Holy LED light Hood Batman. Solaris.

[pjf]

Joe,

I do appreciate your efforts as a manufacturer to make LED technology available to the rest of us. I was an early adopter of LED technology for aquaria although the technology available then does not “hold a candle” to that available today.

Here’s a recent post that should gratify you:

Originally posted by cclough_KeyDev
hahnmeister - as I said in my email to you (that hopefully you received a week or so ago) we are going to send a unit to Sanjay for his evaluation.

We are currently sold out of production units, which would be the only real comparison as the ones sitting on the bench have been beat pretty hard for various tests.

I hope to have something out in the next few weeks.

Again, we appreciate your interest in aiding the community with this data.

BR,
-Chris

Note that the demand for aquarium LED units is such that even the reviewers cannot get a hold of them to evaluate. Reviewers are motivated to evaluate recent aquaria LED products. I know because I’ve received PM’s from them and you may want to make contact with them privately.

I trust that your marketing depends on more than raucous forums such as these. Whatever the merits of the arguments presented here, the fact that there is demand for your products should be more gratifying than staying up past midnight worrying about the number of photons dancing on the head of an LED.

While I get ready to shop for an LED fixture, have a joyous holiday season!

[BeanAnimal]

I may puke...

[crazzy]

Very insightful Bean, Thanx for the contribution regarding LED's

[pjf]

One thing to look forward to this holiday season is the receipt of LED evaluation units by reviewers from manufacturers. Every “bean head” is second-guessing what the reviews will say. Despite the pseudo-scientific babble, there is a herd mentality that permeates some of these threads. Fewer will stake a dubious position fearing that a reviewer that they have been touting may take a different position. Look for a moderation of views as we enter this Christmas season. To all of you who are building or using LED units and sharing your knowledge with the rest of us, thanks for advancing our hobby.

[MorandiWine]

I joined this thread to try and learn something and to see if other people have had the same results that I have had using LED lighting. But much to my and I am sure other peoples frustration a few people have made the discrediting of LED technology their own personal battle. So my goal of trying to learn anything was thrown out the window.

Because this has now become a true mud slinging contest I am going to unsubscribe and not waste time with this thread.

Good luck,

tyler

[sherm71tank]

There may be a fair share of mudslinging if that's what you want to call it but there is value here. I think it's great that manufacturer's claims can be put to the test. Why is it so bad to question? If their products are what they say they are then it will come out in the wash.

[jcltok]

hahnmeister


Here is the literature on the Kelvin meter I am using.

http://www.konicaminolta.com/instrum...200/index.html

Here is the manual for the same meter: Page 10 covers the meter in general and page 11 covers the Luminance function and the Chromacity Function.

http://www.konicaminolta.com/instrum...meters_e15.pdf

Regards,

[BeanAnimal]

Originally posted by pjf
One thing to look forward to this holiday season is the receipt of LED evaluation units by reviewers from manufacturers. Every “bean head” is second-guessing what the reviews will say. Despite the pseudo-scientific babble, there is a herd mentality that permeates some of these threads. Fewer will stake a dubious position fearing that a reviewer that they have been touting may take a different position. Look for a moderation of views as we enter this Christmas season. To all of you who are building or using LED units and sharing your knowledge with the rest of us, thanks for advancing our hobby.

Why must you resort to name calling? We can certainly argue ideas without you resorting to that nonsense.

You speak of "pseudo-scientific" babble. Do you really want to open that can of worms? As somebody who regularly cuts and pastes the scientific views and words of others and does so with demonstrably little understanding of their meaning or context, you may want to avoid casting those stones. Your posts on just about any technical topic ooze with that same pseudo science and babble.

If there are specific instances if where I second guess what the reviews will say, please point them out and we can discuss why I made my remarks.

If you have specific instances of pseudo science being used, please point them out, so that we may discuss the facts.

As for the transparent gushing kindness... most of us are onto that posting technique of yours as well.

This thread is full of valid information from BOTH the proponents of LEDs and those who are skeptical of their current or future quality. PJF, you and others would have the skeptics silenced if it was up to you. The simple problem is that you have been unable to provide compelling evidence that the skeptics are wrong.

[jnarowe]

BA, the skeptics are always wrong. Madisson Avenue has proven that time and time again.

[Me No Nemo]

Wow, quite intense on here. But I have been able to grab some useful info. Debate has always been and, hopefully, will always be a great tool to pull knowledge from both sides on any thought provoking issue. I've learned through the years (and from my favorite journalism professor) that your best attack is against the issue and not the person, as taking any issue to a personal level often discredits or negates valuable info contained in the message. Please continue to post as I'm currently running the new I series LED's and despite the first hand use, learning more about the science behind the technology is a valuable resource and there are many very knowledgable folks posting here that we can surely learn from.

I've had mine up about 20 days and am already seeing color shifts in the corals and one is even showing some slight growth on the tips. As I'm not a scientist, I'm evaluating the lights in the "old school" manner: placing many browned out sps and brightly colored LPS under the lights and evaluating their progress. The only flaw I currently see in the new lights is the patchy areas near the top of the tank since the LED banks are far apart in some areas. I don't build my rock up high, so it hasn't been an issue for me. Other than that...so far so good. Here's the thread:

Oceanic 215 with Solaris I Series

I'm having great fun just monitor the lighting

[jnarowe]

What, you don't get enough at work?

[chrismunn]

when i was at macna in houston they had a demonstration there invoving thoes solaris led lights, metal halides, and a LUX meter. i think they had like the same amout of wattage for both the leds, and the mh's, and then they showed the difference in light output from each set of lights using the lux meter. the led's had a higher lux reading than the same watt mh's.

[jnarowe]

I saw the same display at a coral farmer's market. The problem I had with it, and this is purely subjective, is that although the Lux was higher for the LEDs, to my eye, the MH was brighter, putting more light on the tank. It's hard to convince me that the LEDs have more light, but I have a deep tank and my situation is different than the average reef keeper's.

Plus even just the location of the sensor could change the reading dramatically. I guess the idea of many points of light has validity, but since I have my MHs on movers, the point is moot.

[Flint&Eric]

have you guys seen the green skies LED fixture? i like the dispersion of the LED's...perhaps they are using a wider beam angle lens?

[Me No Nemo]

Originally posted by jnarowe
What, you don't get enough at work?

not yet! Besides, I have lots of toys on this one that I don't have at work. It's all about the toys!

[Me No Nemo]

I agree with the light on the older Solaris models..not very bright. But I have the whites down to 50% with the new tank and it's still really bright. I'm thinking of dropping again in a week if I see that all is doing well.

[chrismunn]

will a lux meter give a different reading if you hold it 5 inches away rather than 10 inches away?

[crazzy]

[chimp]

[GSMguy]

Crazzy stop it, you cant post private messages in the public forum.

[hahnmeister]

Lol, all you guys are too funny. All we need to add is a 6-pack per person to turn this thread into a full blown roast!

Things have changed... in a turn of luck, it turns out that I will be getting that 'testbed' sample from AI after all. It was mentioned that since I asked to test it first, I would get it first after all, and then perhaps send it directly to Sanjay (or back and then to Sanjay, either way). Anyways, Its pretty nuts for me until about the 19th, but as of that night, I will have the lumenarc all polished up and the grid dusted off & ready to go for some PAR testing. So look for some hard data to get posted around the 21st.

As per email from Dana:
"Aloha Jonathan,

Here's the scoop:

XM 20K lamp, with 100 hour burn-in

Coralife ballast, an old one but used only for lamp testing (stad. coil and capacitor ballast)

The reflector is polished aluminum - don't remember where I got this (picked it up during the last 20 years somewhere ;-). It is a standard shape - like any of Coralife's, Hamilton's, PFOs earlier models.

Dana"

Now, to me, thats not the best of each technology being compared... thats the best of LED vs. perhaps the most common in halide (or best from 8 years ago). A lumenarc will shred a hammy reefsun, spider, etc... The bulb was a good pick, esp with regards to being a comparable spectrum, for SE at least, but the M58, well... hey, not knocking Dana one bit, but its not exactly 'top shelf'. Its good that he can give that kind of data, and its not like he's getting sent equipment from PGS to test out, you know? But I happen to have what I would consider 'the best of the best' for halide... M80 ballast, lumenarc mini DE, and a pheonix bulb with 100-150 hours on it (or a brand new one that I can 'burn in' to match Sanjay's tests perhaps). To me, this is the benchmark that when beaten, the benefits of LED's will be front & center, since this is a very blue bulb vs. a very blue LED system (but not alot of 420nm), and best of the best vs. best of the best. I mean really, if you are looking at putting down $1500-3000 on a LED system, you are not going to be comparing to a mogul system with probe-start ballasts and spider reflectors... you are going to compare with a $1500-3000 halide system perhaps.

[killagoby]

Does anyone know when they are going to release the fixture with the LED's that are similar to Solaris, but have a reflector in it?

[GSMguy]

Originally posted by killagoby
Does anyone know when they are going to release the fixture with the LED's that are similar to Solaris, but have a reflector in it?

what? the solaris has reflectors every bulb has its own reflector.

[BeanAnimal]

Correct, the LEDs are point sources with lenses attached. There is no need, or use for a conventional reflector.

Hahn, I am eager to see the test results but still think that a benchmark or standard needs to be compared against. The manufacturers supplying the "test" units is also not ideal when it is so easy to increase the output of the devices for short term measurements. I am not saying that any of the current manufacturers would do such a thing... Given that the local LFS does not stck these units, I don't have a better answer either.

[hahnmeister]

Any ideas for a 'benchmark'? I figured a 'top notch' halide system, but with a top performing blue bulb (pheonix) rather than a 10,000K for instance, would be a good 'benchmark'. That way, if people had a different bulb in mind, they could just use the ratio of par readings between the bulbs as a multiplier to my results. Also, as long as the optics remain similar in spread for the LED's, a single LED test of one white and one blue LED would give good comparison data. I suppose I could block out all but one LED and give readings for just one LED at a time. That way, an array of 4 LED's could be compared against an array of 25 LED's in the future at a LED vs. LED level.

Otherwise, it seems to me that a good and fair playing field would consist of a top level halide system vs. top level LED. Ill take numbers at 6", 9", 12", 18", and 24"... should be enough for most to compare. Heck, if I have time, since these are LED's vs. 'arc3 mini, a 30" reading might be possible, but my sampling grid would be HUUUUGE, so dont bet on it. 24" is pushing it, as I was hoping to keep this within a 3'x3' grid (2" grid spacing), but I might end up doing 4'x4' depending on the spread.

Well see. I dont plan on using the spectrometer for anything... the LED's have a pretty standard output curve that has been published over and over again... not much change there, esp with blue and whites. I havent posted any ocean optics readings yet because I have to get the calibration bulb first so the results I post can be compared to Sanjay's... otherwise, they are just relative readings.

[crazzy]

Hahn:
Like your idea of comparing the best of the best so that any future "models" can be relatively easily compared then to a level playing field standard.
What difference, if any is going to come into practical play of a LED being able to be close to the waters surface and the MH needing to be further away because of heat issues?
Also for future clarification, and I am not sure if it was you who compared PAR at different spots within an aquaria of different MH bulbs, would there then later need a comparison between MH and LED at different "spot" within the Aquaria?