observations of lighting change

[dlove18]

first off, I know this doesn't prove anything. it's just what happened in my tank after a lighting change.


I've been running 440w of VHO lighting since last december. I started with 2 actinic white(12k?) and 2 super actinic. as I replaced the bulbs I switched to all actinic white. the only corals that grew well under the VHO was a monti digitata and blue xenia. my mushrooms would slowly crawl into a shaded spot. 440w of VHO was a LOT of light. my sps frags never did much.
the first week of october, I bought a 48" sunpod with 2x 150w 14k HQIs. I went from 440 watts to 300 watts. my corals seems to love it.

here is a frag that I had for at least 9 months under VHO.

http://www.reeffrontiers.com/photos_members/showphoto.php?photo=7667

here is the same coral after less than 1 month of HQI lighting.

http://www.reeffrontiers.com/photos_members/showphoto.php?photo=7666

(I hope these pics show up)
I'm not sure why 300 watts of HQI seems to be better than 440w of VHO. so far, I'm impressed. I have a icecap ballast that will run 4x t5 HO. I may buy some bulbs just to see how t5 would compare. lighting seems to be the biggest challenge on such a narrow tank. the downside of only running HQIs is:there are tons of shadows. the VHOs lit the whole tank.

tank specs:
55 gallon w/CPR overflow, mag 7 return, 20 gallon sump, approx 70# LR, coralife SS125, 2 modded maxi-jets@ 1600gph on seperate timers at 30 second intervals. (sometimes they run together, sometimes seperate, sometimes not at all) flow goes from 500-3700gph.

salt is at 35ppt
PH 8.4
calc 480
alk 8 dkh
nitrates and phosphates don't show up on tests
I add 50ml of calcium chloride and 50 ml of sodium carbonate daily.


full tank:
http://www.reeffrontiers.com/photos_members/showphoto.php?photo=7668

 

[DonW]

It has nothing to do with watts. Its the intensity, now the light is actually reaching the corals. Put 250s on there and you will really notice a difference.

Don

 

[returnofsid]

A great example of why Watts/gallon is such a useless means of judging lighting. It doesn't take into account the intensity or ability of the light to penetrate water.

 

[dlove18]

you read my mind don. I've already been looking at the 250w sunpods. I'm considering just buying a big tank and redoing everything.

my temps are already on the high side @ almost 82. I would probably need a chiller with the 250s. ......or at least more fans. btw: temps are the same as they were with the VHOs.

everything you read says in tanks less than 24" deep flourescent lights are all you need. maybe T5s punch more than VHO. I had that birdnest almost on the surface under the VHO. I had to change all my rock work and lower all my corals. I have a blue bottlebrush that didn't get color until I put it on the sandbed. what I'm trying to say is: the difference is HUGE. it's not just the SPS that is growing faster. my mushrooms, and zoas are growing much faster too.

 

[returnofsid]

T5HO have a lot more punch than VHO...that's partly due to the reflectors though. Also the ability to put more bulbs in the same amount of space helps. I currently have a 6 bulb, Tek5 fixture over my 75 and am able to keep just about anything. Even my Acros are growing well and keeping their color. I even have a Purple Sebae on the bottom of the tank that's thriving.

There's a VERY long thread over on RC that compares T5HO to MH. That thread, along with a lot of other reading I've done, has led me to believe that down to about 18-20" T5Ho, with correct reflectors, are every bit as good, if not better than 250MH.

The power of T5s is in the reflector. Quality fixtures have individual reflectors or a molded reflector that bends around each bulb in a "gull wing" shape.

 

[dnjan]

T5HO have a lot more punch than VHO...that's partly due to the reflectors though.

AMEN! The built-in reflectors in VHO bulbs are not very good.