T5 Vs. Mh

Mr.Firemouth · 10-22-2006, 01:59 AM

We are currently running a special test on some ricordea. We are taking a rock and fragging it in half with the same amount of polyps on each piece. We are placing it in a tub system with 2 tubs plumbed to one sump therefore all the water is the same. We are lighting one tub with 250wMH and one tub with T5 for the next 3 months. We will see what happens and post the info later. The MH bulb is HQI 14000K The T5 is Hamilton fixture.

prow · 10-22-2006, 03:26 AM

what kind and how many T5 bulbs are you using?

FYI. hamilton reflectors are not all that good. tek is better but icecap reflectors add about 20% more par than the tek.

Mr.Firemouth · 10-22-2006, 12:00 PM

I'm not sure about the bulbs, they came with the fixture. We replaced the reflector with individual ones. The bulbs are 2 58w actinic and 2 58w daylight. The purpose of the test is to check for a major difference in the rics as far as reproduction, size, and color. If the difference is marginal then T5 is the best way to go. If the difference is drastic then the fixture with the best results will be my choice for my 180g.

**Ninong** · 10-23-2006, 02:17 AM

Why are you using Ricordea spp. to test lights? Do you plan on keeping only softies that do not require intense lighting?

Are you using R. florida or R. yuma? R. yuma can take more intense lighting than R. florida. Also, with R. yuma, the various colors are found at different depths in the wild (Indonesia). R. florida prefers less intense light than R. yuma but neither species does well in intense light. In fact, some of mine did better without direct light at all. They got mostly reflected light off the sand bed because they were against a lower rock at the base of the rock structure that was partially shaded from the light.

prow · 10-23-2006, 03:43 AM

aside from the coral, T5 bulbs greatly vary. the ballast also plays a big role. icecap ballast will run a 55 watt bulb to 80watts. with 4 bulbs thats 220w compared to 320w of T5 lighting, about a 50% intensity increase. those 58watters are an odd size. they might not be the best bulbs to use. one thing i can say out of personal experience is T5's are/can be to much for even the most demanding of corals. i had be running 600watts of T5's, it was way way to much for all my corals but the acro's. my torts, montis, clams and many others the T5's were just too much. i had to reduce the lighting big time. now all the corals are doing great. there is a thread at reefcentral called the T5 Q&A thread, i think. they have tested every bulb at various depths running on various ballasts with various reflectors.

the other thing is how far off the water are the bulbs? T5's you can put them as close as a inch off the water. would never try that with MH. also the coral itself where did it come from? was it under MH, this will play a big role in how fast they adjust and start to grow.

IMO you can do any type tank with t'5s. this has been shown over and over. yet people still dont believe it. just last year i was told by many "experts" that T5's "flouescent" lighting just will not support sps. today i hear time and time again they will work but not for tanks deeper than 24". well that too has been proven wrong. currently i am running 6-80watt T5's on 2-660 icecap ballast, which gives my crocea clams on the bottom good growth and coloration. if i use say the ge6500k bulbs only it would cook everything even those on the bottom of the tank.

10-22-2006, 01:59 AM	#1
Mr.Firemouth Tenant Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: St. louis Area Posts: 57	T5 Vs. Mh We are currently running a special test on some ricordea. We are taking a rock and fragging it in half with the same amount of polyps on each piece. We are placing it in a tub system with 2 tubs plumbed to one sump therefore all the water is the same. We are lighting one tub with 250wMH and one tub with T5 for the next 3 months. We will see what happens and post the info later. The MH bulb is HQI 14000K The T5 is Hamilton fixture. __________________ WHAT'S IN YOUR TANK?

10-22-2006, 12:00 PM	#3
Mr.Firemouth Tenant Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: St. louis Area Posts: 57	I'm not sure about the bulbs, they came with the fixture. We replaced the reflector with individual ones. The bulbs are 2 58w actinic and 2 58w daylight. The purpose of the test is to check for a major difference in the rics as far as reproduction, size, and color. If the difference is marginal then T5 is the best way to go. If the difference is drastic then the fixture with the best results will be my choice for my 180g. __________________ WHAT'S IN YOUR TANK?

10-23-2006, 02:17 AM	#4
Ninong Moderator Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Louisiana Posts: 20,692	Why are you using Ricordea spp. to test lights? Do you plan on keeping only softies that do not require intense lighting? Are you using R. florida or R. yuma? R. yuma can take more intense lighting than R. florida. Also, with R. yuma, the various colors are found at different depths in the wild (Indonesia). R. florida prefers less intense light than R. yuma but neither species does well in intense light. In fact, some of mine did better without direct light at all. They got mostly reflected light off the sand bed because they were against a lower rock at the base of the rock structure that was partially shaded from the light. __________________ Ninong

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-22-2006, 03:26 AM	#2
prow Citizen Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: california Posts: 243	what kind and how many T5 bulbs are you using? FYI. hamilton reflectors are not all that good. tek is better but icecap reflectors add about 20% more par than the tek.

10-23-2006, 03:43 AM	#5
prow Citizen Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: california Posts: 243	aside from the coral, T5 bulbs greatly vary. the ballast also plays a big role. icecap ballast will run a 55 watt bulb to 80watts. with 4 bulbs thats 220w compared to 320w of T5 lighting, about a 50% intensity increase. those 58watters are an odd size. they might not be the best bulbs to use. one thing i can say out of personal experience is T5's are/can be to much for even the most demanding of corals. i had be running 600watts of T5's, it was way way to much for all my corals but the acro's. my torts, montis, clams and many others the T5's were just too much. i had to reduce the lighting big time. now all the corals are doing great. there is a thread at reefcentral called the T5 Q&A thread, i think. they have tested every bulb at various depths running on various ballasts with various reflectors. the other thing is how far off the water are the bulbs? T5's you can put them as close as a inch off the water. would never try that with MH. also the coral itself where did it come from? was it under MH, this will play a big role in how fast they adjust and start to grow. IMO you can do any type tank with t'5s. this has been shown over and over. yet people still dont believe it. just last year i was told by many "experts" that T5's "flouescent" lighting just will not support sps. today i hear time and time again they will work but not for tanks deeper than 24". well that too has been proven wrong. currently i am running 6-80watt T5's on 2-660 icecap ballast, which gives my crocea clams on the bottom good growth and coloration. if i use say the ge6500k bulbs only it would cook everything even those on the bottom of the tank.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)