• Folks, if you've recently upgraded or renewed your annual club membership but it's still not active, please reach out to the BOD or a moderator. The PayPal system has a slight bug which it doesn't allow it to activate the account on it's own.

Which bulb has the best par

J

JRodrig692

Seems that the Iwaski 14K has moved to the fore front on the par scene, but they only make the 175 and 400, which works for you.

The XM 10K has always been at the top also with the Actinic supplement.

AS we all know the Iwaski 6500 is king, but we all know the issue with the color.

What ballast do you plan on running them on?

On an Icecap ballast seems that the XM 10K tops out, AB, Ushio, CV, Hami. As for the 12K some people state that it is a bit dim, not until you get to the 400 is it good.

As for PAR, personally think that it is overrated. The spectrum needs to be taken into consideration also and all bulbs burn at different levels. Also important are stable parameters. Have unstable or wrong parameters and no matter what bulb you have, growth will cease.

Color is also going to influence you. Seems that the Reeflux 12K seems to bring out more of the purples/bluish tint compared to the Hami bulb.
 
C

Carlo

PAR does takes into consideration all bands of light that cause photosynthesis (400 to 700 nm range). It's not a measurement at any set wavelength which is why many people rely on this value.

I certainly don't think it's the "perfect" rating to base a light purchase on since it doesn't weigh the bands according to how they could get used, but it's something you can use to help get an idea of the bulb itself. Surely photosynthetically useable radiation (PUR) numbers would be much more helpful.

JRod, not looking for a debate, but I'm curious why you think PAR is over rated? Based on the type of published info out there on different bulbs, what do you normally look for besides PAR when you are selecting a bulb?

What other suggestions would you give to someone looking to buy new bulbs?

Thanks,
Carlo
 
J

JRodrig692

No problem Carlo, happy to share my views.

The overrated thing is something that I feel. I have seen one too many questions over on RC of new people starting that seem to place all of their focus on bulbs and not pay attention to anything else. If you look around at alot of these online vendors, not many are using the XM 10K going for the PAR, they are after a look. 20K radium seems to be choice in the 400W, and these bulbs grow coral too.

I feel that before people focus on the bulb, they need to have the tank in check. Too many people write up about algae problems, corals dying, but hey they have a bulb with the highest par. Corals will grow under any bulb, you need to provide them an environment to grow in. A bulb is not the do all end all.

When people ask what bulb to get, I tell them its a look that your after, because if you want PAR, its the Iwaski 6500K and end of story. But the moment that thing turns on, every is running for the hills because the tank does not "look" the way they wanted it to.

Again, these are my points after doing all this reading about lights and other peoples tanks.

Again this is me. We all have our feelings on many different things, skimmers best-worst, DSB-BB, and it goes on.

As for suggesting bulbs, I tell people to see other tanks and go from there. Lighting is important, but there are alot of things to focus on also.

Ok, end of the long winded answer...
 
H

hayabusa2003

The efficiency of the bulb is also directly related to the ballast you are running. Sanjay has a web site where he publishes different PPFD values for different bulbs/ballast combinations. I like that he publishes the PPFD value, instead of PAR, since this is a more accurate measure of what your livestock is receiving, not just what the bulb is cranking out. You'd be surprised at the variation in output using the same bulb but different ballasts. You'll even see that if you run a 14K bulb on a certain ballast, the spectral chart actually shows the bulb is outputting in the 12-13K range.

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

I spent hours on this site playing with combinations before I made my choice :) Icecap 175MH with Iwasaki 15K. Great color, PPFD rating higher than some 250 bulbs without the heat problems and electricity bill :)
 
M

mott768

Guy's thanks for the responces but Dr Sanjay did a study with a light meter on the bulbs, if you read my post, I posted the link to the results of his study but I don't know what the numbers mean, that is why I ask if someone knows how to read them to please let me know which of the 2 bulbs had the better par. I really did not want this post to turn into a debate over differant brands and spectrum's or tank parameters. There is nothing wrong with my tank just looking to get more color. I have seen tanks with phoenix 14K and liked the look but they don't make a SE 14k bulb, so the closest I have heard to the phoenix is Hamiltons 14. As for the 12k reeflux, I use them on my other tank, I like them but I am curious to see how differant the par is between the 2, if it's not to far off I was going to try the Hamiltons.
 
C

Carlo

Sorry Mott,

I tried to take a look at his results for you with the link you provided to make up for derailing the thread but I didn't see any Reeflux bulbs listed.

The XM 175W 10000K SE 1 with the Icecap 175W Electronic ballast has a PPFD of 70
The Hamilton 175W 14000K SE 1 with the Icecap 175W Electronic ballast has a PPFD of 48

So based on the PPFD the Hamilton is going to have considerable less then you currently have.

Wish I could have been more help on this.

Carlo
 
M

mott768

No biggie jrod ;D I always hated trying to choose bulbs, you never really know if you like them until you use them on your own take. The only reason I'm worried about the par is my clams, they are in my sand bed and I don't want to stress them too much when I switch bulbs, but now I'm wondering if I should try the Iwasaki according to the numbers I see.
 
M

mott768

Carlo said:
Sorry Mott,

I tried to take a look at his results for you with the link you provided to make up for derailing the thread but I didn't see any Reeflux bulbs listed.

The XM 175W 10000K SE 1 with the Icecap 175W Electronic ballast has a PPFD of 70
The Hamilton 175W 14000K SE 1 with the Icecap 175W Electronic ballast has a PPFD of 48

So based on the PPFD the Hamilton is going to have considerable less then you currently have.

Wish I could have been more help on this.

Carlo
Click to expand...

Thanks Carlo, the reeflux bulb is listed under coralvue who is the manufacturer of them. So if I understand it correctly the higher the number the better is that right ?
 
H

hayabusa2003

Mott,

both PAR and PPFD measure irradiance levels, and the higher the better. There are a few differences, but the one I want to point out is that PAR is measured at the source (bulb), and PPFD is measured at the target. Seeing the PPFD is more useful to me, since i want to know how much light my coral is receiving, vs how much the bulb is cranking out. Kinda like knowing I have a 300-HP motor, but what I really like to measure is how much HP is getting to my tires!

I have a clam on my sandbed using the Iwasaki, and it's doing fine. It would do alot better with a calcium reactor .. :) The color is a crisp white light with slight blue tint.

The downside of Iwasaki is that it's 20-30% more than other bulbs. But hellolights is having a sale and free shipping...fyi.

I had a friend that had hamiltons, and he switched to Reeflux and prefers it. He said the color on his corals looked better.

Hope this helps!
 
M

mott768

Thanks hayabusa2003,
I like the reeflux 12k's also but I'm just concerned that the clams wont receive enough light since the ppfd is considerably lower than the 10k XM's I'm currently running.
 
C

Carlo

mott768 said:
Thanks Carlo, the reeflux bulb is listed under coralvue who is the manufacturer of them. So if I understand it correctly the higher the number the better is that right ?
Click to expand...

The XM 175W 10000K SE 1 with the Icecap 175W Electronic ballast has a PPFD of 70
The Hamilton 175W 14000K SE 1 with the Icecap 175W Electronic ballast has a PPFD of 48
The Coralvue ReefLux 175W 12000K SE 1 with the Icecap Electronic ballast has a PPFD of 40

You probably already know that by now however.

You're going to take a bit hit on "energy" hitting the corals with the bulb change to either one of them. But as JRod pointed out earlier, it's not all about PAR. It's got to look good or what's the point right?

I was just reading the article JRod gave and the Iwasaki 175W Aqua2 14000K had great PPFD numbers but according to the article is only available in a Mogul Base. That got me thinking so I checked what Iwasaki had available in singled ended bulbs and found this:

Iwasaki 175W 15000K SE 1 with the Icecap Electronic ballast has a PPFD of 86.

That's even more PPFD then you have now. I don't know anything about the bulb or if it's to blue for you but it might be worth checking into. If it's not to blue then you actually gained PPFD over what you have now instead of loosing it with the other two bulbs.

Worth a check,

Carlo
 
M

mott768

Carlo,
I noticed that with the Iwasaki bulb, now I'm thinking of trying it, I just hope it's not as blue as the 15K XM (I really don't like the color)if it's closer to the reeflux 12k then it would defiantly give it a try. It's a lot more expensive so I'm very hesitant on giving it a try.
 
C

Carlo

Have you tried posting a thread on ReefCentral asking for comparisons on the bulb color?

I'm sure there has got to be a few people who could give you and idea how blue it is.

I'd be concerned also (not a blue fan myself) with it rated at 15K but with that amount of output I'd definitely want to explore the option.

Carlo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top