![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southwest Florida
Posts: 59
|
Outer Orbit lighting metal hilide with either - t5 actinic or PC - which one???
Ok I am soooo torn about which light to buy.
I just upgraded my reef setup to a 29 gal tank. My old light is to small now. I have it rigged up to work for now but it really needs to be replaced. I plan to buy an "Outer orbit" light made by current. I am torn between to simliliar 24" lights Both lights have a 150 watt 10,000k HQI metal halide. the difference is that one model has 2 - 65 watt Dual Actinic 420nm/ 460nm with 4 white moon lights. The other light has 2 - 45 watt SlimPaq T5HO Actinic 420nm & 460nm lamps and 12 lunar lights (6 white and 6 blue) each color lunar light can be run seperately or together. I've been reading all week and still can't decide which atinic is better. The t5 setup is about $100.00 more than the PC. You can find all the specs on both lights at:http://www.current-usa.com/ the models #'s I am looking at are 1040 and 1070 My 29 gal tank has almost 60 lbs of live rock, a goos sand bed, and a 10 gal refugium. I have 2 fish, a Domino Damsel (his name is Spot) and 1 Scooter Blenny. Also I have a cleaner shrimp, a few crabs and snails. As for corals and inverts. I have 1 very small yellow cucumber, (who just split into 2 a few days ago and both are doing well), a few mushrooms. 2 candy canes, 1 frog spawn, several pulsing xannias and a recently addded sun polyp. I have only had a saltwater tank for a few months and this is my 1st post. Ok let the opions fly and Thanks to anyone who replies. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Mentor, Ohio
Posts: 466
|
Without a doubt--the T5's. I've used both, and actinic T5's are much better at fluorescing your corals than PCs.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Oshkosh, Wi
Posts: 1,297
|
I agree with cary
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southwest Florida
Posts: 59
|
Thank you both!
I was leaning that way but just was'nt sure. Ok while I'm at it a few more questions: 1-- If I go with the t5 will I be limited in anyway? My LFS told me that because the t5 has less watts I won't be able to keep a clam. Not a huge deal. Just curious. (I can get the t5 with 250watt instead of the 150 watt metal halide but the 250watt is really really expensive. much more than I wan't to spend.) 2--The light I'm using now is a current PC with the daylights, actinic and white lunar lights. (80 watts ) I have'nt had a metal halide before. Is there anything special I should know now about it to avoid problems later. 3-- Finally will the t5 actinic look as good or better than the actinic I am used to? Ok that's all my questions for now, what do you think?
__________________
This all started because of a 4.00 hand me down fish. Current Tank Info: 65 gal - reef |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Mentor, Ohio
Posts: 466
|
If I read your post right you are talking about two fixtures, both having MH but the only difference is the supplemental actinic lighting. One has T5, one has CF. In terms of being able to keep high light demanding livestock such as clams either would allow you to do that--it's the MH that counts here. (If you want to keep SPS and clams such as maximas or croceas you might be better off with the 250W rather than the 150W, but then you have the additional issues of expense, heat, etc . . )
The difference in wattage between T5 and CF isn't as important as the difference in PAR (essentially the brightness or amount of usable light). T5's have much more PAR, appear much brighter, and give your livestock much more usable light. They are more efficient. For example, on my 75g I recently switched from 440W of VHO to 320W of T5's--the light is so much brighter! Don't worry about the watt per gallon rule--it doesn't really apply these days. As for the appearance of the actinics--T5's will look better too. I have tanks with CF, MH, and T5's. I only use the CF on a seahorse tank where the appearance of the actinics is really unimportant. They don't make "good" CF actinics. VHO actinics probably give you the best fluorescence, and T5's are pretty close. There are a number of different brands of T5 actinics available so depending upon the appearance of the bulbs that come with the fixture you can always swap out. I think you will be amazed at the difference in appearance between your old fixture and the new one with MH & T5's. As for switching from the old fixture to the new--it will be much brighter so you have to worry about light shock to your livestock. Reduce your lighting period for a week or two (shorter hours than gradually increase) and/or cover the top of the tank with window screening (initially several layers than gradually remove one layer at a time). You can buy a roll of window screen material at home improvement stores fairly cheaply. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southwest Florida
Posts: 59
|
That was a lot of info. I really appreciate you taking the time. What you are describing makes sense to me (finally) I am going to by the halide with the t5 actinic. I am really excited to see it now. I will also careful not to shock my livestock. How long do you think I should put the halide on for the 1st day. Maybe 1 hour the 1st day and go up an hour every other day or something?
__________________
This all started because of a 4.00 hand me down fish. Current Tank Info: 65 gal - reef |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Mentor, Ohio
Posts: 466
|
I would probably start with a 4 to 5 hour photoperiod and increase by an hour or two each week. The window screen idea is probably better--maybe combine the two? Two to three layers of window screen (depending upon the thickness) and remove one each 5 to 7 days?
What kind of livestock do you have? How high up in the tank are the corals? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 749
|
I have both.
First I got the Current MH with the PC's for my 34 gallon tank. Just finished setting up a 95 gallon. This time I got the Current MH with the T5's. What a difference!!! The PC's are not bad but nothing compared to the T5's. Spent the extra money you won't regret it. Do a good search online. I found a store where the difference was (only) $65 Michael
__________________
Current tanks: 40G frag tank and an Elos System 120. Proud winner of "nTOTM March 2010" here at RC Current Tank Info: Elos Mini and soon an Elos 120 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: sacramento, ca
Posts: 2,729
|
I have the 48 inch with 2 150 watt mh's and 4 t5 actinics. I love it. I have been growing sps and a crocea clam with no problems. If you can afford the 250, get it. But the 150 is perfectly adequate
__________________
Andy Sacramento, CA Current Tank Info: 55 gallon reef w/20 gallon sump/ER135/ 75 pounds of live rock, 4 in sandbed, 2 b&w ocellaris clowns, yellow watchman/pistol, rosy scaled wrasse, Mystery wrasse, Copperbanded Butterfly, Lighting 48" outer orbit 2 150 mh/ 4 t5 actinics |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Missouri
Posts: 67
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Southwest Florida
Posts: 59
|
Final outcome:
I bought the 36" (Outer Orbit. It has (2) 250 watt MH,T5 actinics and both Blue+White moonlights. I am going to hang it. Eventually I will probably go with the 36" wide 55 gal tank. Thanks to all who commented.
__________________
This all started because of a 4.00 hand me down fish. Current Tank Info: 65 gal - reef |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|