The quick and easy SE vs DE answer?

nengland · 07/12/2006, 12:46 PM

I'm planng out some upgrades on my tank and want to go with halides. I don't though, know yet whether mogul or HQI's would suit my needs best.

What's the quick/easy difference between the two other than the obvious physical differences and UV shielding on the mogul bulbs?

Travis L. Stevens · 07/12/2006, 01:17 PM

Not much. The HQI bulbs are usually slightly more intense. That's about it. You already know about the UV Shielding for HQI bulbs, HQI are smaller, SE bulbs have better reflectors, and both types of MH still run hot.

hahnmeister · 07/12/2006, 01:29 PM

I can give you the long version if you desire, but it goes a little something like this...
HQI ballasts run DE bulbs with more wattage and DE bulbs are built better (to handle the higher voltage) and can easily go years with a smalle percentage of decreased output. SE bulbs do better on e-ballasts like icecap and EVC, and even still they dont last as long simply because mogul socket bulbs were never intended to be mounted sideways. HQI/DE need the UV sheild, and SE has the sheild built in to the outer jacket.

As far as reflectors go, the DE can be more efficient, but since SE have been around so long and dont need the sheild, there is a greater selection. I wouldnt say that one has better reflectors than the other...it just depends on what the goal is...but efficiency-wise, DE bulbs are capable of having more efficient reflectors made for them. I think what Travis is talking about with 'SE having better reflectors' is the famous 'Lumenarc3' reflector...which only comes in SE configuration and is one of the best reflectors out there. Recently, Sunlight Supply has come out with their version of DE lumenarcs called lumenmax3.

nengland · 07/12/2006, 02:28 PM

Years on a DE bulb?

**oh**

That would be a significant impact on long term cost. I hadn't even considered the bulb life.

Assuming average use and electronic ballasts... how long on average would one expect a DE bulb to last? An SE bulb?

-neil

RichConley · 07/12/2006, 02:36 PM

DE's put out slightly more light, but lose that from the UV shield needed. So SEs end up having more light for less energy.

SOME (very few) of the DE bulbs are UV coated. Those ones will smoke an SE.

The problem is, most of the DE reflectors have REALLY REALLY poor spread.

hahnmeister · 07/12/2006, 03:19 PM

"DE's put out slightly more light, but lose that from the UV shield needed. So SEs end up having more light for less energy."

That depends on what is used for the UV sheild. Some companies have glass that is low-E and very thin. These do a great job at letting most of the light through. Some other companies skip the LoE and just use a thicker piece of regular glass...this does tend to cost some of the output.

As for the idea that SEs make more light for less energy...well...thats sorta true.

SE bulbs are often run on regular or electronic ballasts...DEs on HQI. Right there you are going to see DE outperforming SE...no contest. But I think what Rich is talking about is that sometimes people run their SE bulbs on HQI ballasts. For the first few months this combo DOES put out more light than anything. But its a bit like running your auto on jet-fuel... within a year, a SE bulb on a HQI ballast can lose up to 60% of its output. The DE bulb, which is HQI rated to withstand the higher power of the HQI ballast, can keep chugging along. There are many people running 10,000K DE bulbs for years on HQI ballasts, many losing less than 10% of their output per year. So in the long run, DE/HQI is brighter.

I dont know how long SE bulbs on e-ballasts are supposed to last compared to HQI/DE combos, but it cant be nearly as long. Aside from the different power requirements, the SE bulbs just arent meant to be run horizontal...causing premature color shifting and degrading.

bertoni · 07/12/2006, 03:40 PM

There's a wide range of efficiency in light output from bulbs. Currently, SE bulbs hold the top spots. This site has a lot of data:

http://www.reeflightinginfo.arvixe.com/

As far as DE bulbs lasting longer than SE, I don't think there's any data to that effect, and my DE bulbs didn't last years. More like a year for the 20,000 K Hamiltons.

There are good and equivalent reflectors for SE and DE. I have the Sunlight Supply Lumen Max 2 and like it. A good reflector is key.

I don't believe that MH runs any hotter than any equivalent lighting system, really.

What size tank are you trying to light?

nengland · 07/12/2006, 04:03 PM

I'm trying to light a 65 gal tall. That's 36 inches in length. I'm comitted to two bulbs because there's a center brace and I don't want a nasty shadow.

bertoni · 07/12/2006, 04:57 PM

So I'd probably go for two bulbs, perhaps two 175 W Iwasaki bulbs, or 2 250 W bulbs. I like the SE choices better, but some of the DE are fine, too. There's a lot of personal taste involved in the coloration. For efficiency, there's a lot of data.

RichConley · 07/12/2006, 05:02 PM

Hahn, I've run DEs and SEs, mostly on electronic ballasts. The SEs are brighter.

DEs on HQIs are definitely brighter than SEs on electronics, but theyre also pulling 100+ watts more.

nengland · 07/12/2006, 05:56 PM

Two 250 bulbs was what I was thinking. (w/o any supplementation) That would probably mean a 14k bulb?

I want a crisp white light with little if any blue.

A couple months ago some screenshots of the Coralvue Reeflex 12k caught my eye...

bcolvin · 07/12/2006, 07:03 PM

off topic a little....

I have seen a two (granted in 8 yrs of reefkeeping) SE bulbs crack and keep running. These bulbs absolutely fried the snot out of the corals in the tank and the other in prop system. Under HQI's at least you know that there is a UV shied under the bulb. I know this a crazy example but this hobby has all sorts of weird problems.

Bennett

artilespm · 07/12/2006, 07:58 PM

I ran (2) 250 watt DE Phoenix bulbs on Bluewave IV electronic ballasts. I used the Reef Optix 3 plus reflectors. All this on the exact tank you have. Within a year, my SPS more than quadripled in size. I am upgrading to a 180 soon and will buy 1 more ballast and reflector to add to my arsenal. I must also say that I ran no supplemental lighting, no need for it with the 14Ks. The light is more on the blue side though.

bertoni · 07/12/2006, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RichConley
DEs on HQIs are definitely brighter than SEs on electronics, but theyre also pulling 100+ watts more.

I'm not sure quite what this means, but the Iwasaki on an electronic ballast is still brigher in terms of PAR than a number of the 250 DE bulbs on HQI ballasts. The AB bulbs come to mind.

hahnmeister · 07/13/2006, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bertoni
There's a wide range of efficiency in light output from bulbs. Currently, SE bulbs hold the top spots. This site has a lot of data:

http://www.reeflightinginfo.arvixe.com/

As far as DE bulbs lasting longer than SE, I don't think there's any data to that effect, and my DE bulbs didn't last years. More like a year for the 20,000 K Hamiltons.

Ok, the problem here is that you are just reading the numbers for bulbs that have only been hooked up for a few dozen hours or so, AND you are looking at SE bulbs running on HQI ballasts. To be fair, you must compare SE bulbs on e-ballasts and DE bulbs on HQI...thats how they were designed.

For example, you can compare a Ushio 10,000K SE to a 10,000K DE. with both on their PROPER ballasts (DE on HQI, SE on e-ballast), the output is the same. The longevity of the DE bulb is longer though. That is its advantage.

Now, you can cheat and say 'yeah, but I can put that 10,000K SE on a HQI ballast and get almost double the output!!! Wow! Yeah...you will...for a month or two. You are gonna burn that bulb out so fast... because yes...the HQI spec operates with more power. So a lower pressure bulb (SE) will respond with that much more output, but in the end, it gets worn out that much faster.

HQI/DE OTOH, was designed to run horizontal, and to be the eventual replacement for SE (so if you want something that is going to be around in the future, go DE), and its made to a higher spec. Even its pulse-start firing mechanism is better designed to ensure less wear and tear during starting.

"Hahn, I've run DEs and SEs, mostly on electronic ballasts. The SEs are brighter." -RichConley

Well, sure. Sanjay's figures back that up. DE bulbs werent designed to be run on electronic ballasts.

you know, there is a thread just like this started nearly every month, and the pros come sooner or later.

http://members.fortunecity.com/paulerik/id50.htm

bertoni · 07/13/2006, 01:40 AM

No, I wasn't looking at SE bulbs on HQI ballasts, as much as the name means anything. I looked at the numbers for an Iwasaki on the IceCap electronic ballast. The numbers for the HQI ballast are much higher. And I do believe that the bulb might not last as long, but I haven't seen any real data on bulb life.

The burn-in period is only about 100 hrs, but, as I said, I haven't seen any data on bulb life.

hahnmeister · 07/13/2006, 01:43 AM

The identical thread started 5/27...
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showth...68#post7474868

The identical thread started 4/27...
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showth...97#post7270397

And the thread from 3/21...
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showth...e&pagenumber=3

^^^read what Paul Erik wrote here.

"Probe start SE lamps are known for rapid light output loss over time."

Quit trying to tell this guy that SE bulbs are brighter... ask any lighting engineer who works with halides and they will tell you the same. The other problem with SE bulbs is that they tend to have a VIOLENT end-of-life. I cant tell you how many times I have had friends w/ their SE bulbs explode when the bulb got too old.

This is relative to the K rating of the bulb as well of course. A 10,000K will last longer than a 20,000K. So to say DEs suck because my 20,000K DE bulb went out before my 10,000K SE isnt fair. Also, there is a slew of cheap DE bulbs on the market, and you get what you pay for. The better ones will give you many times the longevity of the cheap ones. About the best 'in-between' I have seen is the pheonix 14,000K...more 450nm blue than a radium, but only 10% PAR loss after a year on HQI.

bertoni · 07/13/2006, 01:46 AM

Well, my DE bulbs showed a remarkable loss of light, too. I'd love to see some real data on bulb life.

The Grim Reefer · 07/13/2006, 02:01 AM

Unless you have room for the Lumerarc reflectors the DE's are going to get you more light than a SE if you spend the money for good reflectors.

hahnmeister · 07/13/2006, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by bertoni
Well, my DE bulbs showed a remarkable loss of light, too. I'd love to see some real data on bulb life.

A bunch of us are sending Sanjay our used bulbs so he can compare HQI vs e-ballast on DE and SE bulbs. A buddy of mine, ReeferAl here, sent Sanjay a bunch, and I am sending him Aqualine 10,000K DE bulbs that were either run on HQI or e-ballast. The speculation is that E-ballasts are worse for DE than HQI. When the time came to change bulbs, I noticed that the DE bulbs on the Icecap had shifted more than the ones on the HQI ballasts (compared to the new ones). I am also sending pheonix 14,000K bulbs that have been run either on HQI or e-ballasts for a year. I can tell you visually the HQI is still very bright, and the IC is looking dull.

jlcrandall · 07/13/2006, 07:25 AM

Since the 14k phoenix is so popular I'll ask this question. Hahn, Rich, Bertoni please all respond. Read a thread where almost everyone thought the DE 14k phoenix looked horrible and washed out most of the colors on HQI but looked awesome on E ballasts. If one of the big advantages of DE is bulb life, and E ballasts shift DE faster than HQI, what might a person look to for info on bulb life vs ballast and color rendition per bulb? I know Sanjay is maxed out!!! Also, since the HQI is driving the bulbs harder and giving out more PAR, how is this going to affect photoperiod.

Elvis

hahnmeister · 07/13/2006, 12:24 PM

The only way you can know for sure is to buy your own quantum/PAR meter. $300 for the apogee model.

Some of the things you are suggesting are relative. Yes, with some corals, the colors arent as vibrant. I would speciulate that this is due to the pheonix bulb having so little of its output in the 500-700nm range (the greens through reds)...so corals dont need as full a range of pigments to reflect these areas. The pheonix does have a very large blue spike, but w/o the purple spike that would bring out the greens and reds that alot of people talk about.

HQI/e-ballast is relative. The photoperiod/height over the tank/etc...these things are all determinted by your own situation. The HQI ballast does give it a fuller range (it brings up the 500-700nm range and so it looks more daylight than the blue/white of it being on an Icecap (I think the bulb looks too blue on e-ballasts, and just right on HQI personally). The idea of running the pheonix on HQI is how is was designed to be run anyways. Besides the 'ultra-blue' look that it gives on an e-ballast, I see no advantage to running this bulb on an e-ballast. I have had people take PAR readings of their pheonix bulbs after a year and only have about 10% drop in output. I havent done a reading on my own yet, but my 2 pheonix bulbs have been running on Icecap ballasts for the past year look visibly duller than the one on the HQI ballast. VERY visibly or I wouldnt rely on my eyes to draw conclusions at all until I get a proper meter. I swapped in a new bulb to compare the old HQI to the new...and they looked very similar. So the good news might be that this is a quality bulb that you can buy for cheap.

As for the coral coloration issues. Well, most 14,000Ks are 20,000K bulbs w/o the purple/actinic/420nm spike. This is also one of the spectrums that brings out reds and other warmer colors. Something that some other 14,000Ks do is have a good spike in the green range. This brings out the yellows and blues as well. If you look at a CCT chart, or just think about color addition/subtraction, you see why. What pheonix bulbs are is a very narrow peak at 450nm...and not a whole lot of everything else. This is what gives them their great, or somewhat sterile blue look. This also means that while corals grow great, they might not grow to the fullest color. I have also noticed this...I didnt know that there were others with the same problem. While I find corals like blue tortuosa and green milli look awesome under this bulb, others like bright blue milli, pink milli, bonsai, and even my ultra crocea clams dont 'pop' like they used to. Oh, but orange whorling cap, zoas, and pink birdsnest look awesome!

I added some T5 actinics. Actinics not only boost the purple range, but the reds as well, and really bring out the greens because many bulbs have a secondary spike in this range as well.
My corals are looking much better.

So my 'perfect combo' has been pheonix with actinic T5's. Otherwise, you are looking at buying a 20,000K bulb (say 'good-bye output').

manderx · 07/13/2006, 01:28 PM

Quote:

I have had people take PAR readings of their pheonix bulbs after a year and only have about 10% drop in output

cheap par meters are *worthless* at making this kind of measurement on reef bulbs. a daylight hort bulb maybe, but not a blue reef bulb.

i think people are getting too concerned with par. it's too complicated to simply say 'x is a better bulb because it has a higher par', which is what i see too many people do these days. for example, DE ab20K gets whomped by the p14 on paper. but i've seen it grow things just as fast or faster than the p14 (not my tank but in a friend's TOTM from a while back).

i used to have p14s on a bw7 and they dimmed and shifted big time at 6 months.

The Grim Reefer · 07/13/2006, 02:10 PM

I guess someone should tell JB_NY that his halide measurments tanken with a "cheap" PAR meter are worthless even though his results are in line with Sanjay's that were done with a spectrometer.

hahnmeister · 07/13/2006, 03:00 PM

Yes, in Sanjay's own comparison of the 'cheap' Apogee meter compared to the $1000 Li-Cor, the results were great for the Apogee. They might not show spectral shifting like the USB4000/650 I plan on getting (just have to make up my mind on which one), but they do show PAR with accuracy.

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/7/review/view

I think manderx might be confusing a Lux meter with a PAR meter here. Lux meters are almost useless for comparing halides, as their sensitivity to spectrums varies as our eyes do and so they dont measure blue very well. But a PAR meter takes an unbiased reading of all spectrums (or so its designed to).

And all the research has shown that spectrum isnt so important to corals as just output as far as growth is concerned. I went through a year or two thinking otherwise, experiencing things like you did manderx... but the reasons for my observations were not scientific in nature, and subject to other variables. For instance, changing from Aqualine 10,000K DE to a pheonix 14,000K DE caused a boom of coral growth in my tank and coloration that I had not had before. Well, as it turns out, it was because the 10,000K was in fact TOO BRIGHT and caused my corals to stunt and brown out. So sometimes too much PAR is a bad thing.

I hate to say it, but after years looking over data and making accurate tests and observations, as well as looking at test results from Riddle and the bunch, and conversations with Sanjay... PAR is the only number you need to be concerned with for growth. As for pigmentation, well...thats a whole other story, as more blue light will mean more blue pigments in the corals, etc.

My cousin uses AB 20,000Ks on HQI, and yes, he gets great growth as well, and killer coloration (best I have seen, better than a radium, right up there with my favorite 20,000K by EVC). He too was getting better growth than I was with my 14,000K for a while. But, as it turns out..there were reasons for this. His SPS were only 5-6" from the surface...mine were 2x this. He had better flow in this area of the tank...I did not. His pendants were hanging only 3-4" above the water surface...mine were 6-7" above the water surface. He was using a HQI ballast, and I was using a Icecap. So his really were growing better for a while....until he developed a phosphate problem at the same time I started running carbon (I never had until this point) and phosguard (just in case), and my growth rates were 2x his. Its all relative. Observations as such need to be made from controlled environments where other variables remain constant.

07/12/2006, 12:46 PM	#1
nengland Premium Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Springfield, VA Posts: 74	The quick and easy SE vs DE answer? I'm planng out some upgrades on my tank and want to go with halides. I don't though, know yet whether mogul or HQI's would suit my needs best. What's the quick/easy difference between the two other than the obvious physical differences and UV shielding on the mogul bulbs?

07/12/2006, 01:17 PM	#2
Travis L. Stevens Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Perry, OK Posts: 13,946	Not much. The HQI bulbs are usually slightly more intense. That's about it. You already know about the UV Shielding for HQI bulbs, HQI are smaller, SE bulbs have better reflectors, and both types of MH still run hot. __________________ Travis Stevens Current Tank Info: Restarting 28g Bowfront

07/12/2006, 02:36 PM	#5
RichConley Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Bostonian in Chicago going to DC Posts: 9,908	DE's put out slightly more light, but lose that from the UV shield needed. So SEs end up having more light for less energy. SOME (very few) of the DE bulbs are UV coated. Those ones will smoke an SE. The problem is, most of the DE reflectors have REALLY REALLY poor spread. __________________ NO TANKS!!!

07/12/2006, 03:40 PM	#7
bertoni RC Mod Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Mountain View, CA, USA Posts: 88,616	There's a wide range of efficiency in light output from bulbs. Currently, SE bulbs hold the top spots. This site has a lot of data: http://www.reeflightinginfo.arvixe.com/ As far as DE bulbs lasting longer than SE, I don't think there's any data to that effect, and my DE bulbs didn't last years. More like a year for the 20,000 K Hamiltons. There are good and equivalent reflectors for SE and DE. I have the Sunlight Supply Lumen Max 2 and like it. A good reflector is key. I don't believe that MH runs any hotter than any equivalent lighting system, really. What size tank are you trying to light? __________________ Jonathan Bertoni

07/12/2006, 04:57 PM	#9
bertoni RC Mod Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Mountain View, CA, USA Posts: 88,616	So I'd probably go for two bulbs, perhaps two 175 W Iwasaki bulbs, or 2 250 W bulbs. I like the SE choices better, but some of the DE are fine, too. There's a lot of personal taste involved in the coloration. For efficiency, there's a lot of data. __________________ Jonathan Bertoni

07/12/2006, 01:29 PM	#3
hahnmeister Moved On Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Brew City, WI Posts: 10,156	I can give you the long version if you desire, but it goes a little something like this... HQI ballasts run DE bulbs with more wattage and DE bulbs are built better (to handle the higher voltage) and can easily go years with a smalle percentage of decreased output. SE bulbs do better on e-ballasts like icecap and EVC, and even still they dont last as long simply because mogul socket bulbs were never intended to be mounted sideways. HQI/DE need the UV sheild, and SE has the sheild built in to the outer jacket. As far as reflectors go, the DE can be more efficient, but since SE have been around so long and dont need the sheild, there is a greater selection. I wouldnt say that one has better reflectors than the other...it just depends on what the goal is...but efficiency-wise, DE bulbs are capable of having more efficient reflectors made for them. I think what Travis is talking about with 'SE having better reflectors' is the famous 'Lumenarc3' reflector...which only comes in SE configuration and is one of the best reflectors out there. Recently, Sunlight Supply has come out with their version of DE lumenarcs called lumenmax3.

07/12/2006, 02:28 PM	#4
nengland Premium Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Springfield, VA Posts: 74	Years on a DE bulb? oh That would be a significant impact on long term cost. I hadn't even considered the bulb life. Assuming average use and electronic ballasts... how long on average would one expect a DE bulb to last? An SE bulb? -neil

07/12/2006, 03:19 PM	#6
hahnmeister Moved On Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Brew City, WI Posts: 10,156	"DE's put out slightly more light, but lose that from the UV shield needed. So SEs end up having more light for less energy." That depends on what is used for the UV sheild. Some companies have glass that is low-E and very thin. These do a great job at letting most of the light through. Some other companies skip the LoE and just use a thicker piece of regular glass...this does tend to cost some of the output. As for the idea that SEs make more light for less energy...well...thats sorta true. SE bulbs are often run on regular or electronic ballasts...DEs on HQI. Right there you are going to see DE outperforming SE...no contest. But I think what Rich is talking about is that sometimes people run their SE bulbs on HQI ballasts. For the first few months this combo DOES put out more light than anything. But its a bit like running your auto on jet-fuel... within a year, a SE bulb on a HQI ballast can lose up to 60% of its output. The DE bulb, which is HQI rated to withstand the higher power of the HQI ballast, can keep chugging along. There are many people running 10,000K DE bulbs for years on HQI ballasts, many losing less than 10% of their output per year. So in the long run, DE/HQI is brighter. I dont know how long SE bulbs on e-ballasts are supposed to last compared to HQI/DE combos, but it cant be nearly as long. Aside from the different power requirements, the SE bulbs just arent meant to be run horizontal...causing premature color shifting and degrading.

07/12/2006, 04:03 PM	#8
nengland Premium Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Springfield, VA Posts: 74	I'm trying to light a 65 gal tall. That's 36 inches in length. I'm comitted to two bulbs because there's a center brace and I don't want a nasty shadow.

07/12/2006, 05:02 PM	#10
RichConley Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Bostonian in Chicago going to DC Posts: 9,908	Hahn, I've run DEs and SEs, mostly on electronic ballasts. The SEs are brighter. DEs on HQIs are definitely brighter than SEs on electronics, but theyre also pulling 100+ watts more. __________________ NO TANKS!!!

07/12/2006, 05:56 PM	#11
nengland Premium Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Springfield, VA Posts: 74	Two 250 bulbs was what I was thinking. (w/o any supplementation) That would probably mean a 14k bulb? I want a crisp white light with little if any blue. A couple months ago some screenshots of the Coralvue Reeflex 12k caught my eye...

07/12/2006, 07:03 PM	#12
bcolvin Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Denver CO Posts: 286	off topic a little.... I have seen a two (granted in 8 yrs of reefkeeping) SE bulbs crack and keep running. These bulbs absolutely fried the snot out of the corals in the tank and the other in prop system. Under HQI's at least you know that there is a UV shied under the bulb. I know this a crazy example but this hobby has all sorts of weird problems. Bennett __________________ I am the Walrus

07/12/2006, 07:58 PM	#13
artilespm Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 136	I ran (2) 250 watt DE Phoenix bulbs on Bluewave IV electronic ballasts. I used the Reef Optix 3 plus reflectors. All this on the exact tank you have. Within a year, my SPS more than quadripled in size. I am upgrading to a 180 soon and will buy 1 more ballast and reflector to add to my arsenal. I must also say that I ran no supplemental lighting, no need for it with the 14Ks. The light is more on the blue side though.

07/13/2006, 01:40 AM	#16
bertoni RC Mod Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Mountain View, CA, USA Posts: 88,616	No, I wasn't looking at SE bulbs on HQI ballasts, as much as the name means anything. I looked at the numbers for an Iwasaki on the IceCap electronic ballast. The numbers for the HQI ballast are much higher. And I do believe that the bulb might not last as long, but I haven't seen any real data on bulb life. The burn-in period is only about 100 hrs, but, as I said, I haven't seen any data on bulb life. __________________ Jonathan Bertoni

07/13/2006, 01:43 AM	#17
hahnmeister Moved On Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Brew City, WI Posts: 10,156	The identical thread started 5/27... http://reefcentral.com/forums/showth...68#post7474868 The identical thread started 4/27... http://reefcentral.com/forums/showth...97#post7270397 And the thread from 3/21... http://reefcentral.com/forums/showth...e&pagenumber=3 ^^^read what Paul Erik wrote here. "Probe start SE lamps are known for rapid light output loss over time." Quit trying to tell this guy that SE bulbs are brighter... ask any lighting engineer who works with halides and they will tell you the same. The other problem with SE bulbs is that they tend to have a VIOLENT end-of-life. I cant tell you how many times I have had friends w/ their SE bulbs explode when the bulb got too old. This is relative to the K rating of the bulb as well of course. A 10,000K will last longer than a 20,000K. So to say DEs suck because my 20,000K DE bulb went out before my 10,000K SE isnt fair. Also, there is a slew of cheap DE bulbs on the market, and you get what you pay for. The better ones will give you many times the longevity of the cheap ones. About the best 'in-between' I have seen is the pheonix 14,000K...more 450nm blue than a radium, but only 10% PAR loss after a year on HQI.

07/13/2006, 01:46 AM	#18
bertoni RC Mod Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Mountain View, CA, USA Posts: 88,616	Well, my DE bulbs showed a remarkable loss of light, too. I'd love to see some real data on bulb life. __________________ Jonathan Bertoni

07/13/2006, 02:01 AM	#19
The Grim Reefer Ready for some NOBALL!!! Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Kingman Az Posts: 25,259	Unless you have room for the Lumerarc reflectors the DE's are going to get you more light than a SE if you spend the money for good reflectors. __________________ America, the way it outta be! Current Tank Info: 120 Starphire with Illudium Q-288 Photon Regurgitator DIY LED lighting

07/13/2006, 07:25 AM	#21
jlcrandall Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Westfield, Mass Posts: 20	se or de Since the 14k phoenix is so popular I'll ask this question. Hahn, Rich, Bertoni please all respond. Read a thread where almost everyone thought the DE 14k phoenix looked horrible and washed out most of the colors on HQI but looked awesome on E ballasts. If one of the big advantages of DE is bulb life, and E ballasts shift DE faster than HQI, what might a person look to for info on bulb life vs ballast and color rendition per bulb? I know Sanjay is maxed out!!! Also, since the HQI is driving the bulbs harder and giving out more PAR, how is this going to affect photoperiod. Elvis

07/13/2006, 12:24 PM	#22
hahnmeister Moved On Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Brew City, WI Posts: 10,156	The only way you can know for sure is to buy your own quantum/PAR meter. $300 for the apogee model. Some of the things you are suggesting are relative. Yes, with some corals, the colors arent as vibrant. I would speciulate that this is due to the pheonix bulb having so little of its output in the 500-700nm range (the greens through reds)...so corals dont need as full a range of pigments to reflect these areas. The pheonix does have a very large blue spike, but w/o the purple spike that would bring out the greens and reds that alot of people talk about. HQI/e-ballast is relative. The photoperiod/height over the tank/etc...these things are all determinted by your own situation. The HQI ballast does give it a fuller range (it brings up the 500-700nm range and so it looks more daylight than the blue/white of it being on an Icecap (I think the bulb looks too blue on e-ballasts, and just right on HQI personally). The idea of running the pheonix on HQI is how is was designed to be run anyways. Besides the 'ultra-blue' look that it gives on an e-ballast, I see no advantage to running this bulb on an e-ballast. I have had people take PAR readings of their pheonix bulbs after a year and only have about 10% drop in output. I havent done a reading on my own yet, but my 2 pheonix bulbs have been running on Icecap ballasts for the past year look visibly duller than the one on the HQI ballast. VERY visibly or I wouldnt rely on my eyes to draw conclusions at all until I get a proper meter. I swapped in a new bulb to compare the old HQI to the new...and they looked very similar. So the good news might be that this is a quality bulb that you can buy for cheap. As for the coral coloration issues. Well, most 14,000Ks are 20,000K bulbs w/o the purple/actinic/420nm spike. This is also one of the spectrums that brings out reds and other warmer colors. Something that some other 14,000Ks do is have a good spike in the green range. This brings out the yellows and blues as well. If you look at a CCT chart, or just think about color addition/subtraction, you see why. What pheonix bulbs are is a very narrow peak at 450nm...and not a whole lot of everything else. This is what gives them their great, or somewhat sterile blue look. This also means that while corals grow great, they might not grow to the fullest color. I have also noticed this...I didnt know that there were others with the same problem. While I find corals like blue tortuosa and green milli look awesome under this bulb, others like bright blue milli, pink milli, bonsai, and even my ultra crocea clams dont 'pop' like they used to. Oh, but orange whorling cap, zoas, and pink birdsnest look awesome! I added some T5 actinics. Actinics not only boost the purple range, but the reds as well, and really bring out the greens because many bulbs have a secondary spike in this range as well. My corals are looking much better. So my 'perfect combo' has been pheonix with actinic T5's. Otherwise, you are looking at buying a 20,000K bulb (say 'good-bye output').

07/13/2006, 02:10 PM	#24
The Grim Reefer Ready for some NOBALL!!! Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Kingman Az Posts: 25,259	I guess someone should tell JB_NY that his halide measurments tanken with a "cheap" PAR meter are worthless even though his results are in line with Sanjay's that were done with a spectrometer. __________________ America, the way it outta be! Current Tank Info: 120 Starphire with Illudium Q-288 Photon Regurgitator DIY LED lighting

07/13/2006, 03:00 PM	#25
hahnmeister Moved On Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Brew City, WI Posts: 10,156	Yes, in Sanjay's own comparison of the 'cheap' Apogee meter compared to the $1000 Li-Cor, the results were great for the Apogee. They might not show spectral shifting like the USB4000/650 I plan on getting (just have to make up my mind on which one), but they do show PAR with accuracy. http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/7/review/view I think manderx might be confusing a Lux meter with a PAR meter here. Lux meters are almost useless for comparing halides, as their sensitivity to spectrums varies as our eyes do and so they dont measure blue very well. But a PAR meter takes an unbiased reading of all spectrums (or so its designed to). And all the research has shown that spectrum isnt so important to corals as just output as far as growth is concerned. I went through a year or two thinking otherwise, experiencing things like you did manderx... but the reasons for my observations were not scientific in nature, and subject to other variables. For instance, changing from Aqualine 10,000K DE to a pheonix 14,000K DE caused a boom of coral growth in my tank and coloration that I had not had before. Well, as it turns out, it was because the 10,000K was in fact TOO BRIGHT and caused my corals to stunt and brown out. So sometimes too much PAR is a bad thing. I hate to say it, but after years looking over data and making accurate tests and observations, as well as looking at test results from Riddle and the bunch, and conversations with Sanjay... PAR is the only number you need to be concerned with for growth. As for pigmentation, well...thats a whole other story, as more blue light will mean more blue pigments in the corals, etc. My cousin uses AB 20,000Ks on HQI, and yes, he gets great growth as well, and killer coloration (best I have seen, better than a radium, right up there with my favorite 20,000K by EVC). He too was getting better growth than I was with my 14,000K for a while. But, as it turns out..there were reasons for this. His SPS were only 5-6" from the surface...mine were 2x this. He had better flow in this area of the tank...I did not. His pendants were hanging only 3-4" above the water surface...mine were 6-7" above the water surface. He was using a HQI ballast, and I was using a Icecap. So his really were growing better for a while....until he developed a phosphate problem at the same time I started running carbon (I never had until this point) and phosguard (just in case), and my growth rates were 2x his. Its all relative. Observations as such need to be made from controlled environments where other variables remain constant.