Lighting for my 180

[Folta]

I've been mulling over what to do for lighting for my 180. My original plan was to 'add-on' to what I have now (two m58 magnetic 250W ballasts with XM 10,000k bulbs, spider reflectors) by adding a third of each of these and one or two 110w VHO actinic bulbs.

 

However, a few things have me thinking of changing this.

 

1. I still do not plan to have a canopy. So I would like to have my lighting to have a more refined, finished look.

 

2. I want to get more oomf out of my lights, especially at depth - I plan to make my rock structures much less wall like.

 

3. I am considering going to 20k as opposed to 10k with vho's.

 

After doing some research, I have pretty much decided on reflectors - Reef Optix III - as far as I have read, they are pretty much the best and since its a one time purchase, might as well make it a good one.

 

This leaves ballasts and bulbs.

 

As far as the bulbs I've been looking at XM and AB. I did some checking on sanjays website and made a few plots.

 

Now, if I go with 10,000k bulbs, we get these spectral graphs for the XM vs. the AB:

 

 

I have the icecap electronic ballast listed here, but changing the ballast for this really only moved the graph up and down, not the difference. As you can see, the AB bulbs are 'spikeyer', where the XM's have a more even spectrum. As to what that means, I'm not really sure. I'm sure the color will look a little different between the two (I'm thinking the AB would look a little more blue as it has a spike around 420).

 

If I go with the AB, I'm also not sure if I should get the icecap electronic ballasts or if I should go with PFO magnetics:

 

 

The magnetics give a little more oomf, however I understand they also tend to run hotter. I have magnetic ballasts now for my 55, and I really don't think about the heat as I have the ballasts out and in the corner. Electronic ballasts also cost a little more, but again this isn't an item I plan to replace constantly so I'm willing to put in extra if I feel its worth extra.

 

Last in line, not sure if I want to go 10,000K or 20,000K.

 

 

On the up side of the 20k's, I get the blue look with 3 pendants and it will be a nice clean look. On the downside, I'm not sure exactly how blue it will be and I definately do not like the really blue look.

 

On the side of the 10k's, they are white to start out with and I can add VHO's until I get a nice slight blue color that I like. Also, my understanding is that VHO actinics really make the corals 'pop' in color. On the downside, this means that in addition to the three pendants, I will also need a strip light going accross the front. I don't know if this will look obtrusive or not.

 

 

Alright, so everyone give me your advice, your experience, and opinions!

[BeltwayBandit]

Ok. First Ballasts:

 

From what I have read and researched electronic ballasts are more energy efficient than magnetic (hence mags running hotter, heat=waste).

 

Second Bulbs,

 

I went from 20k to 10k w/VHO actinics. I liked the 20k but felt it was just a bit too blue. I also like the flexibility with the 10k and VHO to split the lighting. My VHO's come on an hour or so before the MH and they stay on an hour or so after the MH so I get a slightly more realistic lighting period. And I like the look of the 10k w/VHO better than just 20K. I was using XM bulbs.

[Folta]

Thanks for the reply!

 

I've heard that too about the ballasts being more energy efficient - but I didn't see by how much. How long would it take to make up the difference in cost between a magnetic and an electronic ballast?

 

 

So the XM 20,000k's looked too blue to you? That is a good point about the flexibility with intensity.. having the VHO's on a little longer than the MH's.

 

I think I'm leaning towards 10k AB with ROIII+ and icecap electronic ballasts, with VHO supplement. Not sure how I'm going to make the VHO's look presentable though.

[BeltwayBandit]

Thanks for the reply!

 

I've heard that too about the ballasts being more energy efficient - but I didn't see by how much.  How long would it take to make up the difference in cost between a magnetic and an electronic ballast?

So the XM 20,000k's looked too blue to you?  That is a good point about the flexibility with intensity.. having the VHO's on a little longer than the MH's.

 

I think I'm leaning towards 10k AB with ROIII+ and icecap electronic ballasts, with VHO supplement.  Not sure how I'm going to make the VHO's look presentable though.

45982[/snapback]

 

 

Hopefully with my new ammeter I will be able to tell you in dollars and cents what the cost savings of an eb over magnetic is...

[HowardofNOVA]

Folta,

If your looking for Icecap MH Ballast Check out:http://www.affordablelighting.com/metal_halide_ballast.html

Look at the 3 on the bottom, Excellent prices for VERY similiar ballast

 

I love the 20k bulbs myself (Check out our post on the PAR Meter Readings and go to the link) I've looked at alot of tanks and everytank has it's own appeal with 10k, 14k, 15k and 20k bulbs, so its just a personal choice, but the readings on the 20k's are up there in scale. I've gotten good growth from their 20k 250w Chinese bulbs as well, but research is still going on.

Chip "Flowerseller" used AB bulbs very favorably, might check with him on those?

Howard

[ErikS]

Yes, magnetics will cost more electricity & produce heat.........but......they will outlive the electronics by a good margin (and they can be repaired).

 

As you've already discovered the mags outperform the electronics w/ DE bulbs by a significant margin. This is due to the fact that the mags drive the bulbs hard, most run at a minimum of 290w where the electronics drive them with an acutal 250w. This also means the mags are drawing more on the order of 330w (BB's meter could tell us exactly).

 

Moi? If you're going with such good reflectors I'd drive the bulbs hard & run them less time (like 6hrs).

 

If you do decide on electronics then check EVC - they produce more par/watt than IceCaps (the EVC are pretty much the top performers for electronic).

 

If you want a bluish/white w/o supplements then pass on any 10K - they're definately "yellow". You might look at 14K bulbs - you can get a large amount of PAR w/o giving up the blue/white look you seek. Check Phoenix, Aquaconnect, or Giesemann - you'll find PAR in the upper 80's w/ a lot less "yellow" than any 10K.

[Folta]

Ok, so I'm still not sure about going magnetic or electronic. Also, thats a good point about bulb color.. maybe if I go 14,000k I will get the slight blue color I desire and still look sleek.

 

When you say par in the upper 80's, do you mean @ about 80% of what 10,000k's would give me?

 

 

Here's another graph of phoenix 14k's vs AB 20k's:

 

[Folta]

I think the trouble is that no matter how much research I do on this online, even including pictures, I just can't really get a feel for the color it will show.

 

Also, unfortunately sanjay does not have 14,000k hamilton bulbs for spectral graphs, hellolights is selling them for $66 each at the moment.

 

Anyone here run 14,000K DE Hamilton bulbs by chance?

[ErikS]

When you say par in the upper 80's, do you mean @ about 80% of what 10,000k's would give me?

well, sometimes it works out that way but I was referring to PAR in the upper 80's. For example Phoenix w/ M80 ballast = PAR of 87 (Sanjay uses PPFD as the label).

 

I've not used them, but I've also not read about anyone really happy with the Hamilton 14K's - most seem to prefer the ones I listed.

 

Even more joy - the color of the lamp will vary with the ballast. For example folks who run the Phoenix in electronics tend to think they're too blue, the same lamp when run on M80's are very white with a trace of blue.

 

The joy of choosing lights :D

[Folta]

Haha, yeah, it figures.

 

a par of 87 at what depth? 87 is pretty low as far as PAR ratings go (check out the excel sheet to see what I mean) if its near the surface.

 

I'm defintely looking for the white with a trace of blue coloring - but I do want to make sure I get some fluorescing from the corals too. I believe that a wavelength of 450 is where that stands out, right?

[Folta]

I just put in my current bulb setup - XM 10,000k SE with an M58 ballast - and was surprised to see the PPFD rating at over 130.

 

I was under the impression that the DE HQI bulbs pushed out higher par values. I put in XM 10,000k DE with an M80 ballast, and it was still only 108. Looking at the PAR spreadsheet from our tests, it seems that DE AB bulbs with icecap electronic ballast was measured at 1111, and with a magnetic ballast at 1800.

 

Was I wrong in this line of thinking?

[ErikS]

I was under the impression that the DE HQI bulbs pushed out higher par values.

They do, with the right reflectors (such as the ones you mention) they can approach 400 watt PAR. IIRC Sanjay measures @ 18" through air & not water - can't say for certain.

 

And as you found out - check the power ratings. For that bulb the M58 is drawing over 300 watts = overdriving the heck out of the bulb (like running a SE bulb on an M80 ballast)

 

Confusing, ain't it? :D (drives me nuts) Which translates for me into "get the max PAR w/ the color I want & a unit I can afford"

 

Ancedotal - I have 2x250w Phoenix 14ks over a 27" deep tank - even the highest light corals aren't happy unless they're on the bottom of the tank? (too much light, duration??????)

 

The only thing worse is chosing a skimmer.

 

Not sure to which spreadsheet you refer but IMHO Sanjay's work is pretty much gospel.

[Folta]

Very confusing! :bigcry:

 

Hopefully I will end up with something I like.

 

The spreadsheet I am referring to is the one for the par meter that was circulated (and is again circulating) through our local club.

 

Here's a link to that spreadsheet:

 

PAR Meter Spreadsheet

[davidm]

Sorry to make things more confusing, but to add my $0.02 to a previous post, I have both Aqauconnect and Hamilton 14K bulbs, (all on PFO magnetic ballasts, all SE, all 400W), and I prefer the Hamilton, even if they were the same cost (and the Hamilton are far cheaper last time I bought them). Haven't tested the PAR yet, but I do have frags from the same corals under these different lights, and don't see any difference in growth rate. sorry to add to the confusion. David

[Folta]

:P

 

Thanks for the input. Are you going to get them tested with the club's par meter?

 

 

 

Sorry to make things more confusing, but to add my $0.02 to a previous post, I have both Aqauconnect and Hamilton 14K bulbs, (all on PFO magnetic ballasts, all SE, all 400W), and I prefer the Hamilton, even if they were the same cost (and the Hamilton are far cheaper last time I bought them).  Haven't tested the PAR yet, but I do have frags from the same corals under these different lights, and don't see any difference in growth rate.  sorry to add to the confusion.  David

46160[/snapback]

[Folta]

Ok, I *think* I know what I'm going to get. It's a decent amount of money even the cheapest I've found it online, so I'm going to mull over it a few more days at least before deciding.

 

Bulbs: (3) 14,000K Phoenix Bulbs

Ballasts: (1) Blue Wave VII (Dual Ballast HQI) & (1) Blue Wave III (Single Ballast HQI)

Reflectors: (3) Reef Optix III Plus

 

The nice thing is that the Blue waves are made by Sunlight Supply, the same ones that make the Reef Optix III Plus reflectors. Also, free shipping on most of it - $30 becuase of the weight of the ballasts.

 

Blue Waves, for those who don't know, are M80 ballasts all boxed up nice and neat. They also have integrated timers on them.

 

Total cost for this setup: $1027.70 after shipping. This is from reefgeek:

 

Reef Optix 3 Plus HQI Reflector (250W)..................$99.95....3....$299.85

250W 14000K+ Metal Halide Bulb (Double-ended)...$69.95....3....$209.85

Blue Wave VII: 2-250W HQI w/ Timer....................$289.00..1....$289.00

Blue Wave III: 1-250W HQI w/ Timer.....................$199.00..1....$199.00

 

Sub-Total: $997.70

 

Shipping Charges: $30.00

State Tax: $0.00

Total: $1027.70

[ErikS]

Well bulbs are always a personal issue but I can't imagine you'll regret the Sunlight equipment - I've never read anything negative about them.

 

I have pics of the Phoenix bulbs but they don't do them justice - they show up as rather dark/blue (I suck @ pics) when in fact they're very bright & almost white.

[davidm]

I just got my Hamilton and Aquaconnect tested with the club's PAR meter last night. Thanks Howard. Surprisingly, my impressions were correct, the Aquaconnect bulb (at a distance of 6" to the surface, and 10 months old) pruduced 460 on the PAR meter, whereas the Hamilton 14000K bulb (6.5" to the surface and 13 months old) produced 771. Same ballasts and reflectors. I even prefer the color of the Hamilton over the AC, and it's much cheaper. From now on it's Hamilton over aquaconnect. I don't know much about the phoenix.

 

Good luck with your choices, there's probably no wrong decision. David M

[Folta]

ErikS,

 

glad to hear that the bulbs are almost white but just a hint of blue. Thats exactly what I'm looking for.

 

davidm,

 

awesome to hear numbers about your setup. That seems like a pretty substantial difference in par numbers! The hamiltons are 65 each, the pheonix are 69, so the price difference between the two isn't much to worry about (whats 12 dollars when I'm about to drop a grand! =p).

 

I almost want to try a couple different bulbs.. just to test them out in person. But then I'd end up with mismatched color I'm sure. Oooh, decisions, decisions!