Lighting Website Updates

[dave2184]

Originally posted by ludiNano
hey sanjay, love ur site

have u ever tested the ratings on powerpaq 14k
they come w/ the current USA SunPod 1x150W HQI
Fixture

Would also like to know as I have one myself. If I was thinking when I had the cash I would have bought a spare bulb and sent it to you.

[Sanjay]

NO, I have not tested these. I am sure there are a lot of rebranded chinese lamps out there that more or less fall into the same ball park - cheap with possibly decent output initially but rapidly falling off. They all seem to fall into the "Yet another Chinese Bulb" category. There really is very little motivation for me to test these bulbs, especially these days after having tested almost 1000 combinations of lamps and ballasts.. it gets old.

Now if a new exciting bulb comes out then its a different story.

sanjay.

[Freds]

That's a shame the sunpod is a very popular fixture and on our local board it comes up quite often especially for nano setups. Now that they make a 250watt version as well it has become an even more popular choice not just for 36 inch and under but for 48 inch tanks as well. I've owned three and I always wondered how their 150 or 250watt ranks compared to the retro setups.

[hahnmeister]

Those who are interested in their bulb's output often dont buy cheap bulbs. Those who buy cheap bulbs do so because of 'wallet output' more than 'light output'... so why bother telling them their bulb's suck? If they cared in the first place, they wouldnt have bought it. You know?

[dave2184]

Nevermind I won't even go there, forget I asked in the first place!

Unsubscribing now have a nice night.

[hahnmeister]

Yeah, truth isnt for everyone.

[dave2184]

I asked the question in the first place because I do care about the animals in my care but because I and many others have a budget and can't afford the latest and greatest high dollar items to start out with.

I was even thinking of sending the gentleman a bulb to test for those of us who do buy these fixtures to have an idea of what the factory bulb was all about. Seeing their growing popularity with those of us trying to afford halides on a budget, it would have been interesting to see how they faired vs. all the hype their site claims.

[dave2184]

Originally posted by hahnmeister
Yeah, truth isnt for everyone.

Well then mabey I souldn't tell you, your attitude sucks, oops did I say that.

[hahnmeister]

Originally posted by dave2184
Nevermind I won't even go there, forget I asked in the first place!

Unsubscribing now have a nice night.

Most mature people dont announce to others that they are unsubscribing from a thread like a wanker... it pretty much means that person isnt goint to then, but they want to be a prat about it. And you didnt, did you? You might like to point the finger elsewhere to take attention away from the fact that you were the one who tried to slip in a konkish statement in the first place. But I caught that, nice try. Sorry for sticking up for myself... if that means my attitude sucks, well then, deal with it. Im sorry you dont like the truth, but its true. You dont see people complaining to Road&Track because they wont do a Dodge Viper vs. Kia Rio comparison.

Originally posted by dave2184
Well then mabey I souldn't tell you, your attitude sucks, oops did I say that.

When you type things you dont mean, you can use the upper right key on your keyboard kid... its called 'delete'. Otherwise, you should add an '?' at the end if its a question. If you need any other help using the internet, LMK. I can direct you to some good 'self-guided' sites.

[dave2184]

Yes i did unsubscribe. Because of this statement.

Those who are interested in their bulb's output often dont buy cheap bulbs. Those who buy cheap bulbs do so because of 'wallet output' more than 'light output'... so why bother telling them their bulb's suck? If they cared in the first place, they wouldnt have bought it. You know?

Why is that? I ask a simple question (which obviously means I do care) then get told that basicly I don't care for my animals becuse I buy what I can afford and that happens to be a sub $40 bulb.

Then when I post that I basicly don't want to respond to your statement because it ticked me off, and you have to get smart about it.

Whatever, I'll tell you what I wont come into your lighting forum and ask about anything again oh great lighting guru.

Peace.

[RGibson]

Originally posted by hahnmeister
Those who are interested in their bulb's output often dont buy cheap bulbs. Those who buy cheap bulbs do so because of 'wallet output' more than 'light output'... so why bother telling them their bulb's suck? If they cared in the first place, they wouldnt have bought it. You know?

hahnmeister you did a bad one this time javascript:smilie('')

[fishdoc11]

Here at Reef Central, we believe that dialogs between participants should be conducted in a friendly and helpful manner. If you disagree with a posting, please express yourself in a way that is conducive to further constructive dialog. Conversely, when you post on any given subject, you must be willing to accept constructive criticism without posting a hostile or inflammatory response. Personal attacks of any kind will not be tolerated. Please work to insure that Reef Central remains a friendly and flame free site where everyone, especially newcomers, can feel free to post questions without fear of being unfairly criticized. Thank you for your cooperation.

[hahnmeister]

Well, you might be interested to know that the mfg's agree as well. For the T5 reflector comparison, just about every high end company has agreed to participate... Sfiligoi, Fauna Marin, ATI, etc. Getting participation from some of the lesser known companies has been like pulling teeth. Why do you think that is? Do you think it might have to do with them knowing there is potential to do more harm than good? As it stands for some companies, they can still make claims like 'as good as' or 'parabolic reflectors for superior light output', without any real data. The truth is that depending on the focal point of a 'parabolic' reflector, you can mount the reflector on a bulb so its output is WORSE than a flat reflector in the first place (think of a semi-circle with a bulb in the middle... the reflection from every point on that reflector points right back at the bulb). IF this were to be revealed in testing, then there would be more harm than good.

Dont get me wrong, its nice to know where you might stand with your lighting, but Sanjay has tested plenty of similar bulbs from those types of makers... and the results dont vary much from bulb to bulb. You can simply look up 'Hello Lights: Vion' to get an idea. I think that when you actually look at the numbers, you might agree with me more... you may find yourself wishing you didnt look in the first place...lol. Knowing if your bulb makes '50' vs '40' isnt as all that significant when the quality bulbs on the market are in the '85' to '125' range. You know? Sure, when you have a Dodge Viper or even S2000, you are more than likely to know what the 0-60 time is, or the top speed. But if you own a Dodge Caravan or Toyota Camry, chances are you dont even care, let alone know, get what I mean? For practical application, its 'something between 8 and 12 seconds' for most of these cars to go from 0-60, and top speeds tend to be in the 110-140 mph range. Having an exact number isnt so important, now is it?

Im sorry it upsets dave2184 to hear it, because among some groups, whooping up a 1.8L Civic to race people at the stoplights seems like a worth while thing to do and they want to do everything they can to get 15 more hp... but in the end, its just another grocery getter. Am I coming across better now?

The thing is, all things considered in this hobby, trying to justify saving money by buying the $40 bulbs because you are 'cost concious' doesnt really fly with me at least. Being 'cost concious' and this hobby just dont mix to well. These are just bulbs after all, not cars (and some people's reefs cost more than many cars), and the difference between buying something cheap vs. decent is often no more than $20. And if you dont have $20 extra to spare per bulb, you are in the wrong hobby. More and more people in this hobby are realizing that trying to save money like this ends up costing them alot more in the long run. I know, I know, that 'you are in the wrong hobby' bit seems like such an offensive statement when you first read it... but its true, and these are living creatures we are providing life support to, not just racing RC cars around a track. This isnt a $20-100 per year hobby, more like a $500 per year hobby at a minimum it seems. And come on... $20 is a drop in the bucket. Heck, do you realize that for most of the US, just running one of those cheap bulbs wastes more than $20 in electricity per year in lost output? Seriously, did you consider that? Trying to justify wasting your money on cheap bulbs doesnt really work in the end unless you get free electricity. If you were in the EU, running one of those cheap bulbs would waste more electricity than the bulb is worth in a few months.

[JMaxwell]

Hahn,

Your obviously quite interested in lighting and seem to be open to offering opinions, so I was wondering if i could run this by you. I'm currently running a pair of Hamiton 14k SE pendants on M58 balasts. My tank is mixed reef, but 40" tall. Footprint is 54"x24". I am looking to improve my light penetration a bit, but no so much as to run 400W bulbs. I figure I should switch to lumenarc or lumenbright minis, but I am frankly confused by the plethora of MH options. SE or DE? HQI or electronic? From what I gather, the HQI balast runs the bulb at higher output, so that is one way I could go higher output without going all the way to 400W.


Anyway, if you could sum it up, what's best combo in 250W range? You seem to like Geisemman, Ushio and possibly Phoenix bulbs, but what about balasts? PFO HQI? Icecap electronic? what about SE or DE?

This stuff is giving me a headache! help!

Thanks.

JSM

[hahnmeister]

Well, 40" tall and only 54x24 footprint! Wow. You may actually be a good candidate for lumenbrights over lumenarcs.

I would suggest DE if you go with 250's... PFO HQI ballast with Giesemann 14,500K bulbs. You are going to need the output of HQI ballasts to get 40" deep.

Then again, that assumes you intend on a 'general mixed reef'... LPS, softy, and SPS up top.

[JMaxwell]

Thanks. Yes, its mixed, LPS, soft, & SPS up top. I've been running it since 2005 & it seems healthy enough. My only issue is rate of growth for some corals is less than I've seen elsewhere.

I don't think the lumenbright reflector is designed to work with a DE bulb, so I think I'd have to go lumenarc mini to use that bulb. Either one is probably quite an improvement over the reflectors I've got. I have no idea what the trade offs are w/ DE v. SE.

Is the Geiseman 14.5K bulb the "Coral 13K" or the "Megachrome 13K"?

It appears that the highest output SE 14k bulb w/ M80 ballast on Sanjay's site is an Aquaconnect and then the Hamilton's that I've got.

I'll have to noodle on this more. Thanks very much for the advice. If you have a thought on the Aquaconnect...

[hahnmeister]

There is a Lumenbright DE on the way.

The reason for DE over SE is that with only a few exceptions, SE bulbs arent M80/HQI rated. Running SE bulbs on M80 ballasts isnt good for the bulb's longevity or spectrum... like running a car on jet fuel... sure, you can do it, but it will have a short life. DE/HQI bulbs are made to a higher spec so they last longer. Most other Mogul base bulbs are cheaper probe start, low pressure, etc... they tend to burn out faster and color shift more.

Aquaconnects though, as it turns out, are one of the few HQI rated SE bulbs (others are the Radium, but only in 250wattSE, the Giesemann megachromes, and all BLV/UShio aqualite/nepturion bulbs w/o a CWA in their model name).

The thing is, if you want the Aquaconnect, you might as well get the pheonix 14,000Ks. Identical spectrum and output, but for much less $$$ in DE. I was keeping that in mind when I suggested DE over SE.

If you just need the sheer output though, the Giesemann is the right bulb. It may appear yellow to some, but thats usually because this bulb is full spectrum, and so it will pick up the yellow in your water if it isnt clear. If your water is clear (or when you just look at the bulb) you can tell it is actually very crisp white with purple/blue if anything. The only suppliment it needs is maybe a couple blue T5 bulbs... thats it. It contains loads of actinic, more than any other 250watter.

Otherwise, if you do want to go bluer, I fear that dual 250's may not be enough for your tank. You really might be looking at 3x250's in that case, but then it would make sense to stick with 400's. Then, if you like blue, the choice it obvious... dual Aquaconnect 14,000Ks on 400wattHQI ballasts (really 430watt HPS ballasts) in lumenbrights OR lumenarcs.

[JMaxwell]

Excellent, thanks again; this is really quite helpful. I think I'll have to wait for those DE Lumenbrights as I think the more focused reflector is appropriate for the dimensions. Hopefully, it won't be too long.

There is something else I haven't been able to figure out for sure and the nomenclature in various catalogs does not match up to what I read on RC. So...is this about right?

Actinic = 420 nm
Blue = 460 nm
Blue+ 440nm ?

So when you say Giesemann has lots of actinic, it looks like you are referring to the large peak on a Sanjay chart around 420 nm for that bulb. However, it could use some help in the 440-460nm range. Is this correct?

I don't have any need for a tank that looks particularly blue, so the Giesemann 14.5K lights would probably look great to me. Also, I run carbon, and I've never any yellow tinge to the water.

Thanks again for all your help.

[hahnmeister]

UV-A ends and violet light begins at about 400nm on the spectrum chart.

http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/EDDOCS/W...lors.html#blue

Visible purple seems to start at about 440nm. I suppose it depends on who you are. Most actinics, or 'true actinic 03' bulbs try to peak at about 420nm. They appear dull, but that is because our eyes arent tuned in very well to see this spectrum. Only about 10% of the cones in our eyes are tuned to see the entire blue spectrum at all. Also, as the nm gets smaller, the frequency gets higher, and the energy required to produce bluer light is higher than redder light... so bulbs tend to not be as good at making blue, and of course purple.

Where violet ends and blue begins can be somewhat personal, but most blue bulbs are designed to peak at about 450-460nm.

The bulb I would suggest combining with the Giesemann 14,500K is the ATI blue+. Other mfg's do make their versions of this bulb as well... Aqua Science 22,000K, and Giesemann actinic+ are made by Narva for instance (ATI is made by Sylvania). Any one of these three bulbs should be fine for supplimenting the 14,500K megachrome... as yes, its only 'lacking' spectrum, if anything, is that it doesnt have the 'deep blue' spike of some 20,000Kish bulbs (like the pheonix 14,000K).

So Id say start with the Giesemann if you want 250's. There are plenty of people who run this bulb on its own with great results (Sanjay, for instance, on his 500g is running 400's). IF you can keep your water from getting a yellow tint, the bulb keeps its crisp white look, and its intensity will also carry farther.

Should you want a little more blue, 2-4 strips of blue+ style T5s is all you need.

Still, that adds up to the same light as just getting dual 400's with Aquaconnect 14,000Ks then... still something to consider. With the height of your tank, its something you might consider still. Sure, its 800+ watts of halide, but you have a tall tank!

[JMaxwell]

Hahn,

Thanks again for all this info. You are really helping me out. Right now, I am leaning toward 250W HQI rated with the lumenbright reflectors. Looking at Sanjay's data, it appears that I can get 100%+ more PPFD hitting the water than w/ my current lighting setup + better coverage and focus on my tank footprint. That seems like a material improvement to me.

Given that my tank is over 2 years old, healthy, and growing (slowly), I hesitate to go as far as HQI rated 400W which would end up with 1000W watts over the tank. That would be a huge change from where I am at and I'd worry about whether my chiller could handle it in the summer time or if it would kick off a nasty algae bloom or something.

Two more, but hopefully last questions. In your opinion, is the Ushio 14K (you run these, right?) quite similar to the Geisemann 14K except less output? (Just to be clear, I don't want the blue, blue look of phoenix or aquaconnect.) I'd probably run these w/o t5 supplement.

Do you have any opinion on the new Icecap electronic ballasts? They claim to be able to run any type of bulb (SE, DE, HQI, not HQI), but can they drive an HQI bulb at PFO M80 output? Should I just get the PFO M80 or are there better options?

Thanks again,

JSM

[JMaxwell]

Just to follow up, I've gone with the 250W M80 ballasts and ordered a pair of lumen bright mini pendants for DE bulbs. (They are available, but production is barely keeping up.)

I'll probably spring for the Geisemann bulbs (ouch!), but considering Ushio 14k as well.

What a complex decision. Thanks for all the help and advice.

[MJSavage]

How many and what bulb, reflectors, ballasts, supplements etc would you recommend for a 96"X30"X30" SPS/LPS tank? I am open to all types of lighting I just want to see and appreciate all of the colors not just the blues and purples.

Thanks,

Mike

[kidney514]

What ballast would you guys suggest for a 7' tank and 24" deep tank

So far I am thinking Lumen bright reflectors and Coralvue Reeflux 12k 250 Watters, but still haven't figure which one is the best ballast out there

Is the blueline E-Ballast the best!

[RGibson]

Ice Cap is the best.

[kidney514]

i have to admit that i have ic660 and never had one single problem with it and it has been 7 years