which is brighter, t-5 or halides?

[jeffnsa]

i keep reading that t-5's are only good at keeping sps at the top half of the tank because the don't have enough par to reach the bottom. but i seem to remember a test done that stated that t-5's had better par at the bottom of a 30in tall tank than a 250w halide. has anyone else heard that or am i going crazy.

[mcliffy2]

If you get good T5s you can keep anything in your tank, top to bottom. By good that means individual reflectors and active cooling and/or overdriving the bulbs with ice caps. You can keep anything, top to bottom with these setup properly. IMO the only reason to go with halide is if you cant live without the shimmer.

[mordibv]

It depends on what u want to keep ; the height of the tank and of course your taste of a white looking tank or the deep blue . Why not use both to get the best of these technologies .

It's what I do .. I get the shimmer and the par . BIGGRIN

[James77]

There is no real need to overdrive the bulbs, but individual reflectors and cooling are a must. I find the tank to be brighter with the T5's due to less shadows, better coverage, and more light directed into the tank(as opposed to the walls, floors).

Ive also read, from Hahnmeister I believe, that T5s send more PAR deeper than halides do. The only thing halides have over T5s is the shimmer- which is greatly reduced if you have excellent halide reflectors(no longer a point source). I barely had any shimmer at all on my old 175 bowfront due to lumenarc reflectors-only the very top edges had any noticeable.

Dudesters PAR readings from his ATI Powermodule over his 30" deep tank.-
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12347636#post12347636 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Dudester
I have a 10-lamp Powermodule on my 30" deep tank, and even with my 4" of 'dead space' I still get excellent PAR values at the front and rear of the tank.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b27/mjosephs/179g%20rimless/PARside12-8-07.jpg [/B]

[jthomps123]

The only thing halides have over T5s is the shimmer- which is greatly reduced if you have excellent halide reflectors(no longer a point source). I barely had any shimmer at all on my old 175 bowfront due to lumenarc reflectors-only the very top edges had any noticeable. I just upgraded from 2 Aqualite fixtures to a single Lumenbright reflector on a lightmover, and the shimmer is CRAZY now, SOOO much more than before. Even/ especially on the dark side of the tank (when the lightrail has traveled to the opposite side) the shimmer is incredible.

[areze]

I believe icecaps run 4' T5s around 70 watts?

T5 and MH are very similair in par per watt, MH are more "efficient" for lumens, but when you subtract out their waste on UV and IR it comes out similair for par.

with that said, 4' bulb, 70 watts, 35watts of light for 2'(easy to compare to MH at 2'). a 2' deep tank can fit approx 8 runs of T5 lighting. 8*35=280watts of light

now MH can have 150-1000w of light in a 2'x2' span.

so now you can see the different between the 2 I think... MH offers more light density than T5 ever can, which is why MH can be extremely popular, if you have a tank that is 12 or 18" wide, you see even further how MH density can benefit you to get deeper penetration with additional watts in a smaller package instead of only 4 or 6 runs of T5.

edit: I know watts are about the worst way to compare 2 lights, and I dont mean this to be taken as an exact comparison, but it doesnt need to be, when your comparing 280w to 400 or 1000w halide, easy to see who wins, or 140w of T5 on a 12" tank to 250w of MH, again easy to see who might win that one.

[mcliffy2]

It depends on what u want to keep

No offense intended, but this really is not true. There really isn't anything you can keep with MHs that you can't with T5s, top-to-bottom.

areze - good statistical info. I'll add that if all that seems confusing, the practical impact is that bottom line, you can go with either choice and you'll be able to keep whatever you want. (altho I'll add that IME the blanketing coverage of T5s can actually be too much for some LPS).

[areze]

yeah, no doubt its 2 ways to get to the same point. obviously when you get down to it, the MH might be brighter, and that might be the difference in growth rates for certain corals down deep in a tank. and hypotheticly for VERY deep tanks, maybe just not a good choice. but Id say the different maker would be upwards of 30-36" deep before Id say a clam or SPS on the sand bed might not like T5 lighting(only because you cant shoehorn enough of them in there)

[grigsy]

I have found Halide to be a better all around choice. Better PAR, better ripple effect in the water, better look. I can keep SPS growing better under halide than T5 also.

Halide would be my preference.

[jjoos99]

I have t-5 over my tank and am dissapointed with the growth rate in my corals. I have got frags from others that have halide lit tanks and in my tank they dont retain the same colors. I am running (7) 60in t-5 that are overdriven over a 180 gallon. I am currently putting together a halide setup to switch out the t-5s.
Jeff

[Harry_Fish]

I think it depends on the bulbs.

I had cheap stock bulbs (T5) I replaced them with Geissman
bulbs and what a differance it made in the colors and growth.

[RetroAndreas]

I set up a new mh fixture over my tank at christmas and the first thing my daughters said was how much more natural the tank looks now.

Both are good but I like the point source effect of halides.

I agree with a poster above, "why not get both".

[chadfarmer]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14120946#post14120946 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jjoos99
I have t-5 over my tank and am dissapointed with the growth rate in my corals. I have got frags from others that have halide lit tanks and in my tank they dont retain the same colors. I am running (7) 60in t-5 that are overdriven over a 180 gallon. I am currently putting together a halide setup to switch out the t-5s.
Jeff


there is more factors than lights

[troyman]

halides are still the best lighting for penetration color and natural t5s is good as a supplement lighting they give a black light effect and color is not natural people put down halides are the ones that dont have them or know what they are talking about halides is still the best natural lighting why have 30 t5s lights on your tank when 2 halides will blow them away for sure

[JohnnyBassMan]

friend of my said with T5, the SPS will grow wide and with MH the SPS will grow taller but will be less light at its base.

[Mojo Jojo]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14121748#post14121748 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by JohnnyBassMan
friend of my said with T5, the SPS will grow wide and with MH the SPS will grow taller but will be less light at its base.

Not true all SPS will grow upward reaching for the light. There are a few factors such as placement and light intervals that give the widen grow patterns.

jeffnsa My younger brother has his tank with T5s and things grow just fine. Like everyone else said light is not the only thing that makes corals grow. IMO good husbandry all around is essential.

[NyReefNoob]

as someone who used t5's for 2 yr's on mainly sps dominated tanks, and currently using mh on my new set-up, i personally liked the t5's better, ran 6 36" t5's od on a 660 and a 430 on a custom 50g breeder and had great growth and color, my pm grew better under t5 then mh, and only reason i am using mh now is because i got a great deal on fixture { would have cost more for new reflectors and bulbs then i paid for this one ) btw it's a coralife pro 24" 250w mh, t5 = better because of being able to run more color temps and better over all light coverage. oh plus less electricity. i really dont feel they put out less heat then mh either, but then again i run a chiller