LEDs Are Bad?

[Mojado]

sarcasm

Not long ago, I remember when the ushio 65k/ ACTINIC "03" were king of the hill.

Ask anybody who has been in the hobby any length of time how many skimmers they have tried

 

LEDs are just like anything else, YOU have to find the best way to us them in your particular setup

 

Are LEDs perfect, No, But they are the reason that Ice Cap closed its doors.

If you dont know who Icecap was, O-Well

 

Here is a nice article on lighting, http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2012/10/aafeature

http://reefbuilders.com/2010/12/15/icecap-lighting-officially-business-closes-doors/

[MrLang]

Noob here:

 

I have spoken with a local biochem PHD a lot recently who contributes to and digests a ton of research on reefs. He specializes in lighting and thinks the gap between science and hobby is a tragedy. His 2 cents on lighting is that LED is hype. Lighting requirements are not as high as lighting manufacturers would lead us to believe (who would have thought that?!). As long as you're hitting the right 2 spectrums you're fine.

 

Here is a simple example - washing your hands. How many of you use soap every time you wash your hands? Who really told you that soap was necessary to be sanitary? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3037063/ look at the results there. That study has been repeated hundreds of times with near identical results. I think this is a direct parallel to what is going on with lighting in this hobby.

[Nano sapiens]

Noob here:

 

I have spoken with a local biochem PHD a lot recently who contributes to and digests a ton of research on reefs. He specializes in lighting and thinks the gap between science and hobby is a tragedy. His 2 cents on lighting is that LED is hype. Lighting requirements are not as high as lighting manufacturers would lead us to believe (who would have thought that?!). As long as you're hitting the right 2 spectrums you're fine.

 

Here is a simple example - washing your hands. How many of you use soap every time you wash your hands? Who really told you that soap was necessary to be sanitary? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3037063/ look at the results there. That study has been repeated hundreds of times with near identical results. I think this is a direct parallel to what is going on with lighting in this hobby.

 

Facinating (insert raised eye-brow here). So, what are the 'right two spectrums' that this PHD person speaketh of?

[afyounie]

All I can say about LEDs is this; they grow my corals pretty well. I don't have optics on them, ripped those off a couple months after starting. I don't have fancy colors either. Just cool white, neutral white, and royal blue. I have a standard 29 gal which is fairly deep. I honestly think the best way to use LEDs is in combination with T5s though. LEDs produce a sun like point source while T5s create that overall sky source aka the effect of the sun reflecting off of the atmosphere. This is what I will use when I upgrade to a larger tank.

 

As for that guy on RC that spent 4k on LEDs and nothing worked. What was he thinking? I mean, why isn't anyone questioning this? Why is it LEDs that are the problem because someone was too arrogant or ignorant or both to take a step back and think logically about the problem? It's like in the engineering world where a failure occurs and everyone blames the component. Then when the actual failure review is done, they realize it was a design flaw. The majority of the time, failure is due to user error.

 

Edit: Saw the post on RC. Guy said he spent 25k trying to find the perfect fixture. I don't even know what to say to that. If you are having trouble growing corals, don't be quick to blame some piece of equipment. I think the main issue with LEDs is people leave them turned up too high. I have my blue channel down to 30% and white channel at ~25%. I'm no longer bleaching corals and getting growth.

[aviator300]

I wish i could use T5s but my tanks are all in the sub 20gal range and i can't find Good T5 fixtures for smaller tanks, only for tanks 24" or longer?

[afyounie]

I wish i could use T5s but my tanks are all in the sub 20gal range and i can't find Good T5 fixtures for smaller tanks, only for tanks 24" or longer?

 

Get a ballast, some end caps, and reflectors and you should be good. The smallest T5 bulb I could find in a quick search was 2' though.

[aviator300]

 

Get a ballast, some end caps, and reflectors and you should be good. The smallest T5 bulb I could find in a quick search was 2' though.

Thats what i'm talking about. You used to be able to get quality T5 fixtures even for Picotopes like ElFab had but no more and that means most newbees in the hobby start small and are limited to LEDs and then continue to use them when they upgrade to bigger tanks.

[1fishmonger]

The Debil!

 

I KNEW You'd be the first post I'd see on this thread!

[Lawnman]

I KNEW You'd be the first post I'd see on this thread!

Nah Basser was the first

Thats what i'm talking about. You used to be able to get quality T5 fixtures even for Picotopes like ElFab had but no more and that means most newbees in the hobby start small and are limited to LEDs and then continue to use them when they upgrade to bigger tanks.

No I think you're talking about the old satellite fixtures. Those were power compact bulbs big difference.

[Red_Blenny]

I'm a T5 guy but I don't think LEDs are all that bad. Afterall, they gave rise to nano reef tanks with "odd shape" (i.e, 12"L or 18"L) and those tanks are thriving. Look at the TOTM thread, many of them are using LEDs and those tanks are gorgeous.

 

 

 

I wish i could use T5s but my tanks are all in the sub 20gal range and i can't find Good T5 fixtures for smaller tanks, only for tanks 24" or longer?

Aquaticlife makes a 20" T5 fixture and they're fairly decent.

[aviator300]

Nah Basser was the first

No I think you're talking about the old satellite fixtures. Those were power compact bulbs big difference.

Your right.

[Lawnman]

Your right.

Yeah those little fixtures where nice. Plenty of people gutted them for led builds. They use to be up for sale all the time before the led trend came calling.

[MrLang]

 

Facinating (insert raised eye-brow here). So, what are the 'right two spectrums' that this PHD person speaketh of?

 

 

Now is about the time I get shot for stating the obvious or quoting the wavelengths wrong but we just need the peak ranges for the active photosynthetic spectrum or ~420nm and ~660nm. His point was just that the type of bulb creating the light is not relevant compared to simply having the right ranges of light present. The context for his comments were that my 10 year old 10k/actinic PC is as effective or more effective than T5, MH, LED, or any other lighting type I'm forgetting in a shallow nano tank. If you look at the spectrums of MH, T5, LED there is a lot of 'extra' light in there that is not really benefiting the coral.

 

If I know one thing about science it's that misquoting it is more dangerous than ignoring it so I'm trying not to overstep. This could be so elementary it's not worth noting OR I've said something that some hobbyists don't even understand yet, in which case it was worth my time.

[afyounie]

Yeah those little fixtures where nice. Plenty of people gutted them for led builds. They use to be up for sale all the time before the led trend came calling.

 

I still have one of these fixtures. I used it for freshwater planted tanks. Dual bulb, cooling fans, and led for moonlight.

[Lawnman]

Now is about the time I get shot for stating the obvious or quoting the wavelengths wrong but we just need the peak ranges for the active photosynthetic spectrum or ~420nm and ~660nm. His point was just that the type of bulb creating the light is not relevant compared to simply having the right ranges of light present. The context for his comments were that my 10 year old 10k/actinic PC is as effective or more effective than T5, MH, LED, or any other lighting type I'm forgetting in a shallow nano tank. If you look at the spectrums of MH, T5, LED there is a lot of 'extra' light in there that is not really benefiting the coral.

 

If I know one thing about science it's that misquoting it is more dangerous than ignoring it so I'm trying not to overstep. This could be so elementary it's not worth noting OR I've said something that some hobbyists don't even understand yet, in which case it was worth my time.

He said a 10 year old PC bulb is as effective or more effective than MH or T5? Have you ever seen a SPS coral under a brand new or old PC bulb?

I must fall into the part where you said something that some hobbyists don't even understand yet.

[GHill762]

Noob here:

 

I have spoken with a local biochem PHD a lot recently who contributes to and digests a ton of research on reefs. He specializes in lighting and thinks the gap between science and hobby is a tragedy. His 2 cents on lighting is that LED is hype. Lighting requirements are not as high as lighting manufacturers would lead us to believe (who would have thought that?!). As long as you're hitting the right 2 spectrums you're fine.

 

Here is a simple example - washing your hands. How many of you use soap every time you wash your hands? Who really told you that soap was necessary to be sanitary? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3037063/ look at the results there. That study has been repeated hundreds of times with near identical results. I think this is a direct parallel to what is going on with lighting in this hobby.

 

 

 

 

Now is about the time I get shot for stating the obvious or quoting the wavelengths wrong but we just need the peak ranges for the active photosynthetic spectrum or ~420nm and ~660nm. His point was just that the type of bulb creating the light is not relevant compared to simply having the right ranges of light present. The context for his comments were that my 10 year old 10k/actinic PC is as effective or more effective than T5, MH, LED, or any other lighting type I'm forgetting in a shallow nano tank. If you look at the spectrums of MH, T5, LED there is a lot of 'extra' light in there that is not really benefiting the coral.

 

If I know one thing about science it's that misquoting it is more dangerous than ignoring it so I'm trying not to overstep. This could be so elementary it's not worth noting OR I've said something that some hobbyists don't even understand yet, in which case it was worth my time.

 

This makes no sense. If all we need is 2 wavelength peaks, then LED is the PERFECT solution, since that's pretty much what they do (i.e. hit specific peaks).. and while that may or may not do okay for growing coral, it's going to look like ass..

[MrLang]

Not a 10 year old bulb, a 10 year old fixture. You're talking about a 50 dollar fixture or a 250 dollar fixture with no difference in performance if you look at the conditions you're creating. The type of bulb is not important, the density of light and spectrum of light is what matters. All of these lights are capable, it's a matter of cost:practicality that creates a logical solution.

 

To that end, an LED is no better or worse than any other light if you've got it putting out the same spectrum and density of light. My understanding is that at depth, it's very tricky to reach the density of light on an LED, hence the bashing on a forum focused on larger tanks.

 

It's a very, very simple point I'm trying to make for the noobs who stumble on this thread. Light is not unique coming out of different types of bulbs. Light is measured in spectrums and intensities. As long as you can meet the requirements of the environment you're creating the coral is going to live and thrive.

 

If you are talking strictly about what looks nice to our eyes and also grows coral, throw my comments out. Just because your eyes perceive the coral differently does not mean the coral is actively healthier than it would be if its needs were met in another way.

[Nano sapiens]

 

 

Now is about the time I get shot for stating the obvious or quoting the wavelengths wrong but we just need the peak ranges for the active photosynthetic spectrum or ~420nm and ~660nm. His point was just that the type of bulb creating the light is not relevant compared to simply having the right ranges of light present. The context for his comments were that my 10 year old 10k/actinic PC is as effective or more effective than T5, MH, LED, or any other lighting type I'm forgetting in a shallow nano tank. If you look at the spectrums of MH, T5, LED there is a lot of 'extra' light in there that is not really benefiting the coral.

 

If I know one thing about science it's that misquoting it is more dangerous than ignoring it so I'm trying not to overstep. This could be so elementary it's not worth noting OR I've said something that some hobbyists don't even understand yet, in which case it was worth my time.

 

No worries, just checking and that's what I thought you'd come up with

 

Your PHD person is refering to Chlorphyl A and it's major and minor peaks. Scientists are generally concerned with what maintains corals and their symbionts, unless they are specifically studying florescent and/or non florescent proteins. Hobbyists are looking at coloration and how to maintain or enhance it. If you look at a graph below you'll see that the vast majority of excitation specta for many coral pigments spans from roughly 400nm to 575nm:

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=Chlorophyll+coral+graph&es_sm=122&biw=1440&bih=763&tbm=isch&imgil=YO6OQctAtTeR2M%253A%253ByO-RB3GWTT1kQM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.reefcentral.com%25252Fforums%25252Fshowthread.php%25253Ft%2525253D2182590&source=iu&pf=m&fir=YO6OQctAtTeR2M%253A%252CyO-RB3GWTT1kQM%252C_&usg=__E9NLeQpzawTfbA9AxUpJhtmEr20%3D&ved=0CCoQyjc&ei=y3v3VILvCo3qoATSyoK4DA#tbm=isch&q=coral+pigment+graph&imgdii=_&imgrc=QlR6_yThdDJpeM%253A%3BUuzjT_fWEkpVPM%3Bhttps%253A%252F%252Freefledlights.com%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2013%252F07%252FPigments.jpg%3Bhttps%253A%252F%252Freefledlights.com%252Fledmytank%252F%3B1461%3B1046

 

It's rather obvious that limited sharp spectral peaks of ~430nm and 662nm fall far short for full coloration and won't adequately stimulate a good number of the coral pigments (especially non-florescent ones). As for lighting in relation to color, wavelengths are wavelengths and as long as the type of lighting used provides the correct spectrum and intensity for those pigments to express properly...it's all good

[MrLang]

 

 

 

This makes no sense. If all we need is 2 wavelength peaks, then LED is the PERFECT solution, since that's pretty much what they do (i.e. hit specific peaks).. and while that may or may not do okay for growing coral, it's going to look like ass..

 

I didn't say LED was not perfect, I said it was hype. The cost is not commensurate with magical coral growing voodoo. If they LOOK nice and our tanks are just for looking at then it's a matter of how much money you want to spend.

 

Just showed up to target the lowest common denominator here and say that any light will work if it provides the right spectrums and intensities of light. The rest is up to what you think looks nice and how much cash you have in your pocket. What looks nice should take a back seat to the biological needs of the coral, imo.

Yeah, pretty new to the forums but have a decent understanding of plant science. So when someone says "LED are bad" I am running on the ASSumption that they are refering to the coral growing capabilities. The hobby is about what looks nice, so it makes sense that they are more concerned with maximum coloration.

 

Appreciate the 'cultural' guidance

[Nano sapiens]

 

I didn't say LED was not perfect, I said it was hype. The cost is not commensurate with magical coral growing voodoo. If they LOOK nice and our tanks are just for looking at then it's a matter of how much money you want to spend.

 

Just showed up to target the lowest common denominator here and say that any light will work if it provides the right spectrums and intensities of light. The rest is up to what you think looks nice and how much cash you have in your pocket. What looks nice should take a back seat to the biological needs of the coral, imo.

Yeah, pretty new to the forums but have a decent understanding of plant science. So when someone says "LED are bad" I am running on the ASSumption that they are refering to the coral growing capabilities. The hobby is about what looks nice, so it makes sense that they are more concerned with maximum coloration.

 

Appreciate the 'cultural' guidance

 

The nice thing is that one needn't compromise. From a strictly lighting perspective, whether using MH, T5s or LEDs, coral health, growth and coloration *can* all be optimized by the aquarist as evidenced by the many spectatular TOTMs.

 

But lighting is only part of the puzzle and is unfortunately often blamed for inadequacies in other parts of the system.

[GHill762]

 

 

But lighting is only part of the puzzle and is unfortunately often blamed for inadequacies in other parts of the system.

I think this is the case many times, LEDs are a scapegoat..

[HecticDialectics]

I disagree. While there may be some people who have valid comments about LEDs (they are not the best), most outright just bash them after trying them for two months and did not use them correctly. Either way, I'm not getting into this with you or anyone else. I have used mh, t5, and led and I like them all.

You're just wrong. Not surprised "cause I said so" is your only reason you don't think there's a single valid justification to dislike led

[KnH]

You're just wrong. Not surprised "cause I said so" is your only reason you don't think there's a single valid justification to dislike led

 

I can think of many reasons to dislike any light system we use.

or

I can think of many reasons to like any light system we use.

 

Pick your poison and make the best of it or keep chasing your tail.

[Arkayology]

You're just wrong. Not surprised "cause I said so" is your only reason you don't think there's a single valid justification to dislike led

Clearly you did not understand what I wrote. I have admitted many times that LEDs have their limitations. I even said in my post that LEDs are not the best.

[RJWalters]

I agree