Light Intensity, 70MH or 96wPC

Bmgrocks · #1 10/27/2007, 12:54 PM

Have a 10 Gallon with 96w PC, and wondering if I should purchase the 12 Gallon AP with 70w MH
(tank transfer)

Which lighting is currently better, would i be better off with the MH, I loose wattage.

PC wise i have some 9WPG
MH wise i have 5.4 WPG

Whats the difference between Light Intensity and Type, would i be better off with MH

everl0ng · #2 10/27/2007, 02:26 PM

you would be much better off with the 70w mh imo. you would be able to house a more variety of corals, especially if you ever plan on sps or clams. and you'd gain an extra 2 gallons for tank stability, and you would be able to hide your equipment in the back chambers of the AP. also i believe marine depot and fosters and smith both have them on sale. let us know what you decide.

zack85 · #3 10/27/2007, 02:46 PM

no pc bulb can compare to even a 70w mh

mfp1016 · #4 10/27/2007, 02:47 PM

The MH will be much more intense. The only reason to select PC over MH is if you have heat issues, want to run actinic supplements (a phoenix 14k, or 20k bulb looks as good), or if you dont want to go open top. If you a smoker of any kind, the closed top is nice...

rickh · #5 10/27/2007, 04:22 PM

Save your money--the number of lumens produced by both lights are approximately equal. The bulb selection for both lights is also very limited. R

mfp1016 · #6 10/27/2007, 05:06 PM

I firmly disagree, the lumens are not same. I've tested them myself with a lumen meter; unless I was testing bad bulbs....

everl0ng · #7 10/27/2007, 05:10 PM

regardless, put the two fixtures next to each other and decide. if you know somebody that has the 70w MH take your 96w PC there and fire them both up and see which you like best and then decide whether it is worth it. in this hobby, a lot of it is based on compatability and stability, but when it comes to personal preference there is a lot of options out there.

MikePowell · #8 10/27/2007, 06:31 PM

ahhh, another debate on which light is better.

phannay · #9 10/27/2007, 07:46 PM

would the 150W sunpod be an overkill for the AP 12?

Rosseau · #10 10/27/2007, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by phannay
would the 150W sunpod be an overkill for the AP 12?

No.

People are increasingly putting lights like this and higher over small tanks.

Though, it may be redundant if you're keep low light species only.

phannay · #11 10/27/2007, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rosseau
No.

People are increasingly putting lights like this and higher over small tanks.

Though, it may be redundant if you're keep low light species only.

when you say higher, do you mean i can't use the stock mounting brackets? i have to raise it up higher?

sammy33 · #12 10/27/2007, 09:50 PM

It is tough to compare light intensities with watts. Lumens or PAR is a much better unit of measurement for light intensity.

Watts is simply a measure of power consumed. PAR (photosynthetic active radiation) is a measure of light produced or usable radiation. While I do not know the PAR on a 96w PC fixture I do know the PAR on a 70w Sunpod fixture and it is impressive!

This was measured with a Apogee Quantum Meter calibrated to electric light sources. For comparison here is a 2 x 36w PC retrofit (72 watts) kit in a canopy on my FW planted tank.

You can see that as far as intensity just about the same wattage of light produces two different results. The metal halide fixture produces almost twice the intensity of the PC light.

Metal halide systems in general will produce more light per watt than most PC systems.

Rosseau · #13 10/27/2007, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by phannay
when you say higher, do you mean i can't use the stock mounting brackets? i have to raise it up higher?

I was referring to higher wattage bulbs.

Rosseau · #14 10/27/2007, 10:03 PM

Nice demo sammy.

zma21 · #15 10/28/2007, 12:14 AM

MH > PC in EVERY case of intensity.

everl0ng · #16 10/28/2007, 10:18 AM

i have my 150w sunpod ovr my 10g and i love it. i will be moving it to my BC29 when i get it though.

phannay · #17 10/28/2007, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by everl0ng
i have my 150w sunpod ovr my 10g and i love it. i will be moving it to my BC29 when i get it though.

did you just use the stock mounting brackets? or did you have to raise it well above the surface of the tank

any heating/evaporation issues?

everl0ng · #18 10/28/2007, 03:03 PM

i have the legs that it came with and i have it set over my tank resting on the mounting legs. sometimes it heats the tank up to 84 or 85, but now i keep a clip on fan running all the time and it keeps it at a steady 82-83 for me. it does cause more evap, especially with the fan now, so i just topoff a little more every day.

puckbs · #19 10/28/2007, 03:27 PM

ha! i was just wondering this same question!! I have 96w pc powerquad (had it laying around) on a 20h. The original plan was to switch over to t5, but now you've got me thinking about the 70mh. wattage is power usage, does that mean the mh would use less electric than my pc fixture? Long island electric makes this a very important question...lol.

I really only plan on keeping zoas, rics, shrooms, and some other softies....

which would you go with?

jman77 · #20 10/28/2007, 03:49 PM

sammy33, is that the 14 bulb in the sunpod?

Bmgrocks · #21 10/28/2007, 04:42 PM

Puckbs

It seems to me like the majority of RC is in favor of MH, rather than T5's or PC, mainly because I think they see it as tried and true, Eithor way, for what your keeping, zoo's palys, rics and softies, I think you would be fine eithor way. But i do have a biased, and would think that they would grow faster under the MH, and is more pleasing to the eye.

With Wattage meaning Power Usage being pointed out (duh now that i think about it) it would seem to me that the MH would use less electricity, but are u just powering the bulb, or are you powering the electronic ballast as well???

The sunpod does come with a stock 14k Bulb, nice hue, I see it as a true 14k, not a ultra white, not a intense blue like a pheonix...
Though the 14k on a Pheonix I think is the nicest 14k u can get.., a Pheonix looks/ feels more like a 17k...

jman77 · #22 10/28/2007, 04:46 PM

FYI: Pheonix's are really 20 + K bulbs with great par !

m1enbo1 · #23 10/28/2007, 04:47 PM

once i went with metal halide, i will never go back to using PC's.

puckbs · #24 10/28/2007, 04:47 PM

bmg...thanks for th input, much appreciated

InsaneClownFish · #25 10/28/2007, 05:02 PM

Watts per gallon is a somewhat outdated and unscientific means of determining sufficient lighting for a reef.

To echo what most have said here, mh is your far better solution.

Here are two inexpensive options you might like:
http://phishybusiness.com/store/prod...roducts_id=680
This is the solution I chose for my 16g custom nano. It's a new 150w HQI fixture from Current-USA that mates to their Solana system. It comes complete in brushed aluminum with hanging tree, has an external electronic ballast, and runs relatively cool. You can't beat the price either:
http://phishybusiness.com/store/prod...roducts_id=791