE into all my tanks just to get as much different spectrum coverage as possible. I have heard that different zoa like different spectrums, I have also heard zoa just need PAR and are not picky. All from the "experts". Since I can not test this myself, I guess the word is still out on this subject.

 

[tdsounds]

this part of the test is what I don't understand:

UVA.....57....117....60 (Super Actinic)

is that a typo? 60 with the ic reflectors? shouldn't it be 160?

 

[Pufferpunk]

GR, Could you scroll up a lil & read my Q about which bulbs to order. I've got to get the order in this week. Thanks!

 

[hlama]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7606486#post7606486 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by snaza
different name here in australia but yes the would be roughly the same as the ati blue +

cool thanks i will try that config and see how it does.

 

[NorthernCF]

BULB NR... SS... IC
NEW BULBS:

ATI/Giesemann:
11K.....98...201...264
B+......83...163...213

UVL:
10K.....79....158...214
12K.....77....161...205
UVA.....57....117....60

2-3year OLD bulbs:
GE.......83...153...210
GA......13.....26.....34

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7606717#post7606717 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by The Grim Reefer



What this says to me (if these readings are accurate) is the only UVL lamp worth considering is the Super Actinic. People don't seem to impressed with the looks of the 10 or 12K UVL lamp and considering the lower output there is no reason to run them. I am still waiting for UVL lamps but I have D&D, Aquaz and the new ATI's here to measure. Got some different T5 spec ballasts to compare as well. I just about got all my stuff unpacked from the move so I should be ready to start measuring these things in a few days.

The fellow who has been running VHO for years liked the look of the 12k best. People get used to a certain look. All the bulbs (not including full actinic ATI) have enough PAR to run an LPS or softie tank, and probably enough for SPS, when you have a bank of them on. I find 2 bulbs per 1' of tank is plenty. Because of that, if you want to pimp out the florescence, the full actinics may be viable. I am used to and prefer the look of the Blue +, however.

In the pictures, you will notice I run only one bulb per tank(its all zoa and softie grow out). There is over 100PAR at the bottom of the shallow tank, and with 2 bulbs in the 170 range. For a 12 hour cycle, that's plenty IMO.

I have more to say, but I have to get back to work ;p

 

[The Grim Reefer]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7605348#post7605348 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Pufferpunk
OK, here are the bulbs I have to choose from:

http://sunlightsupply.com/aquarium/products/fluorescent_lamps.shtml#fl_lamps_atiblue

Which will be best for a 90g, installed into a canopy (not sure how close that would make them, since I don't have the tank yet), for mostly zoas, shrooms, softies & LPS. I'm thinking that 6 bulbs will be good?

If you are sure you wont be doing clams SPS or Anemones 4 lamps would probably due the job.

For 6 lamps I'd do 1 Guismann Midday, 1 Pure Actinic, 2 Aquablues and 2 Actinic Plus.

 

[NorthernCF]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7607314#post7607314 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tdsounds
this part of the test is what I don't understand:

UVA.....57....117....60 (Super Actinic)

is that a typo? 60 with the ic reflectors? shouldn't it be 160?

Opps. Yep, I don't have the papper any longer to confirm that number... but it sure looks right.

 

[MJAnderson]

OK Grim....

How about 5 lights for this:

http://www.aquactinics.com/Products/T5_HO_Systems.htm

I was going to go Tek 4 bulb since the 6 is too wide for my 72g bowfront but this looks better.

I looked through about 30 pages and didn't see a 5 bulb suggestion.

Thanks in advance. My first T5 so I have nothing to compare it to.

 

[The Grim Reefer]

The Aquactinics are fairly new but they look good. People who have gotten their halide hoods have really liked them and I know of a couple people who got their 72" T5 system and are happy with them too. I am not sure how well the reflectors they are using will stack up against the Ice Cap but they are confident enough in them to send some out for me to measure against the IC's.