Luminarcs -- Excellent!

[just dave]

You can use your sockets you just can't use your socket bases.

[szwab]

the bracket that goes with the reflector allows you to center the bulb both vertically and horizontally. it comes with sockets. trying to configure something would be more painful than paying an extra 15.00 bucks IMO

not sure why there was such a large difference in price in the earlier post.

[Big E]

koz,

That's cool............my original point was paying $45 more would be easier than trying to retrofit what you have. I was under the "false" assumption you would sell your current reflectors & sockets to eat up some of that cost of three lumenarc moguls + reflectors.

In all honesty I don't see how you can't make out fine this way...... hey it's your tank & money. I just hate trying to half azz retro stuff especially when I stink at DIY type projects like this.
$45 is a small price to pay......good luck.

[thetedinator]

Grim,

What did you use to make the frame the lights are mounted in?

Thanks,

Ted

[mikeo1210]

Originally posted by grim
Great proof of the quite obvious superiority of 400w SE lamps when paired with a quality reflector.

jb

All that pic tells me is the spread appears greater. You can't tell anything about the PAR by looking at a picture. The DEs just may be more intense directly under the bulb.

[mikeo1210]

Originally posted by copps
I got five for the price of three for sending Dustin a box of frags... there is no debate that these reflectors rock... merlock the light leaking through has got to be literally less than 1/10th of 1%... way less than most SE reflectors... Sanjay Joshi is coming by this weekend, and if you're not sold on these you haven't seen his 500 gallon completely covered by just four of these unsupplemented... expensive up front but when you consider their effectiveness they truly bake... nice Bartlett's by the way Graham...

Sanjay runs these? 400w?

[Leishman]

Yes he does. 400w XMs w/NO actinic

[mikeo1210]

Originally posted by Leishman
Yes he does. 400w XMs w/NO actinic

About your pic... Were both the DEs and the SE on magnetic ballasts?
How about age of bulbs, type, temp etc. The spread appears far greater from the LA3. Too bad you didn't have a lux meter for that experiment.

I had always thought the DE would be more concentrated (where you want it) and just spread less. Suppose the DEs could have gone quite a bit lower too.

[RedEyeReef]

Originally posted by Leishman
Yes he does. 400w XMs w/NO actinic

Which XM's 10K or 20K?

[mikeo1210]

nm

[mikeo1210]

Originally posted by RedEyeReef
Which XM's 10K or 20K?

I'd imagine 20k if he said "no supplemental".

Still dying to hear more about that DE vs. LA3 setup. Sure would like to see more comparisons.

[Leishman]

He uses 10Ks


On my photo:
The left side is 2 ReefOptixIIIs with 10K DE bulbs by AB
The right is 1 SE 10k XM in the DL03.

On a tank my size (65x36x24) I need spread, 250's in ROIIIs will not cut it, I'd need 6 or 8 to do the job of three DL03's I have now. You just can't see how good these things are in a picture.

[Leishman]

Oops!

The DEs were on an IceCap 250w E-ballast.
The SE is on a Blueline 400w E-ballast.

The photo is deceptive as to the left being higher. It is but only by 1".

I'm only trying to show how the DL's work better for ME, they are not the right option for everyone.

[mikeo1210]

Originally posted by Leishman
I'm only trying to show how the DL's work better for ME, they are not the right option for everyone.

I appreciate you showing it. Surprised at the difference.

[copps]

Originally posted by mikeo1210
Sanjay runs these? 400w?

As Leishman says yes he does... his reflector testing put them on the map... I also used the ROIIIs on my old 65 (click my www red house link) on an 18 inch wide 65 and loved them.

Having used and been happy with both Lumenarcs and ROIIIs, I'd say that any tank 24" wide or wider is wasting light by not using Lumenarcs. For tanks 18" wide or smaller the ROIIIs work great, or possibly the smaller LAs now being produced again...

It's not a complex issue... both the LAs and the ROIIIs work on the principal that light is not allowed to escape anywhere but down, unlike many common reflectors like the spiders...

Don't think anything about Leishmans photo... he's a Brit . In reality Rik's a very good friend and my wife refers to him as my second wife and claims he speaks with me more than she does .

Here's a photo from Saturday with me and Sanjay in front of my new system (upgraded from old 65) in our new house. We spent the entire day together exchanging information until almost midnight... I even missed meeting the wife and family at a comedy club . You'll notice that Sanjay's articles are mainly factually based, and he does not get into many of the controversies and offer his opinions in his articles (rightfully so!). It is great to pick his brain though and get his opinions in person... The photo is washed out, but my new system is lit by 3 XM 400 10ks in LAs supplemented with VHO actinics... corals are still settling in after the stressful move three months ago...

[nbd13]

Ok copps we need more pics now! haha!

start a new thread!

Nick

[Leishman]

You opened the flood gates now John!!!

[copps]

No YOU opened the flood gates with that LA ROIII comparison you posted. Once my colonies recover from being chopped up for Leishman's frags I'll start a thread. Seriously, I was going to get around to that this weekend... but now I see Dr. Mac has a sale... hmm...

[Leishman]

Road trip?

[mikeo1210]

Originally posted by copps
Having used and been happy with both Lumenarcs and ROIIIs, I'd say that any tank 24" wide or wider is wasting light by not using Lumenarcs.

What have you noticed in terms of growth between the two or is it too early to tell?

The one "hanger" for me is changing bulbs twice a year vs. once but my new setup will be 30" wide so I'm considering them.

[nbd13]

I think you corals Look FINE! start a thread this weekend! i cant wait anymore!

haha!

Nick

[Kreeger1]

tagging along

[copps]

Originally posted by mikeo1210
What have you noticed in terms of growth between the two or is it too early to tell?

The one "hanger" for me is changing bulbs twice a year vs. once but my new setup will be 30" wide so I'm considering them.

It's too early to tell on growth, but the one thing I have noticed that is nice is that the Lumenarcs not only spread the light out, but cast light on more of the coral surface area resulting in more color saturation on more of the coral and less dull colored area common to the areas nopt receiving direct light. A bit hard to explain, but you get more of the "top down color" by these throughout the coral by the fact that they turn one point light source (the bulb) into a large area cast out with high PAR (like the sun).

Not sure what you mean about changing bulbs... my old DE ushios last as long as the SE XMs... about a year.

If your new system is 30" wide Mike I wouldn't even consider it... these LAs are it for wider systems... Sanjay goes through just about every reflector and bulb on the market, and if you hung out with him for 10 minutes and saw the coverage 4 LAs give the Penn State 500 (8'x30" wide, leaving no dim spots throughout the tank) you'd be sold.

Mike if I were you I wouldn't even consider the DE 250s for your 30" wide system... you'd need double the amount of these over LAs, resulting in more initial cost and more of a cost to run in both electricity and bulb expense. Again for 18" wide systems I loved my DE ROIIIs, although the mini Lumenarcs are very nice now that they're making them again...

[mikeo1210]

Thanks John. I don't know much about SE bulbs but someone I knew changed 'em every six months. Didn't think they had the same life.

[copps]

Yeah SE bulbs run the gammit... some (like 20k radiums) are most often changed after 6 months, while some (like 6500k Iwasakis) last 2 years or longer... most 10ks (SE and DE) I've used last a full year before I switch them... I don't use a light meter or anything, just following along with both Sanjay and JBNY...