|
|
|
05/21/2008, 11:11 AM
|
#1 |
|
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 19
|
Lighting option 1 or lighting option 2?
Ok so right now i am in the process of deciding what tank size i want and what equipment etc. If i do a 48x15x18 i have 2 options for lighting. 1) i build a canopy and place 6 54w T5HO with individual reflectors 3 marine whaite 14k and 3 420 actinics for £282 (im from the uk) or i have the option of 2 150w nano halides and 2 54w T5HO with reflectors (both t5 will be actinic) for £273. the difference of 39 is nothing so what would be the better option? 1 or 2?
|
|
|
|
05/21/2008, 11:20 AM
|
#2 |
|
Registered Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 2,831
|
i think that option 2 is the way to go. nothing can mimic the natural lighting of a reef better than metal halides. the actinics will add to blue appearance that we all want. i just really think the shimmer of the metal halides makes the tank look so much better.
__________________
The friendliest GIANT you'll ever meet. Current Tank Info: 200g Marineland Deep Dimension (Lumenmax Reflectors/Dual PFO 400w/Radium 20K) and 2xFrag Tanks (One TEK T5 fixture and one MH, Galaxy/Phoenix) on same system w/100g sump w/6"x100g DSB, AquaC EV-1000 Skimmer, Reeflo Barracuda return pump |
|
|
|
|
05/21/2008, 03:23 PM
|
#3 |
|
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wilmington, North Carolina
Posts: 13,860
|
I say go with #1.
Especially in the UK...that extra 100 watts an hour will kill you in costs. Plus you can play with and try different bulb combinations out as you see fit. Finally, nothing an mh bulb can crow that a T5 can not. 
__________________
My tank was cool. Current Tank Info: Barebottom (the tank not me...at least not at the moment). |
|
|
|
|
05/22/2008, 02:23 PM
|
#4 |
|
Registered Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dallas, TX Area
Posts: 1,389
|
As you can see from your responses so far :-), it becomes largely a personal preference. Both options are good choices. Personally, I have an all-T5HO retrofit kit (Icecap overdriven) in my canopy above my 90g. My canopy isn't that tall, so MHs (even the HQIs) wouldn't have given me enough clearance from the water.
I love T5HOs. Except for the lack of that shimmer you get from MHs. Aside from the upfront costs of the lights, you should think about the heat generated by the lights, as well as power consumption. The MHs _might_ heat your water to the point where you'd need a chiller, i.e., added costs, and would draw more current. Hope this helps! |
|
|
|
|
05/22/2008, 02:27 PM
|
#5 |
|
Registered Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 5,521
|
I would go with option 1. Do you mind if I ask where you are as I am in the UK too and maybe able to recommend some good places for you.
|
|
|
|
|
05/22/2008, 02:29 PM
|
#6 |
|
lReef lKeeper
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ky
Posts: 266
|
im gonna say to go with the halides, if for not other reason ... the shimmer. i have no experience with T5s, but i know they do not shimmer like the halides will.
__________________
_________________ Bobby 40 Breeder, 20 long sump, Bubble Magus Curve 5, EcoTech Radion XR30w and XR15w G3 Pro, ReefKeeper Lite |
|
|
|
|
05/22/2008, 02:46 PM
|
#7 | |
|
Premium Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wilmington, North Carolina
Posts: 13,860
|
Quote:
 Aside from that T5 is my choice for many reasons. But on the shimmer topic, I am going to order a few narrow beam, 4 watt LED's and see if these produce the effect. Sean
__________________
My tank was cool. Current Tank Info: Barebottom (the tank not me...at least not at the moment). |
|
|
|
|
|
05/22/2008, 03:31 PM
|
#8 |
|
Premium Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Twin City's Mn.
Posts: 1,771
|
I like the MH look over t5. But at 100w more, you will have to decide if it is worth it to you.
Here is a electricity calc. http://www.reefcentral.com/calc/tank_elec_calc.php |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
