t-5 or t-12

[bizzleb01]

What's the real difference between the two and which would you prefer? Also will an ice cap 660 work for both of them?

[noboddi]

a t5 is 5/8" wide and t12 is 12/8" wide. T5 being narrower makes more use out of reflectors as well as you get more bulbs across your tank. I am surprised at the question

An Icecap 660 can drive either VHO - but you get more bang for your buck with T5 either way

[iamwrasseman]

go with the t-5s because of the ease of purchasing bulbs for your personel needs .and i second what noboddi said too .

[bizzleb01]

I know that t-5's are a smaller bulb, but are they more energy efficient and cheaper or something? I'm only looking to get about 400w of light from a lighting system, but I'm done with pc. I'm not keeping sps or anything so 400w is fine for my setup.

[bizzleb01]

And what do you mean more bang for your buck? If you have four 110w t-12 and four 110w t-5 won't you get the same light output? I'm new to vho and ho lighting so if I sound stupid sorry. Can you still only run four 48" t-5's off of one 660?

[reefgroupie]

I am new to the reef hobby so I hope I don't come off as foolish but have two t5 54w bulbs on my 55 gal tank. Will that be enough light to run a reef. If not how much do you suggest.

[noboddi]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15553388#post15553388 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bizzleb01
And what do you mean more bang for your buck? If you have four 110w t-12 and four 110w t-5 won't you get the same light output? I'm new to vho and ho lighting so if I sound stupid sorry. Can you still only run four 48" t-5's off of one 660?

yes, you can still only run 4 bulbs off 1 icecap 660, and yes, you get more light output from t5s of equal wattage

t5s are narrower, which means the reflectors can reflect the light around the bulb and into the tank much more efficiently. a t12 is so thick that the reflector reflects much of the light back through the bulb. t5s with individual reflectors increase the light something like 3x. So you get more light, and deeper penetration.

T5s are much more popular so you have many more bulb choices and higher PAR bulbs. There is nothing T12 does that T5 does not do as well or better, the reverse cannot be said

[bizzleb01]

Thank you very much for your info. It is helpful and will help me make my decision. I guess that's why my lfs doesn't have reflectors on their t-12.

[dsun]

Do they make 60" or 72" T5 bulbs? If not, if you have a 6' tank than that means 2 sets of T5 bulbs to span the length of the tank as opposed to just one T12. If getting lots of light isn't a major requirement, the cost savings of 1/2 the electronics and 1/2 the number of bulbs to replace may be worth considering. Sure a 6' T12 isn't the same cost as a 3' T5 but it's not twice the cost either.

[bizzleb01]

How high should I mount t-5 bulbs above my 90 gallon?

[noboddi]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15557306#post15557306 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by dsun
Do they make 60" or 72" T5 bulbs? If not, if you have a 6' tank than that means 2 sets of T5 bulbs to span the length of the tank as opposed to just one T12. If getting lots of light isn't a major requirement, the cost savings of 1/2 the electronics and 1/2 the number of bulbs to replace may be worth considering. Sure a 6' T12 isn't the same cost as a 3' T5 but it's not twice the cost either.

yes, they make 60" T5. 72" no, but a lot of people do retros 1 size smaller, say 48" on a 60" tank, and then stagger the bulbs so the whole tank gets coverage. The only time light isn't a requirement is on a FOWLR tank, and I don't think we would be talking about VHO or options like that if it were FOWLR

I have a splash shield so my T5s are about 3 1/2" over the water

[wet reefer]

I wouldn't worry too much about staggering the lamps or even using 60". You may find yourself looking for shaded areas after going to T-5. I went with 6- 60" over a 72" (18" deep) tank using Ice Cap reflectors and ballasts leaving 6" at each end with no lamp directly above. It is still too bright for some LPS, Monties and other low light corals at the ends of the tank.

[bizzleb01]

How high is too high to mount them over my 90g (24" high). I want to build a new hood and it would put my lights about 10-12" off of the tank, is this too high for good light penetration?

[bizzleb01]

Ok, another question. What's the highest wattage 48" t-5 bulbs? I was just told that 54w was highest they made, and if that's the case i'll only have 216w for my 90g which is less than I have now with pc.

[addicted2reefin]

u cant look at wattage between pcs and t5s. pcs are apple and t5s are oranges. theres no comparison. oranges kick the #(@# out of apples! the light output on a t5 is a little better than on pcs, also with the individual reflectors, light is better reflected, meaning NO light is wasted going back into the bulb, or elsewhere. there was a test done that ran 3 t5 bulbs with individual reflectors and 4 bulbs with a single reflector covering the all. the 3 bulb had HIGHER par output. a icecap660 will drive the 54watts to 80 watts.
i have 6x54 watt on my 75 and i can keep sps anywhere

[RC Slocum Rules]

There is nothing T12 does that T5 does not do as well or better, the reverse cannot be said


There is one application where those who know the difference will choose T-12.

When using an actinic bulb. Using a real actinic bulb, many will choose the t-12 over t-5 because it just has more power. Actinic bulbs are not for PAR but are used for color and the most power you can get is with T-12.

[bizzleb01]

Ok, so they do make an 80w t-5 then? Also, I keep seeing and hearing about PAR, what is it?

I know I sound really dumb by asking these questions, but I really don't know much about tank lighting (obviously)

[bigfruits]

i think reefgeek has 80 watt t-5s.

good reflectors and cooling (fans) will increase par substantially.

high par - sps, clams, some lps
med par - lps, zoas, rics, softies
lower par - some shrooms... sun coral...

do a search on par. you'll find plenty to read

[noboddi]

80 watt T5s are standard. They are either 60" T5 HO bulbs, or 54" T5 bulbs overdriven (VHO) by an Icecap ballast

[addicted2reefin]

a 54 watt t5 bulb can be driven to 80 watts. URI /UVLclaims there bulbs can be STABELY driven to 80 watts. they make on there bulbs v-ho V being variable. it also says 54/80

PAR is the AVAILIBLE ammount of USEFULL light to plants and possibably corals. it hasnt been PROVEN that corals use the same spectrums for PAR, but having a high par hasent been a bad thing in a reef tank.

[bizzleb01]

Thank you very much for the info. So a standard 54w t-5 powered by and icecap 660 will put out 80w?

[das75]

for supplement lighting started with 2x40W T12 and switched to 2x54w T5 (all 4' fixtures).

Even though just a difference of 14W, amazing how much more light with the T5s.

[bizzleb01]

I'm going to be using the lighting for my main lighting, so I guess my real question is if you had the option to use 4x110w t-12 or 4x65w t-5 for a 90 gallon tank? I don't currently have any sps but would like to get some in the future if I had enough lighting.

[JPMagyar]

Without being too emotional I'd like to respectfully disagree with the answer given so far. There is little research into the true efficiency differences between T5 and T12 lamps. Infact the only direct comparison that I have seen so far was done by Dana Riddle during his T5 tests. (http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/3/review) At the tail end of his article he mentioned that a T5 lamp twice the length and more than double the wattage only produced 25% more PAR than a similar T12.

Take a look at the logic of whats commonly used today. A 48 inch UVL Super Actinic VHO lamp is 110 watts, and that lamp has been the staple of reefers for decades. A standard 48 inch T5 is 54 watts. The implication of Dana's cursory look is that 2 x 48 inch T5s would only just exceed the PAR of a single 48 inch T12, but it would do so at almost twice the cost. I know for a fact that a much more thorough comparison of T5 versus T12 costs and efficiencies is in the works, but at the moment I admit to wondering how much of the current love affair with T5's is based on fact and how much is fad. The gases inside the UVL Super Atinic VHO T12 are the same as the gases in the UVL Super Actinic V-HO T5 so the spektral output will be the same but the PAR of a single T5 will be less so the real question is how many T5s are needed to make a great tank versus how many T12s, and I'm just not certain that one can unequivically say that 6 T5s put out more PAR than say 4 T12s.


Without question T5 lamps are versatile when it comes to color variation and many folks here on RC have spectacular tanks using T5 only lighting, but I think its fair to ask are T5s really "All that".



EDIT: I should also mention that 48 inch T12 light fixtures can be purchased at HomeDepot for less than $10, and the same can not be said for T5 fixtures, and that saving can add up.

[bizzleb01]

Well, there's one other person that is for t-12's other than my local lfs. He swears by t-12 and it seems everyone on here swears by t-5.

So you can use a standard t-12 ballast from home depot? I don't think i'd want to use the standard endcaps due to them not being water resistant.

I think I'm leaning on the t-12's also. I do realize that I won't have the great color variance with the t-12 but I think for my situation and budget the t-12's will suit me better for the time being.

[tufacody]

I supplement with VHO actinics. Nothing looks better.

[JPMagyar]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15581240#post15581240 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bizzleb01


So you can use a standard t-12 ballast from home depot? I don't think i'd want to use the standard endcaps due to them not being water resistant.




The standard ballast that comes with the HomeDepot strip will not drive the VHO bulbs to their fullest potential but they will work. I take them apart and wire in an IceCap ballast for my frag system, and at less than $10 a strip I just replace the strip when they start to corrode which is usually more than 2 years or so.

[bizzleb01]

So instead of buying the expensive stand offs and end caps you just use the cheap ones and replace them every couple of years?

[noboddi]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15580884#post15580884 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by JPMagyar
Without being too emotional I'd like to respectfully disagree with the answer given so far. There is little research into the true efficiency differences between T5 and T12 lamps. Infact the only direct comparison that I have seen so far was done by Dana Riddle during his T5 tests. (http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/3/review) At the tail end of his article he mentioned that a T5 lamp twice the length and more than double the wattage only produced 25% more PAR than a similar T12.

Take a look at the logic of whats commonly used today. A 48 inch UVL Super Actinic VHO lamp is 110 watts, and that lamp has been the staple of reefers for decades. A standard 48 inch T5 is 54 watts. The implication of Dana's cursory look is that 2 x 48 inch T5s would only just exceed the PAR of a single 48 inch T12, but it would do so at almost twice the cost. I know for a fact that a much more thorough comparison of T5 versus T12 costs and efficiencies is in the works, but at the moment I admit to wondering how much of the current love affair with T5's is based on fact and how much is fad. The gases inside the UVL Super Atinic VHO T12 are the same as the gases in the UVL Super Actinic V-HO T5 so the spektral output will be the same but the PAR of a single T5 will be less so the real question is how many T5s are needed to make a great tank versus how many T12s, and I'm just not certain that one can unequivically say that 6 T5s put out more PAR than say 4 T12s.


Without question T5 lamps are versatile when it comes to color variation and many folks here on RC have spectacular tanks using T5 only lighting, but I think its fair to ask are T5s really "All that".



EDIT: I should also mention that 48 inch T12 light fixtures can be purchased at HomeDepot for less than $10, and the same can not be said for T5 fixtures, and that saving can add up.

Not the whole story. To make a more apples-apples comparison, Dana should have tested T5 VHO at 80 watts to compare it to T12 VHO

Also, the PAR readings he quotes are for just the bulbs; they don't factor in the reflectors. If you read how those tests are done it is bulbs only.

I have always said that T5s are all about the reflectors, and where they come into their own is with a high quality reflector that wraps around the bulb and focuses the light into the tank. This is something that T12 does not benefit as much from.

My ATI Sunpower fixture produces 300 PAR at the bottom of my 90g tank. That's just a 4 bulb fixture, HO fixture, and comparable to MH. If it were just the bulbs, T12 would be a contender. But its not, its the whole package, and T12 suffers when it comes to reflectors.

And I do agree that T12 VHO actinics make the best supplementation. The bulbs have the same gases, the ballasts are the same between T5 and T12 VHO, but the T12s actinics look better.

T5s aren't a fad like you say.

[bizzleb01]

So noboddi, you are using just a four bulb t-5 with reflectorsfor your 90 and are completely happy with it? Are you able to keep sps with it?

[noboddi]

Well, I'm not trying to keep SPS in this tank. But the recommended minimum PAR for Acropora is 400. I have that 3/4s of the way down in my tank.

Montipora I could keep fine. If this were an SPS tank, I would opt for a 6 bulb fixture, and my PAR would go up and I could keep SPS without worrying about placement.

But my PAR readings are much like an MH fixture - 1740 above the water, 800 something under the water line, 602 midway, and 308 at the bottom.