HQI recommendations

[Russ]

I'm setting up a new SPS/clam tank - Oceanic 75 RR. I know lighting has been beaten to death :rolleyes: So, please don't flame me. I'm hoping someone would have sound suggestions/opinions on the following (perhaps even from experience with this size tank).

Q1: Dual 150 watt 10K DE OR Dual 250 watt 10K DE? Would the 150's really be enough? Kind of worried about the electric bill.

Q2: Which pendant(s) would provide adequate spread? Or, do I really not have to worry about light spread on the bottom of a 75?

Thanks in advance. -Russ

[Russ]

Thanks MugenMan! :) I was just getting nervous when I heard people raving about the 250 watt DE bulbs over their tanks. I thought I was missing the boat! Suspected 2x250 might be "too much" for this size tank.

Anyone have thoughts on the spread of mini-pendants?

[manderx]

i have a 2x250 over a 50 gallon, nothing seems to think it's too bright. i kinda wish i had gone with a 2x150 so i could get the 20K bulbs, though once i upgrade my tank (which has always been the plan) i'll need the 250's i'm sure...

[bowfront]

I went through the same decision you are making a few months back for my 72g. Ultimately I picked 2x150w DE and I'm really happy with it. These seem plenty bright for tanks our size and when supplimented with VHO actinic the color is fantastic IMO. My SPS is looking great and coloring nicely. If you are interested in keeping power consumption down don't fret about the 150's they are powerfull little fireballs.

[porthios]

i have 2 250w hqi 10kk ushios over my 75gal. i just got them about three weeks ago. i can't really say if it's too much light as i just got my first coral (green open brain) and it hasn't had time to let me know one way or the other. i think it's cool because i never have to turn on the basement lights anymore ;)

i have noticed that my fish tend to hang out in the shade when possible..

[Russ]

Okay, so I guess what people are saying is that dual 150 watt AB 10K DE's would be enough for my 75 SPS/clam tank... BUT the dual 250 watt AB 10K DE's would probably be BETTER and not overkill? :confused:

Reefsun/Reefstar pendants sound like they get the best light spread.

Depth to the bottom will be 18" to 19", considering that I'll have a DSB. Hmm.... decisions, decisions... 150's or 250's?

[porthios]

forgot to mention, i have the reefstar pendants. someone will know the answer to this i'm sure but if you got the 250w pendants and decided it was too much light.. couldn't you just replace the bulbs with 150w?

might be a cool way to go.

[Russ]

I'm pretty sure the bulb holder's are different sizes on the 150 DE's and the 250 DE's.

Porthios, definately keep me posted on how the green open brain handles the 250's... It will probably be another month until I actually get funds together to afford this stuff!

;)

[bowfront]

The 150w and 250w DE's are not interchangeable. What you select is what you get period. I'm using an AB aquastarlight future and its a great fixture. The aquaspacelight which is a little wider would also work on your tank. Not looking to confuse you but I would check into these fixtures also. Do a search on this board and you will find may happy users.

[Russ]

A good point... increasing wattage is likely not linearly related to PPFD output (and varies by bulb type and color temp anyway).

150 DE's probably are a "better bang for the buck" then. Heck, I can always add another 150, if I don't like the growth I'm getting.

Any idea when Sanjay Joshi (or others with the right equipement) might do comparative testing again. Of course things are always muddled with regard to whether the UV shield is used in testing output of the bulbs. I believe when Sanjay compared 250 watt bulbs, he tested the DE's w/o the UV shield, making "real world" comparison's a little difficult. Still, Sanjay has provided a GREAT service, for which we're all extremely grateful! :D

[Russ]

Yeah, I did look at the Aquaspacs-lights. They seem great, but a little expensive. Hmm... maybe not once I add up all the costs.

Plus, I'd like to build a canopy (being a DIY'er), and it might be harder to mount the space-light fixture inside, compared to a couple of pendants.

[Jay Fortay]

how much are those pendants that you mentioned. and by the way has anyone heard of ChampionLighting.com . :D

[Russ]

Thanks Mugenmantoo... Those Gieseman pendants DO look nice! Probably better spread than reefstar.

[Russ]

MM, how high are you hanging those pendants for that kind of spread?

I'm thinking I'll build an open-topped canopy, with just one beam accross the top to suspend the pendants from.

[Jay Fortay]

Could you add actinics to that pendant (the 250 one) ? if not where could you get one with halides and actinics for a decent price? :rolleyes:

[Squidman]

You forgot to mention the sunburn on your flame (flaming) hawk! :smokin:

[Jeremy B.]

Mugenmantoo....

I'm about 99% sure that the 150DE bulb that Sanjay tested was WITHOUT a UV shield. The 250DE bulbs he tested were WITH a UV shield. Of course you're going to have ~fudged~ numbers in this kind of comparison you are making.

Side by side looks comparisons, a 250 DE blows away a 150 DE. Not sure about exact numbers, PAR/PPFD, because no one has tested both bulbs in the same settings.

Just wanted to clear things up a little. HTH

[opihi]

i can't vouch for the 150W, but i have a single 250 DE over my 50gal. it's plenty bright. nothing really complains, frogspawn, open brains, leathers, clams. i have good growth and no heat issues with the PFO mini-pendant.

mugenmantoo: there was a thread that said the 150W was without UV shield... did joshi perform new tests (any link?)? thx.

jeff

[africangrey]

wondering if I can just get the Geismenn's pedent alone , I think spectrum wise, AB 10K bulb is much superior than the Ushio, and Ice Cap's HQI eballast will prolong the the life the bulb than the tar driven bulb.
-A

[Jimbo]

Russ, a single 150w DE HQI fixture is PLENTY of light for clams. I had a 92 corner with a single AB 150w, and my maxima was as happy as a....well...a clam!! I also had a 96 watt smarlite actinic, which made the color look better, so add that to the tally I guess. You certainly don't need two 150's though, overkill.
Feel free to drop me a line.
Jim

[SawCJack00]

MM, what makes you say the the Gieseman product is superior tto the Aquaspace light? They appear to be almost identical.

[bowfront]

Originally posted by Jeremy B.
Mugenmantoo....

I'm about 99% sure that the 150DE bulb that Sanjay tested was WITHOUT a UV shield. The 250DE bulbs he tested were WITH a UV shield. Of course you're going to have ~fudged~ numbers in this kind of comparison you are making.

Side by side looks comparisons, a 250 DE blows away a 150 DE. Not sure about exact numbers, PAR/PPFD, because no one has tested both bulbs in the same settings.

Just wanted to clear things up a little. HTH

Actually to clear things up Sanjay tested a 250w DE bulb without any reflector or UV shield as specified in this (http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/1999/dec/features/2/default.asp) article. He found the 250w DE (reportedly Ushio 10k although article doesn't mention brand) to have a PPFD of 128.8. In his more recent article in Marine Fish and Reef annual 2002 edition he tested a 150w DE (AB 10k) within a PFO mini pendant. He found this bulb to have a PPFD of 246 with a magnetic ballast and 210 with an electronic ballast. I'm in no way suggesting that a 150w DE is brighter or more powerful than a 250w DE because comparing these two articles is apples and oranges. The reflector and UV sheild as well as bulb type seem to be different in both tests. Until someone else presents additional research the matter remains unresolved IMO.

[Jeremy B.]

The AB bulb is really not that much more blue than the Ushio......in all reality, you have to look at the light shining on a white wall to tell a difference. I can tell you that the Ushio appears more intense to the eye. I am going to try and do a side by side comparison tonight with pictures.

[bowfront]

Originally posted by Mugenmantoo
I just ordered though a pair of 20k Osram DE bulbs to check them out. They are supposed to have the closest natural light spectrum to the sun.

Where did you find spectrum data on the 20k DE's? Just curious because I was thinking about trying them also but can't find much published data. From the pictures that I have seen they are difinitely bluer than the AB 10k's that I am using. Actually I don't find much visible blue in the AB's. I think they look a whole lot better with VHO suppliment. Interesting to hear the differences between the AB and Giesemann fixtures.

[Russ]

This has been really great! :D :D :D Thanks to everyone on RC who is contributing and helping to rip apart these lighting options-- It's going to make my decision a whole lot easier! :thumbsup: Definitely send pic(s) my direction.

[toptank]

Glad to see these post as I am setting up another clam holding tank which is a 60 long and 17" but when I add the eggcrate it will be about 12" from the top so thinking that 2 x 150 HQIs would be the idea setup for me. Does the aquaspace lite have actinic installed in the unit?

Thanks.
Barry

[Piero]

I'm thinking of doing a 30x30x24H cube. Goiing with HQI pendants for color, small profile, and simplicity. Looking at the Reefstar, AB, and Geissman models. I've seen the PFO DEHQI pendants and the reflector is only 2-dimensional. It only reflects across one axis, but this allows the housing to be much smaller than the others.

Anyone see anything wrong with two 250s over a cube like this? Overkill means...what? aside from heat issues, can there bee too much light?

[omegatron]

From Sprectral analysis the Iwasaki 6500K bulb has the most natural closest spectrum to the sun even though it may not be a pleasing light to all. As far as the 150DE bulb it is shear myth of the PPFD value. Any numbers found on Sanjay's page on the articles he has written prove otherwise. I posted this before on various threads. Can someone post a link backing up there claims of a PPFD value of 246 on a 150DE bulb.

[bowfront]

Originally posted by omegatron
As far as the 150DE bulb it is shear myth of the PPFD value. Any numbers found on Sanjay's page on the articles he has written prove otherwise. I posted this before on various threads. Can someone post a link backing up there claims of a PPFD value of 246 on a 150DE bulb.

It's no myth. The AB 150w DE bulb is evaluated starting on page 68 in the 2002 Marine Fish and Reef annual edition. The article is entitled "Spectral Analysis of Recent Metal Halide Lamps" by Sanjay Joshi. This article is not yet found on his website as they are probably still trying to sell copies of the magazine. At any rate the PPFD values listed for this bulb are 246 with a PFO magnetic ballast and 210 with a PFO electronic ballast. Most importantly the lamp was tested using a PFO mini pendant while the other mogle lamps rated in this article were tested without any reflector or UV shield. Thus the on going confusion about these numbers.

Here's a quote from Sanjay himself within the article "As seen from the results with the 150-watt Aqualine HQI lamp in the PFO reflector, the PPFD of the setup is higher than a 400-watt Iwasaki lamp (without a reflector) at the same distance".

This has stired up some controversy but it's no myth the article is for real.

[omegatron]

It is shear myth period.

In Sanjay's own words as I have personally wrote him.

I cant help it people don't read !! The only lamp that was tested with the reflector was the 150DE. It does not put out more light than the 400.

sanjay.


This is a post he put at reefs.org

Hi,

Just thought I should respond this discussion, especially relating to the 250W and 150W DE 10KK lamps.

The 250W lamp was tested without any reflector, whereas the 150W was tested in the PFO mini hood. When testing these lamps without a reflector, the lamp is basically sticking out with absolutely nothing on top so no light emited from the top is reflected in the downward direction and almost none of that gets measured - since the test is performed an a room with walls painted dull black and really high celing. Since all the tests were performed in a similar manner, this allows direct comparison of the lamps against each other.

However, when a reflector (or in the case of the 150W the mini hood) is thrown in to the mix, the data cannot be easily extrapolated for comparison. To use 50-75% increase due to reflector is most likely not correct, since in the case of the mini hood most of the light was being reflected in a downward direction and hence being measured, and throwing off the comparison based on extrapolation of the data from the 250 tested in a very different manner.


A 250W DE tested in a similar hood will have more light output than a 150W, for lamps with similar spectral output. If someone is willing to send me a 250W hood and lamp I will test it and post the data.

sanjay.

The problem here is people do not read the whole article and go quoting things saying this guy said this and that. Sanjay has stated the 150DE will not beat a 400watt Iwasaki period. All his other tests were done with stock bulbs no reflectors if you put these bulbs under the same conditions they 150 DE would pale in comparison. These words are from the guy you are claiming advocate these claims which he does not. He states several times even in this article that the 150DE was the only light he tested WITH A REFLECTOR which greatly enhances the numbers.

[bowfront]

The above quote that I posted is word for word from the article in MFAR, which I have sitting in front of me. I don't understand your myth theory but whatever. Maybe you should go out and buy a copy of the magazine yourself and read the article beginning to end as I already have several times before saying that the article doesn't exist. I didn't write the above quote Sanjay Joshi did so maybe he should clarify things more.

[omegatron]

Bowfront,

I never said the article does not exist. I said people made assumptions based on a number without proof. Sanjay also stated that this was the only bulb tested with a reflector. It is stated right there in the article. Every other bulb did not have one. He states when I wrote him that the 150 DE bulb is not brighter than a 400watt bulb period. Why can not one understand this. Basically this whole thing began by someone taking this article out of context. I do not make any mythical claims or such. When I speak I go right to the source where you all claim to get your proof. Sanjay stated that everyone read that article wrong and came to the wrong conclusion. You can not compare a bulb without a reflector against a bulb with a reflector in a mini hood where every ounce of light is being pushed back into the tank. I just try and go right to the source and clear up what I consider is a gross misconception. I do not want anyone beleiving a point that is not valid. Alot of new reefers may be mislead by claims such as the one saying the 150 is brighter than a 400 bulb.

I can not say enough you can not compare apples to oranges.
For anyone who thinks for a second that a 150 DE bulb is brighter than a 400watt iwasaki I will post this pic that DSB1829 shared with all in another thread.

http://www.reeftalk.com/pics/400 vs 150 1.jpg

[ReefDent]

I have a DIY 2x 250 DE setup with an additional 440 watts VHO on a 75 rr. I'm using the AB bulbs with LN electronic ballasts. I spent a lot of time deciding on the setup, and got a lot of input from Ltspd and Ninong. Ninong has an AB fixture and Ltspd also has a DIY. Ltspd uses 2x 40 watts actinic and has had nothing but good things to say about his setup as far as I have read.

I have mostly sps, but also some lps and softies in the bottom third. I really think that if you're going with clams and SPS, then the 2x 250 watts might be a little weak, unless you're only going to have those light-demanding specimens in the upper third of the tank. Just my 2 cents worth.

James

[bowfront]

Chuck,

Sorry I assumed that you were saying the article didn't exist when you said "As far as the 150DE bulb it is shear myth of the PPFD value.". The infamous PPFD numbers of the 150w DE bulb are published in a chart within Sanjay's most recent article. They are no myth and the fact that the lamp was tested in a PFO mini pendant while the other moguls were tested naked is spelled out by Sanjay within the article. I agree with you that others have taken the article out of context. I would also agree with you that Sanjay probably never intended to imply that the little 150w DE was brighter than a 400w Iwasaki. I've seen Doug's pictures and they are no suprise to me. I have AB 150 DE's and don't find them to be visually as bright as 400w Iwasaki's or AB moguls. That's not to say that they aren't powerful just that I think comparing them to 400w bulbs is a little much. If you haven't read the article do yourself a favor and read it and you will see what all the confusion is about. If Sanjay is wondering why people misunderstood his intent maybe he should go back and read it. I mean when you print stuff like:
"As seen from the results with the 150-watt Aqualine HQI lamp in the PFO reflector, the PPFD of the setup is higher than a 400-watt Iwasaki lamp (without a reflector) at the same distance".
and then wonder why people are comparing the two come on.
Anyway we're all in this together and unfortunately there isn't a heck of a lot of published aquarium lamp data to go on. Maybe someone like Perry can help to clear some of this mess up.

[omegatron]

You hit the nail on the head bowfront my friend this is the MYTH I am refering too. People have read the article and there are like 5 different threads that claim the 150watt DE has a higher PPFD than a 400watt Iwasaki. They do not consider the reflector and hood types factor and schew the numbers. It is a shame really cause your average new reefer could really think this to be true only to learn that after he spends his hard earned money to see it wasted. Not that it is a bad light by any means but from the picture I posted one can see there is a huge difference.

I am glad Sanjay answered my email and stated point blank that these people were making assumptions and have not considered the facts.