different T5HO actinic?

[95accord]

is there a difference between spectrums for different T5 actinics? if so how much and how can you tell? are some better than other?

[DarG]

Do you mean to ask if the different brand pure/true/super actinic bulbs look different? Or are you asking if there is a difference in 420nm "actinic" and 460nm "actinic"?

a couple of compnaies refer to their 460nm bulbs as "actinic". These are actually what most would more accurately call blue bulbs. The 420nm bulbs are what would be called actinic ... either true actinic, pure actinic or super actinic. So a 460nm bulb is blue and the 420nm actinic bulbs are more of a purple color.

If you are asking if all manufacturers 420nm actinic bulbs are the same color, the answer is no. The UVL brand 420nm super actinic VHO T12 is still generally recognized as the king of flourescent actinics.

I think that the UVL brand T5 Super actinic is the closest looking T5 actinic to the UVL VHO version. It has the closest color and also the highest par of the T5 super actinic (last time I checked anyway). I have heard the Giesemann 420nm actinic described as more of a blue/purple, closer to blue than it is purple compared to the UVL brand super actinic T5. I have a few of the cheaper asian 420nm actinic T5's and I can tell you that they dont have as much output as the UVL T5 super actinic. They also dont have the purple color. THey are purple but is is also lighter and looks like it has more blue in it than the UVL super actinic T5.
I havent seen the ATI brand version and dont recall reading a description of them.

Regardless, it seems that concensus favors the UVL brand super actinic T5 as the best of the 420nm T5's. They dont look bad either when overdriven to V- HO levels on icecap ballasts. At high output levels (4 foot T5 = 54 watt) they are a bit anemic looking (comparing them to the T 12 VHO versions) but still seem to be the best of the bunch and they dont look too bad as far as color goes. I use them (UVL brand) to supplement my halides and I overdrive with Icecap ballasts. I chose the UVL super actinic T5's over VHO super actinic because of the signifigantly higher output on the Icecap ballasts and with SLR reflectors.

Hope i covered your question somehwere in there.

[95accord]

you covered it and them some!
i was basicly wondering about the difference between the 420nm and 460nm. would it be better to have one of each or 2 of the same kind? ive seen a few tanks with a almost purple hue which im really starting to like.

[DarG]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12066417#post12066417 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by 95accord
you covered it and them some!
i was basicly wondering about the difference between the 420nm and 460nm. would it be better to have one of each or 2 of the same kind? ive seen a few tanks with a almost purple hue which im really starting to like.

Im not sure what type of lighting you are using but you cant load up on actinics because you wont have enough par. I ran VHO lighting for a long long time. Two actinic whites and two super actinics. The look was white with a purple actinic tint. Thats probably why I dont like blue tanks. I probably like the same look as you do. I like to find a whiter halide with a blue tint and then supplement with actinics so that I end up with a white with slight blue tint with noticeable actinic undertones.

You can run a couple of actinics in a 6 bulb T5 setup or 8 bulb setup and then the other bulbs can handle the bulb of the par. As long as you get enough par for your corals it doesnt matter how many actinics you run. You just have more flexibility with the more T5's you run or if you are using halides and then supplementing with actinic. With halides there are a few bulbs, 10K's that have huge actinic spikes but also alot of energy in the warmer spectrums so they have a bit of a yellowish look despite all the actinic. Then the bluer halides have huge spikes in the blue and not much actinic energy. You can supplement some of the 10ks that have lots of actinic with some blue T5's to blue them up a little so they dont look yellow and then still have a good bit of an actinic look because of all that actinic energy.

So, there are different ways to get a bit of that purplish actinic look. Also, if you are running T5, there is a bulb by KZ called the fiji purple. It's not a true actinic but it has a purple look. A bit whiter than a true actinic and with some red in it so it has more of a red/purple look than the blue/purple of the true actinics. Nice bulb. I use one along with a UVL super actinic to supplement my halides. I have yet to try a 10K with lots of actinic (like the 175 watt and 250 watt XM 10K) and then some blues to take away some of the yellow but that would work too.

[95accord]

currently in running 2x54w (1x18K power glo and 1x actinic) over my FOWLR (well mostly....a couple anemone near the top and a couple ricordeas) and im looking at getting another 2x54w. im just trying to get a good idea of bulbs which would give me the result im looking for.
many thanks

[DarG]

I see. Well, 420nm are the purplish ones. UVL brand probably the most purple. And then KZ brand Fiji Purple is a little whiter, brighter redder purple. So throw one (or two if you still have enough par) of these in the mix and you should get some of that purple/actinic color.

[95accord]

here is what im thinking;
current;
1x18K power glow
1x actinic

to come
1x fiji purple (or other 420nm)
1x 18k power glow or a mid-day bulb

does this sound like a reasonable combination? or should i just go with 2x420nm-ish bulbs and 2 whiter bulbs?

(i dont plan on getting too many corals at this point, im mostly going for looks with a few additional corals down the road for show)

[DarG]

Two 18000K bulbs and two actinics is going to be very blue. You probably will see the actinic tint in with the color but overall it will be a very blue look assuming that the 18K bulbs are truly around 18K. If you dont need the par, you can throw a couple of actinics in the mix and then maybe 1 blue and 1 white bulb. That should whiten it up some and the two actinics should have a larger impact on the color with only one blue in the mix. Blue bulbs usually have signifigantly higher par that pure actinics.

I think you are heading in the right direction. If you can afford to experiment by picking up some extra bulbs that is the easiest way to find the look you want, by trying different combinations. I havent used or seen the power glo bulbs so I dont know exactly how the combo is going to look. I can just go by what an 18K bulb would look like. There is the Aquablue (aquablue special) that Giesemann (and ATI I think) both have out. These are white with slight blue tint and have good par. They are about 11 or 12K I believe. Two of these and two actinics may also be a good look for you. There would be no yellow, just a crisp white with the actinic hue coming through because the blue in the Aquablue bulbs is fairly subtle. They arent "blue" bulbs, they are white with a slight blue tint. If thats not blue enough, maybe an 18K in place of 1 aquablue and then your two actinics or actinic and fiji purple. When I say actinic I am referring to the UVL brand super actinic. That is the actinic that I know and probably the best actinic T5 in terms of color (and the purplest from what I have seen and read).

[DarG]

dp

[95accord]

any opinion on Geismann bulbs?

http://www.jlaquatics.com/phpstore/store_pages/product-info.php?product_ID=lb-t548ap

for a full list;

http://www.jlaquatics.com/phpstore/store_pages/category-info.php?category_ID=378


many thanks again.

[DarG]

Yes, they are excellent bulbs. BUT ... the pure actinic is reportedly not the purple color that the UVL brand super actinic is. Just a few days ago I read a couple of members talking about it. It was described as more of a pale/lighter blue looking bulb than a true actinic. I have heard similar descriptions in the past about the the Giesemann Pure actinic. The Actinic plus is a great bulb, it's their version of the bluest bulb and has good par. The Aquablue plus is a whiter bulb with a blue tint and also very good par, higher than the actinic plus. They used to be called Aquablue specials and I thought they were about 11 or 12K but I se that they are 15K rated according to the description. Should be the same bulb, white with a noticeable but not dominant or overwhelming blue tint.

I see that JL Aquatics also sells the URI T5's. URI is now UVL and those are the super actinic bulbs that I am referring to. the URI/UVL super actinic. From the last par comparison I have seen this super actinic has the highest par than any of the others. From what I have seen myself and read about, it also looks closest to the URI/UVL super actinic VHO which is the best flourescent 420nm bulb that there is. I would go with the URI/UVL super actinics for the best color and output of the 420nm T5 brands, and then choose Giesemann or ATI for any of the other T5 bulbs. You cant do better than Giesemann or ATI and maybe a could other european brands for quality T5's. Then there is KZ which has the Fiji purple and the Coral (which has a lot of red) for high quality T5's that are unique. Not many carry the KZ. Zeovit USA has the KZ. The KZ bulbs cost more.

[95accord]

next question;
is there anything you dont know regarding this? lol

you've bean an awesome help! Many thanks!

[Obi-dad]

DarG, do you actually have the UVL T5 super actinic? Because the ones that I have are (to my eye) purple with some blue, whereas the ATI and Giessman pure actinics are just purple.

[DarG]

Obi-dad ... Yes, I use the UVL's. I'll have to snag an ATI or Giesemann and take a look. Most of the reports I have read have said the opposite of you. That they are lighter and a bluer color. In fact, just a couple days ago I read about a member who reported the same and wasnt happy with them at all. Next time I order something Ill grab one so I can take a look up against a UVL. I have several new UVL's so I can compare new to new. Grim did the par testing a while back and the UVL had the best par of the group but that doesnt account for color. Do you suggest the Giesemann or ATI or are they the same? I wouldnt be surprised if the ATI and Giesemann are the same exact bulbs made by Narva.

95Accord ... I dont know all that much about T5's actually. I mean I know the bulbs because I have most of them. Never bothered with the European actinics though as I have mentioned. Ive been happy with the UVL's, especially overdriven. I guess Ill know a little more when I pick up a german Actinic. I think we just like the same look with the actinic influencing the color.
Actually, Grim Reefer is the resident T5 guru. But Im glad I could help. Youre welcome.

[rgreenpc]

I am looking at doing a 6x39 on my 65gal.

Was trying to find the right bulb layout.

Was thinking 2 420s and then 2 10k and the other 2 not sure... I don't want to overdo the actinic but I am planning on adding a few stonies into my aquarium.

It is wierd some people swear by Giesemann and others by UVL... I guess there are pros and cons for each.

[DarG]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12074945#post12074945 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Obi-dad
DarG, do you actually have the UVL T5 super actinic? Because the ones that I have are (to my eye) purple with some blue, whereas the ATI and Giessman pure actinics are just purple.

I just received a pair of Giesemann actinics from an internet seller one shipping day away. Unfortunately, they both arrived broken. What UPS did to bend a double walled shipping box so badly that the one side of the crease was actually torn I can only imagine. But UPS does it again !!! So I guess it will be a few more days until I can get a look at these.

95accord, I was hoping to get a quick look at these bulbs and compare with the UVL's to see what better first hand info I could give you on the Giesemann 420nm actinics. I'll post back when I finally get some of these in one piece.

[DarG]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12076221#post12076221 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by rgreenpc
I am looking at doing a 6x39 on my 65gal.

Was trying to find the right bulb layout.

Was thinking 2 420s and then 2 10k and the other 2 not sure... I don't want to overdo the actinic but I am planning on adding a few stonies into my aquarium.

It is wierd some people swear by Giesemann and others by UVL... I guess there are pros and cons for each.

Depends on how blue you want it or what kind of look you want and how much par the corals need. You can throw a blue plus in with the 2 actinics and 2 10K's and that should give you a blue/actinic tint that isnt overwhelming but is noticeable. They you can go bluer with another blue plus. Or stay about the same with an aquablue. Or go a little warmer/whiter with a 3rd 10K or warm up further with a lower K bulb like a 5000K or even 3500k.

Seek out Grim Reefer, he is good at suggesting bulb combos for par and different looks.

[DarG]

Got the replacements for the broken Giesemann actinics this morning.

Im not sure how the Giesemann actinic can be seen as more purple than the UVL because it certainly isnt to my eyes. Im glad I took a look at these Gman actinics so I could see for myself. UVL's are the better actinic IMO. The Gmans are definitely a usuable lamp. The difference is not that great. But the Giesemann appears whiter than the UVL. Side by side, the UVL has a slightly stronger/deeper actinic color. The Giesemann color is very similiar it is just slightly whiter as in less color. Up against a different color bulb you can see that it is a good actinic. But to me, seeing the Giesemann finally, the UVL is the better 420nm bulb.