All zoa tank what lights to use???

[AnThRaX]

I know. It's all cool.
I'm not really against LEDs. I'm just exposing the facts about them.
The testimonies of people all over the world are sometimes ignored...
Every one has the right to choose/like what they want.
Nothing wrong with that. :thumb:

Grandis.

I know I'm new here and all, but I couldn't help but register an account to comment on your OPINIONS.

You say you're not against LED but almost every response you have given to this thread is basically stating you don't approve of them and are basically calling them garbage and saying that you're only stating facts . Seems to me the only fact that you should be stating is that you don't have the experience nor full knowledge of LED to be making these "facts" a point. There are thousands of hobbyists all over the world that are 100% successful using LED systems. Yes, there are people that don't like the LED and say they had better luck with their old lights. Did it ever occur to them that their old lights worked better because they weren't intense enough to actually burn coral? There are so many things I could make a point of about LED. . I just don't fully understand your thought process on them especially with what seems to me is only negative talk coming from you about them... I'm not trying to start a battle or ruffle any feathers... It just seems to me that you don't fully understand the product and don't have the experience with them. There are too many factors to say for sure... But I will go LED any day over other options as I have personally seen superior success with the LESs once the person has taken the time to actually get to know the product and get it dialed in correctly. And I'm sorry, but LEDs that are not dimmable? Terrible idea. You're only asking to burn/bleach your corals.

 

[trido]

drive some heat

I'm a little confused by your whole "heat" terminology. Are you talking about the heat that requires us to run chillers to keep our temperature stable, intensity or UV? In your first post you sound like you really know what your talking about but then when you throw out a term like "heat" and use it several times, it doesn't sound scientific or factual in any capacity, and for me ruins your credibility. Can you explain what you mean?

 

[A. grandis]

Very good thread!!
Thanks very much for the feedback!!

I wrote all what I think about LEDs already, so I don't want to over do it. Not against them at all. I mean, if you want to go with it, fine...
I'm just trying to see what is missing there. I've been asking people for years and today we still have people going back to their T5s/MHs. Do a search and you'll probably fine.
I do not think that ANY LED fixture sold today for aquariums are actually BETTER than MH or T5 bulbs for any system with zoas/corals.
I'm sorry, but that's the truth. Besides less heat and electricity bills, LEDs will loose any time.
And I'm sorry but you won't be able to change opinion on that.

If you read my past posts you'll clearly see what I meant.

What I've meant by "heat" was simply a comparison of incandescent source of lights (natural/artificial).
Like the sun, as the optimal source of light for the zoas and corals kept by many of us.
I don't think that is a big deal nor anything too hard to understand.

If you think sun is not good for your zoas or corals, that's something to worry about. Really!!! Specially to compare LEDs with the sun. Big mistake IMO.

God made all that and it works great!!! The way God made nature to work (and nature isn't any mother, by the way!!!) is basically perfect.

Regarding the too much artificial light, there is a balance to be reached, of course, and the use of 2 400W MH pendants over 55gal tanks has proved that in the past. But anyways, that would be out of the context here.
By the way, the best growth, color and reproduction rates I've ever had from my zoas was in a 55gal with 2 X NO actinic fluorescents and 2 X 250W 6.500K MHs!!

I do appreciate all the posts and will keep reading them.
I think I've said what I had to. It's good to be able to say what we think, and I respect your opinions as well.
I do not want to cause any arguments here, or harm anyone with words. That's not my style.
I think if you take my past posts in consideration and try to picture the simplicity of it is a very nice way to start.

It sounds like many here are upset because they really want to feel good about their LED purchases and investments. That's normal. I get that all the time.
It also seems like many don't like to compare the LEDs with MHs or T5s and they are "happy" with the results of their LEDs.
What I hope is that those who tried to explain electricity here were able to bring their focus into the SUN vs. ARTIFICIAL LIGHT more, than try to bring excuses and get hurt/angry. I'll be listening to you...

Again, very nice thread!!!!!!
Cheers.

Grandis.

 

[flowflezy]

Thank you guys for all the input. A lot of opinions out there. .

 

[joshporksandwich]

Wohooo this is getting good!!!! Please post your opinions. We're here to help each other. I've learned a lot from people that have been in the hobby for 20 yrs and also from people in the hobby for 3 months. Don't be shy!

 

[Pappy]

I ran halides with power compacts for about a year and can tell you that my stuff never grew or was as healthy as it is now under my DIY led fixture. I have sps that grow like weeds and zoas that are bigger and fatter than anyone else's around "except MAYBE porkchops and that is debatable".

I am not only sharing my opinion but also my experience.

 

[TJ's Reef]

Grandis, I'm still very confused to your statements. I do my best with my education and continued learning to pass on valid factual information here on this Forum, others and directly most every day. Especially on subject of interest or that I have extensive history or background in. What you have written as FACT is only your opinion and Science proves otherwise. Your comparison to Sun -vs- Artificial light is still only an opinion and not fact based. If you take a look at a multitude of Spectral Charts for most MH and T5 lamps available you will see no match to the Sun, you will see some have similar curves though usually huge spikes in the so-called sweet spots but nothing to match overall. Plus if you are trying to match the Sun you are way off base as well because our Corals get much more of their usable light spectrum from the Sky ( Indirect and refracted Sunlight) which filters out much of the damaging radiation the Sun produces (just as the plasma arc does in a MH lamp). Your light HEAT (infra red) theory is also a bit inaccurate in that it also is a negative to most living organisms without protection and once again plants and animals alike spend much energy on this self-protection that could/would be better spent elsewhere. And lastly your statement If you think sun is not good for your zoas or corals, that's something to worry about. Really!!! Specially to compare LEDs with the sun. Big mistakeIMO. Facts say that only parts of the Suns radiation energy is good for any living organism here on Earth. Just so happens that you can extract almost exactly those parts with the use of LED's and fine tune intensity of each individual part of the spectrum. Not the case with any incandescent light source as you will always get a fair amount of unusable (non photosynthetic light waves) and potentially damaging radiation from their energy source and must be filtered out for protection.

And to lighten it up a bit, here is my humble opinion relayed in the ruse of an analogy..... Nothing wrong with Bias-ply Tires been using them on my Studebaker for years..... don't know if I'll ever spend those BIG BUCKS on those new 'Radials'..... seems like a bunch of fancy worded Sales Hype to me....

Cheers, Todd

 

[A. grandis]

Hi TJ. I'm sorry you're still confused.
Here is part of my first post to refresh our conversation:

"...Heat energy is transmitted by infrared electromagnetic radiation.

Light itself is electromagnetic radiation. The power of the bulbs (watts) is the transformation of energy from one form to another. So the LEDs could have the power (watts), but not so much heat. That we know...

The sun produces incandescent light, which is light energy converted from heat, and it's a source of electromagnetic radiation. MHs have similar properties, of course, and it's an incandescent source of light. T5s convert other types of energy (electricity through mercury vapor) to light, with less heat, but still have the heat.

How many people know that sunlight is the best light for the corals?? …"

Incandescent light bulbs are the closest artificial replica of sun light. We all know that. One of the qualities is the heat emitted by them.
It's a mistake to totally ignore that part, IMO.
Besides spectrum ("curves") and PAR, which are the most known qualities of light by aquarists nowadays, we've got also the infrared electromagnetic radiation (heat). That is part of the sun's vital qualities for the planet we live in. Incandescent light, as a similar font of energy, will cover that part and will make a difference in a long run for the reef tank. Some people notice the different right on the first month. That's all independent of spectrum, PAR, or other light quality. I do believe that is one of the key ingredients to keep cnidarians with zooxanthellae for long periods of time with close to natural health and reproduction, without having to worry too much about lighting also. That will leave only the rest of the deals (water chemistry and supplemental feeding, specially) for the aquarist to worry about, as a minor maintenance with a good schedule and knowledge of the cnidarians' metabolism.

The best MH system are safe for the organisms and us, having the lens to filter UV light. We don't have to worry about that.
The heat (infrared electromagnetic radiation) passes through the protective lenses of MH fixtures. Just place your hand under it and you will feel it.
Thanks for your input.

Grandis.

 

[ritter6788]

I'm shocked this debate still pops up. I can understand the arguments for preference of one type of lighting or the other but the crowd that keeps popping up saying LEDs don't work are wrong. I think this is the first I've ever seen someone argue that corals need heat from lighting to thrive.

 

[Jlobes]

lots of heat is definitely emitted from a MH bulb/fixture, stand close to one and you can feel it. but im still confused, how this "heat" is important to coral? or plants/animals for that matter, if you are referencing the sun?

 

[ReefRMadness]

Leds u can tune to the desired spectrum which IMO bring out the color better in coral.. Ive had metal halide n my colors on my coral were no where near as intense. Imma say like i was told a while back. MH for growth n LEDs for color... Although i will say im happy with the growth my led puts out but MH was soooo much faster. But i like the colors the leds give my corals. Someone should have a mh with leds n have the best of both worlds. Til then my kessil is doing a great job. N less algae everywhere too also is a +

 

[Pappy]

Hi TJ. I'm sorry you're still confused.
Here is part of my first post to refresh our conversation:

"...Heat energy is transmitted by infrared electromagnetic radiation.

Light itself is electromagnetic radiation. The power of the bulbs (watts) is the transformation of energy from one form to another. So the LEDs could have the power (watts), but not so much heat. That we know...

The sun produces incandescent light, which is light energy converted from heat, and it's a source of electromagnetic radiation. MHs have similar properties, of course, and it's an incandescent source of light. T5s convert other types of energy (electricity through mercury vapor) to light, with less heat, but still have the heat.

How many people know that sunlight is the best light for the corals?? …"

Incandescent light bulbs are the closest artificial replica of sun light. We all know that. One of the qualities is the heat emitted by them.
It's a mistake to totally ignore that part, IMO.
Besides spectrum ("curves") and PAR, which are the most known qualities of light by aquarists nowadays, we've got also the infrared electromagnetic radiation (heat). That is part of the sun's vital qualities for the planet we live in. Incandescent light, as a similar font of energy, will cover that part and will make a difference in a long run for the reef tank. Some people notice the different right on the first month. That's all independent of spectrum, PAR, or other light quality. I do believe that is one of the key ingredients to keep cnidarians with zooxanthellae for long periods of time with close to natural health and reproduction, without having to worry too much about lighting also. That will leave only the rest of the deals (water chemistry and supplemental feeding, specially) for the aquarist to worry about, as a minor maintenance with a good schedule and knowledge of the cnidarians' metabolism.

The best MH system are safe for the organisms and us, having the lens to filter UV light. We don't have to worry about that.
The heat (infrared electromagnetic radiation) passes through the protective lenses of MH fixtures. Just place your hand under it and you will feel it.
Thanks for your input.

Grandis.

Okay so thank you for getting me to read and research more! However everything I just read regarding "infrared electromagnetic radiation" is all referencing spectrum output and nothing to do with heat when pertaining to reefs. Yes it when referencing the sun is a source of heat BUT the spectrum is pertaining this conversation. Before we move on...

"Infrared radiation is popularly known as "heat radiation," but light and electromagnetic waves of any frequency will heat surfaces that absorb them." From this link...
https://www.boundless.com/physics/electromagnetic-waves/the-electromagnetic-spectrum/infrared-waves/

Now you for some weird reason (no disrespect intended because u clearly know more about physics than I) you are comparing a metal halide to the sun with "infrared electromagnetic radiation". Infrared itself is defined as 780nm to 10600 nm.

The very best metal halide bulb (debated but whatever for the sake of argument) a radium has no "infrared" electromagnetic radiation. It has lots of electromagnetic radiation as does any light but NOOOO infrared.

A radion pro (led) puts out same spectrum and 170 watts versus 250 watt metal halide.

No light we use has infrared electromagnetic radiation.

No more physics please brain is mush let's move on this topic is completely irrelevant.

 

[bigfoot86]

So A. grandis, if your saying that you think that t5 and mh are better than leds and that's the 'TRUTH', then I guess all the success I've had with leds is just a big dream and all the growth and tremendous response I've had and others had is just 'FAKE'. In that case, somebody better pinch me and wake me up, lol. I TOTALLY agree that t5's and mh are awesome, without a doubt. But I took the plunge and jumped into the led world and I admit I was very skeptical the first 5 or 6 months because I DIDN'T see what I wanted to, but I wasn't that quick to discard the fixture and go back to my t5's. I dedicated myself to really try to find a way to make them work, and once I did, everything else fell in place. What you called the 'TRUTH' is actually just your OPINION. I'm not trying to argue, but please don't make it sound like a fact.

 

[Lovge]

Doesnt the "heat" or warmness of a bulb refer to the actual color of the Light spectrum it comes from? Not the heat temperature being generated by said bulb?? Light is radiation period no need for hot radiation just to have to cool it back down. This thread is seeming beat to me with way too much "im right , ignorant but right" going on. Screw the sun it burns stuff and that includes sea creatures

 

[TJ's Reef]

OK, back at this one last time....... Being relatively new to this Forum here most of you don't know that I've been in and around the Lighting Industry for over 20 years and can talk PAR, PUR, Lux, Lumens, CRI with the best of them and by no means would ever say that you cannot grow Apples to Zoanthids under Metal Halide or T5 Fluorescent lamps. Just trying to state facts on and voicing my opinion, knowledge and experience on the down-played LED's

This thread was/is suppose to be about which lights are best for Zoanthids to thrive under..... right ?

So lets start over and make a list of best options we have personally used (ie; spectrum, Kelvin, bulb layout etc...) in each of the three debated categories above. Once we get some census on a few in which majority agree with I'll edit the very first post to show our combined analysis on best two or three within each category..... agreed

Metal Halide:

T5 Fluorescent:

LED:



Cheers, Todd

 

[bigfoot86]

Gotta tell my zoas to stop thriving under my leds then, lol. Making some look bad, yikes!

 

[trido]

I think this is the first I've ever seen someone argue that corals need heat from lighting to thrive.

In over eight years of reef keeping I cant agree with this more. Makes me laugh. I still don't understand the science of this but apparently I'm not the only one here who doesn't understand that our corals need the "heat". :tongue:

 

[bigfoot86]

Yea I definitely don't get the 'heat' issue?! Still really trying to figure that out.

 

[AquaSwap]

I have an AI Vega over one tank and a hydra over another. Both thanks have zoas in them and both tanks grow them great. Im happy with both lights....

 

[A. grandis]

You all would understand more about the "heat issue" (meaning heat from natural sunlight and trying to resemble the same at home) and the importance of natural sunlight for corals and zoas if you just spend some time underwater in the tropicals. LOL!! Common sense, my friends. That is true for planted tank as well. Try find some time and check some zoas and corals on tide pools, for example. 8+ hours a day exposed to the sunlight, summer time, under inches of water and exposed to the air during low tide (sometimes for hours!!!). Compare them when you bring them home and place them under the "best aquarium LEDs" you have available on the market. See what type of transformations happen. Now, bring them and offer some MHs or T5 lights. You will see what I'm talking about. Adaptation will need to be well done for all types of artificial lights, but the results are really different for each of them, independent of minor differences of water chemistry and maintenance schedule.. I know many locals that tell me same thing over and over, so I don't have to imagine how good your zoas are to your eyes on the mainland… I've been there visiting.

I am talking about pursuing the best health and reproduction rates similar to the ones found in nature.
If that isn't your goal, you just ignore me, please.

Again, spectrum and PAR isn't all about lighting. That's what the LED companies are trying to push because of the literature. Business is business. If that's what aquarists talk about and see on articles, that's what they will sell.
People never talk about some of the important issues regarding reef keeping (not only light!!) because they just go with the flow and keep studying on the internet alone.

I think this is really the first time I bring the subject here in this forum, but I wouldn't imagine that it would cause such impact. So simple to understand, but you guys really love your LEDs. Just cool off, please, like your LEDs. LOL!!
If you didn't get it by now, it won't make any difference trying to explain any further. Let every one analyze and do their search. I believe that people are capable to choose for themselves. I'm not trying to impose anything here nor to prove my point. Not at all.
Again, it's just my point of view and you may agree or not. I don't really care, really. LOL!! I still respect all of your opinions and read them.
Thanks for letting me express myself.

I'm very, very sorry, but I really don't have time for this. Not to be rude.
I was just trying to help. I'm sorry for any inconvenience!

No hard feelings.
:smile:

Grandis.