pros and cons of LEDs

[DogFish]

Originally Posted by Jules

As to replacement costs - I guess that depends on what you're using. I don't know anything about T5s, but I use power compacts and they can be run until they die (mine average 5-6 years) and then replaced for around $30 (for 96W).

Jules I can provide a more Par with 36W of LED than I can with 78W of T5 florescent .You can dismiss that as negligible but old math /new math, American math/ Canadian math it's still and always will be 50% less electricity providing more light.

I am unaware of any florescent Compact or standard tube that is not losing substantial quality light levels after 6mos. Will it run for 5 years maybe, will it provided Par needed to grow plants? ... just not going to happen.

That's why just about every Aquarium and Hydroponic site recommends swapping out fluorescents at 6mos.

[Jules]

Originally Posted by DogFish

I am unaware of any florescent Compact or standard tube that is not losing substantial quality light levels after 6mos. Will it run for 5 years maybe, will it provided Par needed to grow plants? ... just not going to happen.

I'm familiar with the theory behind swapping out bulbs - but I quit doing it ages ago since I don't see any difference in the fullness, growth, colour or health of my plants when I do put a new bulb in. (I did back in the day when I was running old-style tubes, but not with compacts.)

I don't measure PAR and I don't worry about the spectrum - I just watch my plants, I figure they'll let me know pretty fast if there's a problem. My current bulb is going on year five (8 hour photo-period) and my plants are still growing beautifully with lots of nice red highlights. The tank is in a dark corner, so gets no natural light at all. But I don't grow anything all that tricky - Ludwegia, Hygro, some crypts.

[somewhatshocked]

What specific "look" do you mean? The shimmer effect? Color temperature? Something else?

I'm honestly interested in what you mean specifically because it's easy to have LED fixtures that produce lighting that looks the same as any other.

Originally Posted by Jules

Another con: some people (like me) just don't like how the light they produce looks aesthetically, so before you fork over the big bucks spend some time seriously looking at high-end LED lit tanks vs. high-end non LED lit tanks to make sure you're happy with the LED look.

[DogFish]

Jules - As long as you are happy with your light choice, that is really all that matters as you are the one that looks at the tank.

Personal ascetic observations just are not debatable.

My comments were not intended to be competetive, merely to provide the newer members with accurate info to help make an informed choice.

[Saltybob]

Coming from the reef side of lighting, LEDs produce a narrow spectrum and therefore have a lack of color where T5 bulbs a wider spectrum. Mixing of emitters can widen the spectrum but still have sharp drops in color.
That being said I will only run LEDs as the pros out way cons by far.

[BriDroid]

My Ray 2 is scheduled to be here tomorrow for my 72 gallon bow front. I'm excited about using LEDs over T5s or T8s. The smaller fixture was the winning point for me! I also like how they use less wattage and lower heat output. The UPS man is KILLING me right now! I want my light LOL!

[Jules]

Originally Posted by DogFish

Personal ascetic observations just are not debatable.

My comments were not intended to be competetive, merely to provide the newer members with accurate info to help make an informed choice.

Ascetic? Freudian slip from the LED devotee no doubt

Anyway, in the case of my last post it had nothing to do with aesthetics, and everything do with pointing out that your statement about kind of old florescent bulbs being incapable of supporting plants is just wrong. As I said before, I don't know anything about T5s, but I can tell you as a matter of empirical fact that my 5 year old power compact is growing my plants just as well as it did on day one. Is that because my plants aren't terribly demanding? Who knows, maybe - but clearly and old power compact bulb can grow Ludwigia and Hygro just great.

Originally Posted by somewhatshocked

What specific "look" do you mean? The shimmer effect? Color temperature? Something else?

I'm honestly interested in what you mean specifically because it's easy to have LED fixtures that produce lighting that looks the same as any other.

The light from LEDs just looks dead to me (which is perfect for moonlights or deep water effects, but doesn't work for me as sunlit shallow water).

It's not just a matter of the colour, mixing in various colours helps but doesn't get rid of the underlying deadness of the light. Maybe it's just the uniformity of the light they put out I'm reacting to, maybe it's the staccato-like spectrum - don't know exactly. It has something to do with how the light behaves though, since high-end LED systems look fine to me in pictures, just don't like them in real life.

[blink]

Originally Posted by Jules

Ascetic? Freudian slip from the LED devotee no doubt

Anyway, in the case of my last post it had nothing to do with aesthetics, and everything do with pointing out that your statement about kind of old florescent bulbs being incapable of supporting plants is just wrong. As I said before, I don't know anything about T5s, but I can tell you as a matter of empirical fact that my 5 year old power compact is growing my plants just as well as it did on day one. Is that because my plants aren't terribly demanding? Who knows, maybe - but clearly and old power compact bulb can grow Ludwigia and Hygro just great.

The light from LEDs just looks dead to me (which is perfect for moonlights or deep water effects, but doesn't work for me as sunlit shallow water).

It's not just a matter of the colour, mixing in various colours helps but doesn't get rid of the underlying deadness of the light. Maybe it's just the uniformity of the light they put out I'm reacting to, maybe it's the staccato-like spectrum - don't know exactly. It has something to do with how the light behaves though, since high-end LED systems look fine to me in pictures, just don't like them in real life.

I've never run power compacts over fresh water but I can tell you that an old power compact over a reef tank quickly creates an algae farm. By old I mean 6-12 month old bulbs vs new, the difference was shocking actually.
Based on my experience, using old power compacts is opening yourself up for potential problems.


I'm very much a fan of LED but I currently light my planted tank with compact fluorescent lights, a Philips daylight spiral in a brooder lamp. Growth is good and cost cant be touched by anything out there, I've got $30 into my setup including a timer and 3 spare bulbs.

[DogFish]

Originally Posted by Jules

Ascetic? Freudian slip from the LED devotee no doubt

Anyway, in the case of my last post it had nothing to do with aesthetics, and everything do with pointing out that your statement about kind of old florescent bulbs being incapable of supporting plants is just wrong. As I said before, I don't know anything about T5s, but I can tell you as a matter of empirical fact that my 5 year old power compact is growing my plants just as well as it did on day one. Is that because my plants aren't terribly demanding? Who knows, maybe - but clearly and old power compact bulb can grow Ludwigia and Hygro just great.

AESTHETIC... Not Ascetic. Hardly Freudian, Dyslexia + a Cataract = typos.

I don't doubt you can manage keep low light demand plants alive with tired old bulbs. I never posted "old florescent bulbs being incapable of supporting plants ", I posted about loss of PAR. I believe you did understand my meaning as you posted " don't measure PAR and I don't worry about the spectrum " Twisting the meaning of my posts is weak and beneath you.

There is a major difference between Survive and Thrive. Unless you can produce some independent test data you don't have an "empirical fact" you have biased personal opinion.

What I can believe happened is you had way more light (PAR) levels that you needed in the beginning, it's degraded over the years as ALL florescent tubes do, and now you left with enough to keep the plants alive.

[Lia]

I use the flourescent power compact bulbs and wow they are bright and my vals have taken off like crazy in the short time which I have had them but the bulb fixtures look bit lame and ONLY due to that am I looking at LED but if the fixture doesn't bother you, the bulbs are great (White light type).
This is a 36 inch long, 30 gallon tank and 2 -13 watt bright white bulbs, I found the daylight type gave off to much of a blue tinge.

[nalu86]

Originally Posted by Lia

I use the flourescent power compact bulbs and wow they are bright and my vals have taken off like crazy in the short time which I have had them but the bulb fixtures look bit lame and ONLY due to that am I looking at LED but if the fixture doesn't bother you, the bulbs are great (White light type).
This is a 36 inch long, 30 gallon tank and 2 -13 watt bright white bulbs, I found the daylight type gave off to much of a blue tinge.

Those are CFL's not PC bulbs.

CFL= Compact fluorescent light
PC= Power Compact

with the daylights, do you mean the ones from HD 5000K's?
Costco has the 6500K's, in what is it 17 or 18watts.

And LED's as lighting for aquariums and my aquaponics... Still looking for that good payed job...

[Lia]

Originally Posted by nalu86

Those are CFL's not PC bulbs.

CFL= Compact fluorescent light
PC= Power Compact

with the daylights, do you mean the ones from HD 5000K's?
Costco has the 6500K's, in what is it 17 or 18watts.

And LED's as lighting for aquariums and my aquaponics... Still looking for that good payed job...

Thanks I do not know much about lighting.

These were just called 'Bright white' from eco-smart ,came in plastic package with red label, the same company makes 'day light' bulbs with blue label.

Got them at Home depot.


I tried the 'day light' but to much of a blue tinge so used them in garage.

They are 13 watts and according to package give off light output of 60 watts.

I do not know anything about lumens,etc but just know the plants are taking off with these bulbs and very bright.

I find the light thing rather confusing and will just use this till I figure out what LED is good for this tank.

The LED systems I was looking at come with lunar lights and do not want that, want this light spectrum but again the light dome look , isn't the best look which is why want to change it.

[jester56]

Originally Posted by BriDroid

My Ray 2 is scheduled to be here tomorrow for my 72 gallon bow front. I'm excited about using LEDs over T5s or T8s. The smaller fixture was the winning point for me! I also like how they use less wattage and lower heat output. The UPS man is KILLING me right now! I want my light LOL!

FWIW, I've got two Ray 2's on my 50 Gal acrylic and I love them. I had a little problem with algae. But with some direction from forum members, I've gotten it under control by cutting the "on" time and a few other tips. They ARE bright! You should like them.

[Jules]

Originally Posted by DogFish

AESTHETIC... Not Ascetic. Hardly Freudian, Dyslexia + a Cataract = typos.

Likely story. Your "slip" was clearly a subconscious manifestation of your deep seated conviction that I'm wilfully depriving myself of the pleasures of the diode.

I never posted "old florescent bulbs being incapable of supporting plants ", I posted about loss of PAR. I believe you did understand my meaning as you posted " don't measure PAR and I don't worry about the spectrum " Twisting the meaning of my posts is weak and beneath you.

No. No, NO, NO! I can't cope with invalid arguments (we all have our cross to bear).

• You said a 5 year old bulb will not provide “the Par needed to grow plants.”
• If a bulb does not provide enough X to grow plants, then that bulb is unable to grow plants.
• “Unable to support plants” (what I said) is just another way of saying “unable to grow plants.”

Don't make me post the laws of logical entailment, man, 'cause I'll do it.

There is a major difference between Survive and Thrive. Unless you can produce some independent test data you don't have an "empirical fact" you have biased personal opinion.

1. Opinion? Oh come on - tell me it’s not glaringly obvious whether a plant is merely “surviving” vs. “thriving.” I bet you a bucephalandra you could tell from across the room with both hands tied behind your back.

2. Fine, empirical this: two days ago I had to trim 6"-8" off my Hygro. A month before that I had to trim to 6"-8" off my Hygro. Two months before that I had to trim 6"-8" off my Hygro. And so on for as long as I’ve been growing the stuff - 6"-8" needs to come off every month.

What I can believe happened is you had way more light (PAR) levels that you needed in the beginning, it's degraded over the years as ALL florescent tubes do, and now you left with enough to keep the plants alive.

Could be, if by "alive" you mean "continue to thrive" (but this wouldn’t change the fact that your statement about my old bulb being unable to grow plants is simply wrong (just thought I’d point that out )).

But since even my current old bulb causes my Ludwigia’s leaves to go very red as it approaches the surface; if a new bulb really supplies dramatically more energy wouldn’t you expect the near-surface leaves to burn to a crisp every time I put a new bulb in?

[DogFish]

Jules - Thank you for reminding me to be to be more precise in my writing. I acknowledge I presented my thoughts on the effective service life of CFLs in too broad and general terms.