# Metal Halide vs. T5 vs. PC options?



## epicfish (Sep 11, 2006)

I have a few options:

1) used: 2x150 or 2x175w MH setup for a 70 gallon, 48" long tank. Retrofit into an existing canopy. The MH setups I can get used with ~6 month bulbs for $200 total. Each replacement bulb is expected to be around $70 for a total of $140 for two. 300-350watts over 70 gallons -> 4.3 to 5WPG.

2) new: 4x54w T5 HO retrofit into a 48" long tank. This will cost $235 plus bulbs, which are $60, so $295 total. Bulb replacements will cost ~$55. 216 watts over 70 gallons -> 3.1WPG.

3) used: 4x54w SLS Tek fixture with old bulbs. $195 shipped. Bulb replacements will cost ~$55. 216 watts over 70 gallons -> 3.1WPG.

4) used: 6x54w SLS Tek fixture with old bulbs. $295 shipped. (Not economical for me unless I really need 4.6WPG of T5 output)

5) new: 2x55w + 2x36w AHSupply retrofit kits, both with new bulbs, $170 shipped. Bulb replacements will cost ~$84. 182 watts over 70 gallons -> 2.6WPG.

The difference between #2 and #3 is that I'm not sure the Tek fixtures were designed to be mounted into a canopy...is this possible? Would it be bad?

#1 has a lower start-up cost with a high WPG, but the bulb replacement costs are gonna add up pretty fast. I think option #3 would be most economical, but would it viable with my canopy? I threw option #5 out there, but don't think it'd be the best choice right now.

I want to be able to grow high light plants at good growth rates, and I'm guessing that means I'd need around 3+WPG for this tank...if so, the 4x54w would barely get me there. Would I need 3WPG? More? Less?

The reason I'd prefer the 4x54w is that I could run 2x54w for most of the day with 4x54w run for a couple hours...I wouldn't be able to do that with the MH.

So many options...does anyone have a suggestion? Heck, would a DIY T8 "retrofit" system work well? I'd need a ton of bulbs seeing as how I can only find 10000K bulbs that are 36 watts. I'd need 6 bulbs for 216 watts....or ODNO??!


----------



## SnyperP (Dec 10, 2004)

I'd personally go with option 3, but i'm unfamiliar with the dimension of a 70g. Would this be enough coverage? Personally, Teklight fixtures have a great asthetic appeal to me and in the long run, would cost less than MH setups. These fixtures are really designed to be hung above the tanks. 

If you're really set on using a canopy, a t5 retro would be nice. Any idea what type of reflectors they'll come with?


----------



## Gomer (Feb 2, 2004)

I have the 3ft Teklight fixture and it is awesome!


----------



## epicfish (Sep 11, 2006)

The 70 gallon acrylic would be 4 feet long. The retrofit kit I'm piecing together comes with SLS Tek reflectors, so pretty high quality ones.

I figure with ODNO, at this site: GWAPA: ODNO Lighting, I could get 56 watts per bulb. If I have 6 bulbs over the tank, that's 336 watts. Say it's equal to 240 watts of useable light due to re-strike and light loss from poor reflectors, it still leaves me with 3.4 WPG. Not bad for ~$120 at Home Depot.


----------



## Laith (Sep 4, 2004)

I'd go with option 2 or 3, depending on whether you want an open top tank (the Tek setup) or with a hood (the retrofit).

3.1wpg is fine and I also like to use the noon burst lighting method. Just make sure that you can control the lights in sets of two like that (ie that there isn't only one switch/cord for the unit).

IMO, besides the really nice "ripple" lighting effect of MHs, they're more trouble than they're worth (heat!), especially with the availability of HO T5s. Even experienced reef tank hobbyist are starting to experiment with using HO T5s exclusively, and this for corals that several years ago could only be grown with MHs...

If one has access to T5 setups and tubes, I really can't see any advantage of going with T8s.


----------



## epicfish (Sep 11, 2006)

The T8 ODNO setup would be a bit cheaper than the T5.

$120 compared to at least $250 for the used Tek fixture with new bulbs I'd have to order.

I live in an apartment, so I'd rather not hang fixtures from my ceiling if it can be avoided...the retro set would cost a nice shiny penny though, at ~$300.


----------



## SnyperP (Dec 10, 2004)

If you're going to DYI your own retro, i'd probably go with the SLR (icecap reflectors). On reefgeek, they're only another 2 dollars per. I've seen some par results with SLR ahead of SLS reflectors using the same setup. I'm not sure on the reflectiveness of SLR's but my SLS are rather dull and not as highly polished as an AHsupply reflector. I'm assuming that's the difference between the SLR's and SLS. 

I'll try to find the link in the morning.


----------



## AaronT (Apr 26, 2004)

I agree option 2 or 3 is the best. I've tried all 3 different types of lighting. MH grows some awesome plants, but the heat / evaporation issues turned me off of them.


----------



## Laith (Sep 4, 2004)

epicfish said:


> The T8 ODNO setup would be a bit cheaper than the T5.
> 
> ...


Yes, but you get value for your money with T5s and the light output can't be compared. T5s also need swapping out less often.

Another retro option is to go with an AH Supply kit (Compact Fluorescent Lighting Kits) but I think they provide CFs, not T5s. Many people seem happy with AH Supply setups and they have great reflectors. Still a better option than T8s.

As my preference is for open top tanks  : if you don't want to hang fixtures from the ceiling, get a T5 unit that sits on legs on each end of the tank.


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

I bet you'd be happiest with option #2. Personally, I love metal halides, but you'd probably run into heat issues with 2x150 over a 70g tank. If you wanted to go this route I'd recommend hanging pendants that were up off of the surface a foot or two.

Just for the record, CF's are nothing more than T-5's that have been bent in half. You loose a bit of light to restrike with this bulb configuration, but the AH Supply kits are still a great option - sometimes cheaper.


----------



## epicfish (Sep 11, 2006)

The start-up costs for the PC option would be cheaper than the T5 option in this case, but the bulb replacements are ~$30 more expensive each time.

Since the Tek T5 is used, it's so much cheaper than the T5 retrofit and comes in a sleek fixture. The retrofits will cost closer to $315-$320, not $300.


----------



## Geobelle (Feb 14, 2004)

*Metal Halides Bulb*

If you're up to a well planted tank in the future, well, you should or I may say it's a must to use MH bulb, base on the size of your tank, I would rather get a 3 bulbs of MH rated at 6500Kelvin. 12-15 inches apart from the water surface. Always remember, you must have a chiller in order to stabilize the aquarium water temperature of 23-26 degree Celsius at all times.


----------



## epicfish (Sep 11, 2006)

Geobelle said:


> If you're up to a well planted tank in the future, well, you should or I may say *it's a must to use MH bulb*, base on the size of your tank, I would rather get a 3 bulbs of MH rated at 6500Kelvin. 12-15 inches apart from the water surface. Always remember, you must have a chiller in order to stabilize the aquarium water temperature of 23-26 degree Celsius at all times.


Plenty of people here use T5 bulbs and they work fine, even up to tanks of 125 gallons.


----------



## Geobelle (Feb 14, 2004)

epicfish said:


> Plenty of people here use T5 bulbs and they work fine, even up to tanks of 125 gallons.


T5 is considered just so so, but if you want greener & healthy plants, MH is the best way, I have two planted tanks, one with 6 T5HO bulbs and the other using 2 MH bulbs, there's a significance difference since both aquariums have almost the same plants.


----------



## BryceM (Nov 6, 2005)

MH is an option, T-5 is an option, NO T-8 is an option, CF is an option, and even LED lighting is an option. The "best" is highly subjective. Plenty of people grow outstanding plants with each of the above. Each system has its merits. MH's are very nice IMO, but they put out tons of heat and are expensive. For large tanks they're a good option, but certainly not the "only" option. I would disagree that T-5's are just "so-so". T-5's do a great job and are very efficient, especially with good reflectors. I use both on my 180g tank. I wouldn't hesitate to go solely with T-5's even on very large tanks. I use the MH's mostly for the shimmer effect, which is a nice touch.


----------



## ruki (Jul 4, 2006)

I am currently using T8/T12 NO, OD T8/T12 NO, T5 NO and T5 HO fluorescent options...

Options #2,3,4 T5 HO totally kicks @ass over the other options. TekLights have a great reflector so good, toss the watts/gallon out the window on this one. Your getting much more watts/gallon directed into the tank than other fixtures. No fans required either. I have option #4. I usually use just 4 bulbs and use the two extras as an "overdrive" for special uses. Nothing I have seen compares with this fixture. You can put it on multi-level racks without worrying about it catching on fire 

Option #1, MH. These make perfect sense to me for an indoor pond with an overhead light. The new close-to-the-water fixtures don't make much sense to me. You waste alot of power on fans and shorten tube life on combo fixtures since the MH bulbs end up cooking them. Close to the water MH gives you bright spots which limit what you can do in the tank. The tradtional pendant MH bulbs makes some sense to me for large show tanks too.

Option #5, AHS Power Compact fixture. If your length >= 24 inches, Power Compact doesn't make sense to me. It's the exact opposite of the TekLight. Lots of light getting wasted because the tube is bent back against itself with no way to get some sort of hybrid parabolic reflector. This is true even with a pretty good AHS reflector. It's just worse in the other PC fixtures out there 

Overdriven tubes option
This way makes sense as a way to save money. Cook cheap tubes and keep replacing them. Makes much more sense for long tanks than PC bulbs to me. I have fun with my OD fixture. It is a bit brigher towards the center than normally driven tubes though.

T5 NO tubes
If you need just medium light, this gives the most light per watt which will save some money on your electrical bill.


----------



## SnyperP (Dec 10, 2004)

MH used to be the king in the reefing world. Many different corals, clams and such didn't grow in anything but MH. But t5's have been creeping on their territory. There are very few species, if any at all, that cannot be grown with t5's.


----------



## AMP (Nov 11, 2006)

I am currently setting up a New 90 All Glass 48x18x24 with a Canopy, My LFS who has a 216G suggested that for my particular set up which will be planted fairly heavy in th back and terracing towards the front, states I should go with the SunPod 1064 2x150 MH. MH Is new in my tech terms, and I read the sticky on the Lumen Kelven factor here.

My 55 has the 1024 PC And is heavly planted front to back, and my plants are doing wonderful, as well as my fish.

My Question Is is it benificial to switch to the MH especially with heat being a factor with them? This unit is going to sit under a canopy as well, I plan on modifying the canopy with some 4" fans for cross flow air circulation. 
This si going to be my project tank, so I want to get the best bang for my 2000 I am investing on this project, And to me Lighting is the most critical element for a prosperous tank.

Thanx for any suggestions.


----------

