If you had 700 bucks to spend on lighting...

[ahullsb]

What would you buy? I have a 55 gallon tank. I need new lighting....I can't decide. MH's or T5's or both. I just want this to be my last lighting upgrade for a long time! ANd I don't want to be limited as to what I can keep in there! I have been thinking about the outer orbit mh t5 combo. But many say I should get 250w mh's anyway...any help would be greatly appreciated!

[kpk]

Hey IMO a couple of 250w 20ks by themselves would be sufficient. Make that 2x250w de 20ks on a hqi ballast. Also I would get pendants and hang them to cut down on heat. Some people love the t5's but personally I don't know what I would do w/o the halides, I just like the look over floresence!

HTH,
Kyle

[jmchzn]

only 700 on lighting...i would kill myself...no just kidding.
ORBIT has some nice actinic and hqi set ups. you definitely have to get all in one set ups. go to fosters and smith online they have affordable options and great service!!

[BLockamon]

Aquactinics 48" 5x54W T5 HO fixture. With bulbs, ~$450. Save the other $250 for flow or a quality skimmer. With 5xT5 over a 55-gal you can keep anything (except stuff that doesn't like light).

[Roland Jacques]

Blockmon, who sells Aquactinics 48" 5x54W T5 HO fixtures?

[Salamander]

I'm lookin' at the Aquamedic light with 2 250 MH and 2 54 W T5. So far it seems to be the best fixture out there from what I can tell. I'm still looking around though so I'd love to hear others recommendations too.

[kpk]

Man if you have $700 to spend strickly on lights and enough for all the other equipment to be good go with that light you are looking at. As long as the 250ws are DE then that is what I would do with 14k bulbs and actinics in the t5's. I have a little aquamedic oceanlight pendant and love the slick look plus it's easy access to the tank...

Good luck...

[musty baby]

I'd build a canopy, buy the parts, and put 2x250 14k mh w/ 2 110w actinic vhos over it. Then I'd spend the $300 left over on something ridiculous. Maybe buy a ceramic "no fishing" aquarium ornament for the tank.

[BradL.]

First off get rid of the 55. They make terrible reef tanks. A 75 would be much better and you could use the 55 for a sump. Than take the remainder of the $700 and buy 2 pfo mini pendants and 2 phonenix 14k bulbs.

[Steven Pro]

Originally posted by ahullsb
ANd I don't want to be limited as to what I can keep in there!

Forget about this notion. It is a false myth propagated by people that don't know any better. You are limited. You are limited by the size of your aquarium. You are limited by competition amongst the corals. And you will be limited by lighting. The "corals" we keep can be collected at anywhere from 10 to 40 meters deep. Expecting to select a compromise which keeps everything healthy over that collection range in a mere 21" of water is ridiculous.

[nikygm]

i would do four 48" 54watt T5 HO all the way more efficient, cheaper to run, less heat and quieter mine don't have that hum metal halides do or T12 VHO

[McCrary]

Aquamedic with 2x250 MH and 2x54 T5 actinics.

[kpk]

Thank you Turbo lol...

[Steven Pro]

Here is a little editorial rant I wrote for another message board, but it is on point for this thread.



“I don’t want to be limited in my coral selection. I want to be able to keep anything and everything.�

This is an often repeated sentiment, usually after you ask someone to give you an idea of what they want to keep so that you can recommend to them an appropriate lighting scheme. This idea is so frequent that I find it discouraging. But, what is even worse is the way this idea is accepted by so many and no one seems to question the foolishness of the statement. If for instance, I were to say I wanted to setup a fish tank that had a little bit of everything, I would be roundly and deservingly ridiculed. The idea that one could house a herd of seahorses along with a school of Anthias, a pair of Mandarins, a group of Domino damsels, a Clown Trigger, a Green Moray Eel, and a Panther Grouper all in the same aquarium and not expect trouble is ridiculous. Why then do we think there will not be compatibility problems with corals? Is it because we have a hard time remembering that corals are animals and behave as such? I assure you, corals are quite capable of killing each other. How do you think those vast mono-specific stands of corals come about in nature? These types of battles are even worse when we combine corals and other photosynthetic creatures that don’t occur together naturally. The array of weapons that ‘corals’ have at their disposal is really impressive: stinging nematocysts, chemical warfare/alleopathy, crowding, over shadowing, and encroachment. Don’t underestimate the potency of their armaments. They may take longer to kill their cohabitants when compared to the quick and decisive battle that would take place if one were to attempt to mix a school of Green Chromis with a Lionfish, but they will still fight albeit slowly and perhaps less visibly.

Let’s imagine a theoretical display while the topic of coral aggression is still fresh. A 30 gallon new aquarium is setup. It is stocked with frags of the following corals: Galaxea, Hydnophora, Montipora (both plating and digitate forms), Blastomussa, and Xenia. Anybody want to guess how many will be left in a few years? I would bet any amount of money that the ‘last men standing’ will be the Galaxea and Hydnophora. Those two should sting and consume everyone else with ease.

If I were to post a thread asking about lighting for a theoretical 90 gallon display tank, I am sure the recommendation to use two 250 watt metal halides lamps would be proffered and be popular. Without having any idea of what I wished to keep under that lighting, the advice is frankly irresponsible. Often I hear the sentiment that if you use powerful lighting, you will be able to acclimate lower light animals and therefore you can keep whatever you want. Let us forget momentarily about the tremendous waste of resources theories like that are and its environmental impacts on the true reefs that we wish to mimic. The idea simply strikes me as completely illogical. Why stop at 250’s? Why not make a blanket recommendation to use 400’s? If 250 watt metal halides are better than 175’s, VHO’s or PC’s, then 400’s must be even better. And, if that is true, why not just use two 1,000 watt metal halides lamps? You may require a chiller, but think of the growth rates and coloration you might get! Right now, I am looking into utilizing several plasma cutting torches mounted above my aquarium. They give off a nice bluish flame and such intense light that if you look at one directly, you will get something referred to as welders flash and go blind (much like if you stare at the sun). I estimate I will be able to recreate the power of the sun at noon in the tropics on a clear day with this lighting. I already have to go to a shop to have my carbon dioxide tank for my calcium reactor refilled. Getting these torch tanks refilled should not be much more of a hassle. Plus, I won’t have to heat my house in the winter. Cooling in the summer could be a problem, though.

The point of this ridiculous soliloquy is that there must be a point of diminishing returns. There must be a point (which is different for any and every coral) where you have gone beyond their saturation point and are merely wasting electricity. So, evaluate carefully what you want to keep. Identify their needs before purchase. And then custom tailor a system to provide the best possible care for your cnidarian pets. Isn’t this what we recommend so adamantly to individuals purchasing fish? We insist that others research fish prior to purchasing to ensure that they can properly care for their latest acquisition. Then how can we advocate anything less for corals?

[kpk]

I understand your point Steve, but I think we all know what he is talking about when he says anything. Like if he upgrades, wants to get into some more light loving corals etc. This doesn't have to be so scientific he just wants a recommendation on a light!

[Jeanniee]

Aquactinics T-5 set up, great service, fast shipping. My tank is thriving under these lights.

[hahnmeister]

I would not consider dual 250s on a 55g. Sure, a 55g is too tall for 150s, so you go with 250s... but then most of the light they make just spills out the front and back because the tank is only 13" wide. The tank's shape just doesnt lend itself to halides. If it were a 60g cube... then by all means... but this 4' long tank lends itself to being lit better with T5s.

A 4-6 bulb retrofit or fixture with individual parabolic reflectors would light that tank up very nice... better than halides would. As of recent, Im liking the growth and coloring that my T5s provide better than my halides anyways. A 4 bulb ATI powermodul should come in right at $500-600... that would be bright as all heck (one of the best T5 systems around, about 2x the output of a Tek). A 6 bulb 4' ATI powermodul will run you exactly $700 from Geek when they get them in. This would also allow you to upgrade to a 75 or even a 90 with that same light. The 6 bulb unit would easily outshine a dual 250wattMH system.

Or, get a 4-6 bulb Tek Light (there is a new one on the horizon as well if you can wait)... this would easily be less money than the ATI, but so is the output. Still very nice though. My 234watt Tek hood easily outdoes what I can do (output wise and flexibility of color wise) with my 250wattDE halide pendants.

Me personally, I would make a canopy and use a retrofit. This is the best way to get the exact high-quality components that you want for every part of the system. New reflectors out on the market that you want to try and yours are all corroded? Simply pop out your reflectors (usually clipped to the bulbs in a retro) and pop in the new ones. Think your T5 bulbs arent getting the cooling they need? Simply add a fan. Retrofits use waterproof endcaps (and only those ATI sunpower, fauna-marin Ultra-Solaris, Aquaconnect lumimax type fixtures can compete on this), you can use whatever ballast you prefer (Im tryin out Sylvania/OSRAM soon, but I also have an IC660 I can wire in if I want a 'boost')... on and on and on. Retros are usually alot cheaper too (at least cheaper than a really good fixture that they compete with). A retrofit also allows you to modify that system down the line. Lets say that some day you decide to upgrade to a 120g... you can either just add on another 4 bulbs (something you cant do with a fixture), or use a couple halides as the primary lighting, and have the 4x54wattT5s as your blue+ and actinic bulbs. IMO, retrofits are the best 'win-win' solution. Then when Tek and some other company release their highly anticipated new reflectors in a couple months, all you have to do is snap yours out, and snap the new ones in and you have a state-of-the art system that can compete with anything, and is very adaptable. Just be sure to have good air movement... something that some T5 fixtures like the Tek lack. This can cost you a good deal of your output... 25%, maybe more.

[McCrary]

Hey Hahn, could you throw out some PAR figures for the ATI. I would really like to see how they compare to halides.

[sjm817]

For a 55G, 4 normally driven T5s with decent reflectors would do fine.

[hahnmeister]

According to Grim's test that he posted in the 'ATI vs Tek T5 war thread' the Tek had a PAR of 152 at the sand (I believe 18"? or something close to that), and the ATI, thanks to its silver coated reflectors, active cooling/thermal monitoring, and possibly because of the Sylvania/Osram ballasts.... came in at 302 with the exact same bulbs/wattage (literally, took the bulbs from the one fixture, put them into the other, etc). FWIW, the output of the Tek peaked at closer to 200, but then after heat built up in the Tek, the output of the bulbs went down. Adding a fan to the teks seems to be a good idea... I have since added a cross-flow fan to mine to improve cooling.

I think there might be something to the ballasts as well. I looked at the ballasts in my Tek... Advance, normal line, etc. Now, they only say their ballasts run the bulbs at above 40 khz...who knows what. I talked with a Sylvania Engineer yesterday... they have ballasts that pump the T5s up to 100khz. Their ballasts seem to have some other things about them that help... like active thermal monitoring in the ballast. This may be why companies like ATI, Aquaconnect, and Fauna-marin get use OSRAM ballasts... there might be something to it. Maybe they are the european Icecap. They dont overdrive the bulbs, but they do run at a very high frequency and everything else.

Perhaps I should put more stock in Icecap's plan to start making a spec T5 ballast.

[BLockamon]

Roland, Aquactinics sells the fixture direct at www.aquactinics.com

[McCrary]

Thanks for the figures, those are some pretty powerful lights. I didn't relaize that T5's could produce PAR figures in the 300's.

[hahnmeister]

Sure, they compete with halide, and due to their more linear nature, they penetrate deeper than halides FWIW. The linear dispersion field from a T5 can can reach deeper than the rounded dispersion field of a halide. OTOH, the tradeoff is that halides do peak at a much higher level towards the top of the tank, since they are more of a point source, creating numbers in the 2000s (some approaching 3000) in the top 6" under the bulb. T5s only seem to approach 1000 within a few inches of the bulb.

This is actually good news for T5 owners, as numbers as high as 2000 and 3000 are higher than most corals can even tolerate, even in less than 5m depths. Crocea clams might like it, and some shallow water porites, but thats it really. Most of the time, with numbers that high anyways, people raise their pendants a good 6-10" above the water anyways for better distribution. T5s can sit right above the water... 2-3". And have you ever noticed how when you raise the halide up off the water, how much light gets reflected back... lighting up the canopy? well, with a T5 reflector array, this doesnt happen... the light gets sent back into the tank. The inside of my new canopy shows this... when the T5s are on, the canopy is still dark above the lights, but when the halide is on, the whole canopy is lit up because of all the light that the water surface reflects, and the small halide reflector doesnt redirect this back down. T5s just mean less light wasted.

Its the more even light field that makes T5s so attractive to me. I can put SPS anywhere along the top of the tank, regardless of where a halide pendant might be hanging, and the coral will get plenty of light from all angles. With a halide, placement is more problematic... and even at that, the shadows that the light casts often means that while the 'lit' side of the acro looks colored in and pretty, there is another side that gets little to no light, so its a faded color. T5s color in all over the coral.

[joeycadre]

pfo shimmer lights

[hahnmeister]

Ugh... you trying to send this guy back to 1996? Shimmer lights are Mogul Base / Power Compact combos. They suck up alot of wattage for the light they make, and require frequent bulb replacements for the mogul and PC bulbs.