Hanna Checkers - Thoughts/Experiences?

[banasophia]

Hanna Checkers - What are your thoughts on them? Anyone looking to sell theirs?

[brianinak]

low range phosphate waste of money, go with Ultra low for phosphates.  The DKH is worth it!

[KNelson]

ULR phos and alkalinity are great.  I've read those are the best 2 and the others aren't as accurate so not worth the $50 each. 

[markalot]

ULR Phos good, I find the Alk more difficult to use than the Salifert and the same accuracy.  Salifert a lot cheaper over time, last I did the math.

 

 

[HarryPotter]

Just now, markalot said:

ULR Phos good, I find the Alk more difficult to use than the Salifert and the same accuracy.  Salifert a lot cheaper over time, last I did the math.

 

 

 

How can it be more difficult than Hanna? You add 1ml and get a result? 

[markalot]

That blasted elongated tip thing bugs me for some reason, but basically the work is identical except one has a digital readout.

[banasophia]

Thanks so much for your input. I’m looking at the set that includes the dKH, ULR Phos, pH probe, and calcium. Any direct experience with the calcium one? Looks like there are mixed reviews and there may be issues with accuracy, but possibly due to the really small sample size and precise measurement needed. I do have a history of working in a lab, so I think with the micropipette they include now, that one could be a fun one to do.

[rsucre]

I have the Alkalinity dKH and the ULR Phosphorus.  Love them!

The Alkalinity dKH is a must for me.  I was tired of color guessing with Red Sea and other test kits.

ULR Phosphorus you have to do a conversion to get Phosphate, but it has a lower/better resolution.  So I like that one over the Phosphate checker. 

[markalot]

6 hours ago, banasophia said:

Thanks so much for your input. I’m looking at the set that includes the dKH, ULR Phos, pH probe, and calcium. Any direct experience with the calcium one? Looks like there are mixed reviews and there may be issues with accuracy, but possibly due to the really small sample size and precise measurement needed. I do have a history of working in a lab, so I think with the micropipette they include now, that one could be a fun one to do.

 

You should rarely have to test calcium, base all dosing off of Alk, equal parts any 2 part solution.

[Playapixie]

I have the alk (DKH), calcium, and low range phosphate checkers.
-The DKH checker is fantastic.  Super fast, way better than titration methods, super easy.  Totally worth it.
-Calcium is a bit of a pain and you definitely need to understand and follow the directions perfectly and carefully.  You MUST use distilled or RO/DI water for all steps except the tiny tank sample, including washing the test tubes and syringes.  It works on a dilution so the tiniest error or contamination throws the results way off. It took me some practice to get it right, but now I like it, and prefer it over titration methods.

-Low Range Phosphate: the jury is out.  Mine has only ever read 0.0 or 0.2 in about a dozen runs.  I find both numbers to be suspect (based on the appearance of my tank, how the macroalgaes grow, etc.) Maybe I should have gone with the UL range phosphorus, but I wasn’t going for a ultra-low-nutrient tank so that didn’t seem necessary. For the record, though, I’ve never had any better luck testing with titration kits, either.  

[tanacharison]

19 minutes ago, markalot said:

 

You should rarely have to test calcium, base all dosing off of Alk, equal parts any 2 part solution.

You told me this last year and it's some of the best advise I've had! I test alk weekly and sometimes more often than that. I think i'm on my 5th reagent refill and no issues yet.

[rsucre]

A little off topic, but how do you test Mg and how often?

[squamptonbc]

I had the Hana alk, but it was so inconsistent, check 3 times with samples all taken at the same time and get 3 inconsistent results. I find using a quality Alk test kit like Salifert and Red Sea to be more consistent with results, ditto with calcium.

 

Phosphorus and phosphate seem accurate enough to be useful but the alk and calcium, I am no fan of.

 

[Tamberav]

Alk and phosphourous is what I use. They seem accurate. I don't have inconsistant results others reported. 

 

Calcium seems like a waste... Rarely need to test for it. 

 

I use red sea low range nitrate which works well. Red sea for mg as well but another thing I don't need to test often. 

[Playapixie]

1 hour ago, rsucre said:

A little off topic, but how do you test Mg and how often?

The goal is to figure out what your mag consumption is so you can replace it.  So the answer is variable.  

If you’re using a complete balanced 2-part system that includes mag (for example, C-Balance,) you can check mag extremely infrequently.

While I’m figuring out my dosing requirements I check weekly.  Once I’m satisfied that I know what the consumption is and I’m dosing approximately right, maybe monthly.  I found when I was using C-balance that as long as I was staying up on CA & ALK, I never needed to supplement mag, so eventually went to checking it only every 6 months or so.

if you’re dosing in a system where the mag is separate, you might want to check more often (most traditional 2-parts don’t include mag and you have to dose it separately.  I dose it once a week, while CA and ALK are daily.

So basically, check often while you’re figuring out how much your tank needs, and then taper off once you know you’re replacing mag in the right ballpark.

Remmeber that as stony corals grow in your tank, the consumption of all the major & trace elements will go up over time, so you do need to check periodically to be sure your dosing routine is keeping up with growth.

 

You can use any test kit you like to test mag.  I am currently using Salifert, which I find to be easier than some of the other tests.

[Playapixie]

28 minutes ago, squamptonbc said:

I had the Hana alk, but it was so inconsistent, check 3 times with samples all taken at the same time and get 3 inconsistent results. I find using a quality Alk test kit like Salifert and Red Sea to be more consistent with results, ditto with calcium.

 

When you ran the controls on the Hanna Alk, did you use the same test tube for zeroing as testing? Using the 2nd test tube to zero introduces error.  As long as I am very detail oriented and careful when I use all three of my Hanna checkers, I find the results are very, very close, repeatable, and reliable.  The Alk is my favorite one.

[brianinak]

On ‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 3:16 PM, Playapixie said:

I have the alk (DKH), calcium, and low range phosphate checkers.
-The DKH checker is fantastic.  Super fast, way better than titration methods, super easy.  Totally worth it.
-Calcium is a bit of a pain and you definitely need to understand and follow the directions perfectly and carefully.  You MUST use distilled or RO/DI water for all steps except the tiny tank sample, including washing the test tubes and syringes.  It works on a dilution so the tiniest error or contamination throws the results way off. It took me some practice to get it right, but now I like it, and prefer it over titration methods.

-Low Range Phosphate: the jury is out.  Mine has only ever read 0.0 or 0.2 in about a dozen runs.  I find both numbers to be suspect (based on the appearance of my tank, how the macroalgaes grow, etc.) Maybe I should have gone with the UL range phosphorus, but I wasn’t going for a ultra-low-nutrient tank so that didn’t seem necessary. For the record, though, I’ve never had any better luck testing with titration kits, either.  

I have never had a reading other than 0.00 with low range phosphate.  ULR is on my wishlist

[A Little Blue]

I have Hanna and Red Sea Pro and I've learned to like RSP a little more over time. 

[Clown79]

Unlike everyone else my hanna alk has been nothing but a problem.

 

Salifert, red sea, and api alk were within .5 of the same result 

 

Hanna was a hell of a lot lower and multiple tests on the same tank 10mins apart gave me 3 different results and none were close to each other.

 

The other night hanna alk gave me 74ppm result which is 4.1 dkh

 

Red sea and salifert results were 8.5

 

 

Just because its digital doesn't mean it's the best.

 

It is easier and faster to use, I love that. It's also very finicky. Bubbles, smudges, water marks, even particles in the water can alter the results.

 

 I question the accuracy of the product after I've seen the inconsistency for mnths.

 

Hanna finally stepped up to replace my unit so I'll be able to test with a new one and see if my current one is faulty or if the kit is just not as accurate as we like to report.