Another, slightly different approach to lighting... opinions wanted!

[Dwarfnut]

I'm getting ready to move into my new house in about 6 weeks and am working on some new stands for several of my tanks. I building custom canopies with them and want to equip them with enough lights to to some nice planted tanks. I stopped by the local Bulbs Plus store to see what they had for power compacts rather than ordering from a place like AH Supply and had an interesting discussion with one of the owners. He seemed to have quite a bit of experience with aquariums but did not like the power compacts very much. He said they put out a lot of light, but the spectrum was not optimal for growing plants. He said he had actually helped develop some new bulbs specifically for aquariums and they used different phosphors to get the right spectrums needed for plants. He said he should have the T8 test bulbs in the next week or so. those bulbs are not going to be real cheap, like $20 each, so I asked about a different option and just getting some Daylight bulbs at around a 6,500 K rating. Again, he told me they would not be the right spectrum, although they would probably work. He then suggested doing a mix of 50/50 of some 5,000 K bulbs and some actinic bulbs. He said he has had some really good success using this method for years. He's reasoning was that the 6,500 or 5,000 K bulbs do not have enough blue to voilet in them and you need the actinic bulbs to balance them out. He also suggested adding like one halogen buld that was specifically developed to provide a lot of red spectrum for places that grow like orchids and such and need to simulate different seasons. Since two of my tanks are already fitted with T12 and T8 bulbs, I thought I'd try the 50/50 approach... what do you guys think?

Also, he had some T10 bulbs that produce more light than a T12 but he said they use the same ballast... anyone heard of that before?

He also said the new design he was working on would be made in a T5 bulb that puts out way more light and you would only need one or two bulbs even for a fairly good sized tank. He said that 4 of the T5 bulbs would be the equivelent of using 400 Watts of Metal Halide light!!

So has anyone heard of these new technologies and such? I must admit, I am scepticle, but the guy seemed very knowledgeable and showed me lots of pieces and parts of things he was doing and has going in. I'm not sure I could ever afford the T5 stuff (like $35 for the bulb!), but the 50/50 stuff sounded like it might be worth a try.

Sorry so long-winded,

Thanks,
Bill C.

[SnakeIce]

there are lots of options when it comes to lighting... do you have planted tank expirience? maybe you could suggest testing his bulbs on a new set up of yours at a reduced price of course and talk it over with him as to what he is going to want in a field test

I know that some bulbs are better than others and the ones that are you don't have to have as many to get the same results

[blitzen25bm]

how serious are you, if you want tons of plants CO2 and everything like amano style then you might need some special lights otherwise if your just getting flourite and light CO2 you can probably do fine with some lights that are the right temp. i just used a 4ft double bulb shoplight with the highest K bulbs i could fine and did everything for about 35-40 bucks and its doing fine.

[RTR]

It the lighting guy is trying to push you toward hight color temp lights his experience is SW not FW, or he is not as knowledgeable as he thinks he is. The AHS PC lights at 5000K, 5300K, 6700K are excellent for growing FW plants, and the choice between them is personal preference in the "look" of the tank (cooler or warmer), not any difference in the way they grow plants. They are also more efficient than NO tubes. The guy is a salesman, not an expert.

[TwoTankAmin]

RTR always says it faster and better than I can. I would suggest you have this guy take a drug test before buying anything from him. When it comes to fw planted tanks, intensity is more important than spectrum.

I have a dozen planted tanks which use an assortment of bulbs including GE Plant&Aquarium and Triton fluorescents and several AH Supply power compacts. All do the job well but give a different look.

[Dwarfnut]

Thanks for the input... maybe I can fill in some more blanks.

First off, I'm not into the serious, high-tech stuff, just a nice planted tank that might use some DIY Co2 and such... just looking to get to about 2.5 wpg so I can do more plants. I have been doing planted tanks now for a couple of years with limited success, but right now the tanks are less than 2 wpg.

I wouldn't mind testing the new bulbs, but he's not sure he'll be able to get them in T12 or T8 sizes... right now just looking into T5. Since I don't run T5 now, I'd have to build a new setup a get new ballast ($$!), endscaps and all and that would be too much work for a 'test'. That's why I'm leaning more towards the mix of the 5,000K and actinic bulbs for my tanks.

He did talk alot about the differences between the SW and FW tanks and the requirements of each and how they are different. They was definitely some knowledge-base there! After we had been talking a bit, he was not really pushing the sales or anything, just trying to figure out what would best fit my needs and address that. It sounds like the new T5 bulbs and all would be a killer way to go for an all-out planted tank, but as I told him, the cost would be way up there and too much for me. That's when he was more than willing to show me and recommend the less $$ solutions of the 50/50 mix and how he has had real good success with that setup with a lot of his customers. One of his customers who supposedly uses that system is a proven show-winner fo both fish and tanks.

He is definitely not pushing towards the higher color for the FW, in fact, he said the 5,000 K with the actinic would do much better than the 6,500 K bulb. I've been using the 6,500 K bulbs because I like the look, but he says using the actinic plus the 5,000 K will get similiar results as the actinic bulb will add a lot of blues and give it that 'cool' look.

Looks like I'm going to try and add some actinic bulbs to my 40 gallon so there will be a mix of 6,500 K, a 5,500 K and two actinic bulbs. I'll post back the results if I get in done this weekend. If it looks good, then on to the 75 gallon, then the 20 gallon, then the other 20, then 10, then the....

Thanks again,
Bill C.

[jra]

Interesting that you should mention this. The plant specialist at my LFS suggested the same thing just yesterday (using an actinic bulb). She seems to be very knowledgable and has some beautiful, heavily planted tanks that she has set up and maintained. She told me that she always uses an actinic bulb (coupled with the more "standard" bulbs of course) for heavily planted tanks. Kind of suprised me because I've never heard of actinic bulbs being used for or suggested for freshwater plant growth. Anyways, I went ahead and bought an actinic bulb to try it out. So far, I like the look but it's obviously too soon to know how the plants will re-act. If anyone else out there has used actinic bulbs for freshwater plants, I would be interested in hearing about how it has worked out and how the plants have re-acted.

[Dwarfnut]

Well, I went back to talk to him some more yesterday and all I can say if that if he is full of BS, then I'll really be impressed that he pulled one over on me!! The guy obviously (to me anyway, and I'm no dummy!) knows what he is talking about when it comes to light bulbs. He has also had a lot of experience dealing with aquarium lighting both FW and SW. Some of the ideas he is coming up with are pretty neat and he plans to sell some kits such as AH does in the future. Right now, he is working with a supplier to get them to make the bulbs he wants in the spectrum he wants using the phosphors he wants... should be pretty cool! It will be sometime early next year before he can start selling the kits and such as right now he only has some test bulbs. He is going to get a spectrum analysis done on them to make sure they are what he wants and then order various sizes.

I did go ahead and pick up another ballast and some bulbs to add another set of T8 36" lights to my 40 gallon. I did pick up some actinic bulbs also and I gotta say, I really like the look of mixing the 'regular' 5,000 K or 6,500 K bulbs and the actinic!! It gives it a 'cool' look much better than the 6,500 K bulbs do, but colors are also more vivid and bright! Like jra said, the look is really awesome, but will have to wait and see if the plants like it!!

Bill C.

[JeffP]

I noticed the new T5 lights in a recent Drs F&S catalog. Other than being really low profile, I couldn't see the advantage of having more bulbs to get the same wattage compared with VHO/CF when considering that T5 bulbs were expensive. They seem to be the "new" thing but did I miss something?

[125gJoe]

All I can say is I'm so glad I could return my Actinics! Uuugh, what a 'washed out' look they had on my 80 gallon. Actinics and saltwater work well together.

Dwarfnut, can you post some pictures? I could be missing something here... I'd would be nice to see the effect the Actinics have on your set-up.

[Dwarfnut]

Jeff,
I was asking the same question... the reply I got did make some sense, but I would need to try it to believe it! The standard watt-per-gallon ratings on the plants were derived from the T12 bulbs. As technology has improved over the years, the bulbs have gotten better, ballasts more efficient and the light output greater. This happens by concentrating the phosphors into a smaller area, thus a smaller bulb. When you start going to smaller bulbs with more light output, the less bulbs you need and therefore, the traditional watt-per-gallon rules get thrown out. I can truly verify that the T5 bulbs put out a whole lot more light than the T12 bulbs!! I would not suggest you stare at the T5 bulb very long if at all because it really is that much brighter!! As an example, He said that using 4 4' T5 bulbs in the phosphors he has come up with, would be equal to using 400 Watts of metal halide lighting!! FYI, the 4' T5 bulbs are rated at 54 Watts. So you could have a ton of light for a lot less money, trouble and heat!

Anyway, I'll be keeping an eye on it over the next few months to see how the solutions progress and post back when something is available.

Bill C.

[DTs]

I have T5 lights on my 90g reef to supplement my 2x250w double ended halides, and a single 11000k T5 bulb is *extremely* bright. It seriously puts VHO to shame.

I'm not a T5 expert but I do know that part of the magic of these bulbs is in the fact that they are super skinny so the bulb doesn't get in it's own way when the light is reflected back into the tank. Obviously, you need a well-designed reflector. The Tek reflector does a fantastic job.

I'm setting up a high-tech 90g plant tank right now and I plan on using 4x39w T5's. The hood will be suspended over the tank and only 2" thick. Maybe I'll toss an actinic bulb in for curiosity sake. The actinic on the T5 is not like it's larger relative's (T12 - regular size flourescent). It's not as purple, but rather more blue, and brighter. For a marine tank, I actually prefer the look of a true actinic T12 bulb.

Supposedly these bulbs last at least a couple of years (true actual useable life). They're rated for several years, but for aquarium use, they probably should be changed at least every couple of years as the spectrum will change long before the eye can detect it.

[DIYMatt]

This is an interesting post.

Dwarfnut- If you go back to that lighting store see if that salesguy has any info on the lumens to watt ratio of those bulbs he his talking about. From my terrestrial plant growing days the total lumens always seemed to be the key. So, then the total number of lumens produced per watt of energy used was the key to the efficency of the bulb. SO, basically this guy is saying that a T5 flourescent bulb produces twice as many lumens per watt than a MH?? Are you sure he is not trying to sell you on an overdriven setup? I have read about people overdriving T5's and T8's to produce much more total light and much more intense light which is always beneficial. So, if he is talking about running those four 39w t-5's in a standard 2x overdriven setup, it should produce the same or a little more lumens than a MH, but using the same wattage, so almost a wash. He could argue the light is of a better spectrum than the MH, but thats always debateable. Also, IME most florescents and MH bulbs of equal wattage produce about the same amount of heat, always. In fact, NO flourescent seem to produce a little more because they are less efficent. The MH seems like it produces more heat because it is concentrated in a such a small spot. Ballasts may be a different story, I have seen MH ballasts that seem to produce way more heat than comparable flourescent ballasts.

Now, there are obvious advantages to having linear lights over a rectangular tank. But, I read a lot about lighting and I don't think lighting has come that far to double the efficency of CF or HIDS. They have just formed the bulbs in more effecient shapes and combinations of phosphors to make them more intense. But, from what I understand it is just because it is just the same amount of light is being produced in a smaller area, which is what made HIDS so far superior years ago.

I work for a Steelcase office furniture dealer. We sell a Steelcase light called underline that uses a T2 bulb. It is very bright for its size, it is about the diameter of a pencil. I believe that is something like a 18 watt bulb. I have contacted Steelcase to get all the specifics as ar spectrum, wattage, lumens etc. But, from a visual perspective it is much brighter than the three foot 25 watt T8 light I have on the other side of my station. More details to follow.

Matt

[Dwarfnut]

Yes, DTs, I agree that the T-5 bulb is a whole lot brighter than other flourescents and possibly the MH which I have no experience with. I also agree with DIYMatt in that the most important measurement is the lumens that are put out, not necessarily the amount of wattage. According to several sources, the wattage theory was designed and works well for standard T-12 bulbs, but probably not as well for the other bulbs.

I will ask if I can can get the rated lumens of each type next time I go to the store. He should also have some of the 'test' bulbs in by then.

Matt, The guy was also showing me a little fixture that had a pair of T-2 bulbs in it... probably about 12" long each. I could not believe the amount of light they put out!! He's going to check if he can get them built using the phosphors he wants to make a really nice aquarium bulb! Also, he is not talking about over-driving the bulbs, but using standard workhourse electronic ballasts to power them. The life span is much greater, but he still recommends replacing the bulbs after 1 year of use.

I'm not sure how the efficiency is rated or even measured, but he says that the smaller the bulb diameter, the more efficient they are. Also, do to the concentration of phosphors or something, the light just gets brighter and better the smaller the bulb!

Dts, I really recommend you try adding 1 or 2 actinic bulbs to the mix, I really liked the look! Right now I have 3 36" bulbs or various spectrum (5,000, 5,500, and 6,500 K) and 2 actinic bulbs and love the look. The plants seem to be responding better, but kinda early to tell for sure. These actinics are really blue, not purple, so the look is much more 'cool' than the SW actinic purple bulbs.

For now, I'm sticking with the T-8 bulbs since I have several more pairs of the water-proof ends to use up and really like the mix of the regular and actinic bulbs. The T-5 stuff he is working on is not quite ready and will be fairly expensive (by my standards!). For the new 55 gallon, I plan on doing 3 4' 5,000 T-8's and 2 4' actinic bulbs. This will be a medium planted tank with medium to low light plants.

Anyway, I'm certainly not going to try and debate which solution is better, but to simply throw out some other ideas and see how they work! Anyone else??

Thanks,
Bill C.

[DTs]

I have a lot of experience running different metal halide combinations, bulbs, ballasts, etc., for my SPS reef tank and the one thing that can be said is it can be very intense lighting. Very much so over flourescent, and even T5, especially if the tank is deep.

T5's are awesome simply because they can be set-up to reflect the light so much more efficiently. Much more so than regular T12 VHO, which is why it's so appealing.

At this point I would never trade in my Metal Halide set-up for T5's. If I see some quality data that shows light demanding , more difficult reef-building corals can be kept successfully, and nicely colored (purple, pink, blue, not just brown and green), then I'll gladly trade in my halides!

I have a feeling T5's are going to be extremely useful for planted tanks because the light spread is so much more even than metal halides, and you get more bang per watt from them versus VHO. This is why I'm going to get a T5 setup for my high-teck plant tank.

[RTR]

Lumens are a poor measure of light output for plants - lumens are scaled for the human eye, which is quite different from plants. Tubes with spectra not appearing or measuring very "bright" (=high lumen output) may be as efficient or more efficient for plants as more bright spectra.

[Dwarfnut]

I'm not suggesting that someone go out and replace their HID system with a new T-5 or anything, but mearly looking for opinions and feedback if anyone has heard of this before. In the case of setting up a new tank, I think one should give it a serious look before jumping right into an HID system.

From talking to several others that are pretty knowledgable about lighting and such, I think you will be seeing a lot more of the T-8 and T-5 stuff around! I agree that the T-5 stuff could get real popular with the aquarium industry as you get a lot more light in a much smaller space that is easier to control. It will just take time to get the right sizes and colors of bulbs, but I'd bet it is coming!

DTs, how soon will you be doing the T-5 system? I'll be moving in mid-December and after that will be setting up my new tanks and seriously considering the T-5 system.

Thanks,
Bill C.

[DTs]

Er, actually I just bought a HID system instead of the T5! :eek:

My tank is open top, braceless, so I definitely had to have something suspended. The T5 Tek hood is not of the same quality as the Giesemann Nova II 150w system, and I discovered I would be able to hang the Giesemann in a nicer fashion than the T5. Plus the T5 uses 4 bulbs at $20 a piece vs. $50 for a 6000k halide. The T5's probably last twice as long though, but that's ok. Also, the Giesemann only ways 5 lbs., and despite being bracketed to the wall, I can move the light up and down as well as horizontally.

I couldn't hang the T5 system from the ceiling as my bedroom ceiling is about 20' tall.

[Raithan Ellis]

Originally posted by RTR
Lumens are a poor measure of light output for plants - lumens are scaled for the human eye, which is quite different from plants. Tubes with spectra not appearing or measuring very "bright" (=high lumen output) may be as efficient or more efficient for plants as more bright spectra.

Correct, also the LUX would be the measurement wanted for measuring brightness for plants. Keep in mind the golden rule, when halving the distance between a light source and it's intended target, LUX will increase to 4x of what it was at when double that distance.

Cheers,
Raithan O. Ellis

[DIYMatt]

Errr...Ok, I stand corrected. I think I need to do some research and try to get some information to my terrestrial plant growing friends. Does anyone know of some useful sites where I could get some info on lighting and possibly some tests of various types of lighting? Honestly, I don't even really know what LUX is, or how its measured.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[DTs]

www.ReefCentral.com has a *ton* of information on lighting. Everything from how it's measured, intensity, lumens, lux, PAR (Photo Adaptive Radiation), different halide ballasts, etc., etc. There's a lot of truly expert advice.

[Raithan Ellis]

1 LUX = 1 lumen per square meter

It's a measurement of how bright the light is over an area, or actually how much light has actually travelled to the target point. Bulbs are also rated in lumens, however the lumens they are capable of putting out don't all reach the target, the intensity of light will diminish by the time light travels to it's target.

Also, lumens are not limited to merely what we can percieve through vision, rather a comprehensive measurement of luminosity throughout the entire spectrum.

Regards,
Raithan O. Ellis