Which one is a better buy?

[JohnyBravo]

Ok you experience reefers...

Which of the following retrofit set ups would you consider the better buy? I'm looking at having moderate lighting. My canopy measurements ar 48"L x 16"W x 4.5"H. So I'm leaning toward the T5s because if I decide to get livestock that would require more lighting later on, I would have some room to put a MH. As you probably can tell my budget is under $400.

1. IceCap 48" T5HO 4 x 54w bulbs w/individual reflectors and 660 ballast. $349

2. IceCap VHO 48" 4 x 110w bulbs also w/660 ballast. $315

3. Hamilton 4x96w PC Retrofit System. $399

4. Hamilton 4x55w PC Retrofit System. $286

5. Coralife 48" AQUALIGHT RETROFIT KIT - DOUBLE LINEAR STRIP 4 x 65w. $200

[JohnyBravo]

By the way my tank measurements are 48" x 18" x 20" (75 gal)

[BreadmanMike]

1. IceCap 48" T5HO 4 x 54w bulbs w/individual reflectors and 660 ballast. $349

If you aren't looking to do SPS right away and will add halides to do so, then go with the triad ballasts instead.

[sjm817]

The 4 bulb Ice Cap T5 would be too much for a 75G. Plus, that is a very short canopy. I'd get 4 normally driven T5s.

[nemo g]

just a bit of info that is contrary to popular belief:

i have an lfs near me that has a 6 bulb tek light over a 75g (about 3" over the tank).

it only has softies. shrooms, zoos, cloves, misc polyps, and they are all doing well.

so im not sure why or how 4 bulbs would be sufficient especially if you want more light demanding corals in the future.

remember, this is eye witnessed experienced, not simple lighting conjecture.

[dhnguyen]

There is a HUGE difference between normal T5 and T5 HO (High Output) IMO.

Were the bulbs on the Tek Light regular T5 or T5HO?

[nemo g]

dh,

you should know better than that, give the post a solid reading before giving a knee jerk reaction

"has a 6 bulb tek light"

and just for more info, it has 2 blue plus and 4 aquablues

[dhnguyen]

Nemo-

The reason why I said that was because I actually have seen Tek Light units using normal output T5 bulbs as well

[RichConley]

375 seems kind of expensive.

4x48" SLR reflectors should be about $80.
4x48" T5HO bulbs another $75
4 x endcap pairs $10
2 x Triad ballast $80
--------------------------------------------------
thats like $245

I'm not a big fan of overdriving T5s with icecap 660s. Yes, you get more light, but you really dont need it. (go look at the "My sps are light under T5s" thread in the SPS forum. Go see how many are running Icecaps)

When you overdrive bulbs, you lose efficiency, they run hotter, and they burn out quicker. They also run a different color.


There are plenty of SPS tanks out there running 4x54w T5 setups, driven by triads. If you can keep your water clean, you'll be able to keep pretty much anything

[nemo g]

dh,

really? get out? what would be the point of that?

was it a lfs that was using NO t5 inside a tek light???

wouldnt that defeat the whole selling point as the light would be dramatically reduced. hard to ask for $600+ retail for a 6 bulb tek running NO bulbs.

thats funny "lol"

[reefnewbie54321]

IceCap 48" T5HO 4 x 54w bulbs w/individual reflectors and 660 ballast. $349

Dont go with PC you will regret it

[nemo g]

ewww, PC?

isnt that the reef lighting equivalent of VD?

[JohnyBravo]

Ok, so the general consensus is go with the T5s, however go with the triad ballast instead of the IceCap 660...

For all those who suggested the MHs... Quick question… might be a stupid question but here it goes... If you can keep most softies and even some more light demanding species under T5s why would you spend/recommend the MHs set ups that are, give or take, $100 or so more?

I don't know… this stuff is really confusing. From everything I've read the T5 HOs (as long as they have individual reflectors) provide sufficient lighting to grow most things. Even though most people will agree with this, they still recommend MHs. Why is this? Shouldn’t the recommendation be “if you plan on keeping these ____ species, you’ll be just fine with that set up? “ “However, if you’ll be looking at adding some of these ____, you’ll need to go with MHs…� I'm just curious because, like in my situation, where I have a very limited canopy, where more than likely heat will be a factor; why would you recommend MHs? I know they are the best thing out in the market, but are they required??? Don’t get me wrong, I really appreciate everyone’s opinions… It’s just I don’t want to blow money just to say I have the best thing in the market. However, if it is required, by all means state your reasons. Man, you would think by now all this stuff would be available to newbies in some type of chart based on the type of livestock you want... or something.

[JohnyBravo]

Ok, so the general consensus is go with the T5s, however go with the triad ballast instead of the IceCap 660...

For all those who suggested the MHs... Quick question… might be a stupid question but here it goes... If you can keep most softies and even some more light demanding species under T5s why would you spend/recommend the MHs set ups that are, give or take, $100 or so more?

I don't know… this stuff is really confusing. From everything I've read the T5 HOs (as long as they have individual reflectors) provide sufficient lighting to grow most things. Even though most people will agree with this, they still recommend MHs. Why is this? Shouldn’t the recommendation be “if you plan on keeping these ____ species, you’ll be just fine with that set up? “ “However, if you’ll be looking at adding some of these ____, you’ll need to go with MHs…� I'm just curious because, like in my situation, where I have a very limited canopy, where more than likely heat will be a factor; why would you recommend MHs? I know they are the best thing out in the market, but are they required??? Don’t get me wrong, I really appreciate everyone’s opinions… It’s just I don’t want to blow money just to say I have the best thing in the market. However, if it is required, by all means state your reasons. Man, you would think by now all this stuff would be available to newbies in some type of chart based on the type of livestock you want... or something.

[crumbletop]

I concur with the T5 consensus above -- 4x54W on normal ballasts (Triad). Get the IceCap SLR reflectors with them. An advantage beyond cost, heat, and the fact that they have plenty of light for your 75 to pretty much keep whatever you want is that with two ballasts you will have some control over a dusk/dawn effect whereas with the IC660 you'll have them all on/off at the same time.

Jack

[crumbletop]

dp

[RichConley]

johhnybravo, you'll hear lost of conflicting info because 90% of the people on here have no idea what theyre talking about.

As to prices, you're not going to save anything with T5s. Nothing reasonable anyways. Decide on what you want, not on cost.

you can go 2xspider reflectors $60, 2x 250MH ballast $90, 2xbulbs $110, and you're at 260, which is cheaper than the T5s.

As to electricity, again, no major savings. A 250w MH pendant costs about $10 a month to run. So 2x175 isnt going to really be any more expensive to run thant 220 w of T5.

[BreadmanMike]

I would have said the halides as well, but his canopy is only 4.5" high. I figured it was too short for the reflectors. Unless he's going to change the canopy, I say T5's are the way to go.

[dhnguyen]

Personally I like MH but that's mostly because I'm quite partial to the shimmering lines it creates in the tank. Other than the possible heat issue, there's really no advantage to using T5HO versus MH.

Nemo- Yes it was a a LFS that I saw a tek light fixture running NO T5. It was also used for a softies tank as well.


D.

[nemo g]

heat is an important consideration when it comes to halides, as i learned the "hard way". there is no way to dispute the following with the use of halides over a comparable t5 setup:

1. a lot more heat and noise: a single 250w heated up my windowless/ventless room while pcs and t5s didnt. and whether you are using a chiller or the extra fans in a canopy/fixture, more noise will be produced with halides.

2. electricity and par: more heat at the same wattage means it isnt as efficient, which then means you are getting less light for the same wattage, which then means you are paying for heat not par, whcih then also means you have to cool the room via air conditioning and/or get a chiller which also affects the room and drives up cooling costs. many are believe halides are superior for producing par, and this is misleading. halide does produce "hot spots" that t5s can not compete with (directly under a halide bulb), but the halides can not produce the intensity found throught a given area produced by t5s (non-point source).

3. color flexibility: it is a lot easier and cheaper to get the color out of the light and corals that you want. for the price of 2 quality halides you can get 8 - 12 quality t5s which will enable you not only to get the color you want by trying out different combinations, but youll have spares as well. the spares can take the place of the older bulbs when necessary. i dont think anyone (at least ought to) buy 8 halide bulbs just to find out what they like since the extras are the "unwanted" bulbs and are thus a wasto money.

now there are other positives and negatives for both lighting schemes which need not be discussed here since they will mostly be of aesthetic value for both the light and the resulting effects on the corals.

these issues must be considered, and subjectively wieghted, before making an aware decision when it comes to halides.

good luck with which ever way you will go

[JohnyBravo]

Thanks guys...

So when it comes down to it, MHs are not required, just prefered. Could I remove my lovely canopy... ah, NO! Mama says canopy stays... Tank mine, equipment mine, fish, corals, rock, sand, all mine.... Furniture hers... She likes, she wants, she gets. As long as mama is happy my bank roll stays lol...