# Finnex Ray2 Vs FugeRay Planted+



## Malefactor

So, out of these two lights, the Ray 2 is a little bit more pricey by about $10. Which is better for actually growing plants though? The Ray2 is a high output light, but i think the planted + is more for low - medium light plants. If i'm injecting CO2 + supplying nutrients and everything else, would the Planted+ be detrimental to my setup? I currently only have half my tank lit with a Ray2 and it does it's job excellently. Finally have enough to get the other half my tank done, but don't know about these two and which is better. Any suggestions?


----------



## Michael

I think Finnex gives PAR ratings for these fixtures on their web site. Take a look and see if there is a significant difference.


----------



## Malefactor

On the website it says the Ray2 is equivalent to 3 T5's and that it uses 7,000K lights to give High light output.

The Planted + says it uses less 7,000K lights to provide light - medium light, but supplements this with 660nm True Red to promote photosynthesis. 

I'm not sure what's more important myself, the higher par and high light output, or the photosynthetic rendering of the red with a lower light output.


----------



## Tugg

The fuge is likely not colored to please the human eye. Being designed for refugiums, they don't need to worry about color rendering, its all about PAR. Hydroponic grow lights are like this too, they have a weird color since they focus on the blues and reds and leave the green wanting.


----------



## Malefactor

Gotcha, so probably wanna stick to the Ray2 since it's nice and bright and not odd colors. That is something i didn't think about in that respect.


----------



## Apaa

I am getting a used Ray 2 for my 29 gallon. Theres little info about how it compares in lumens or anything else really. Its likely that it isnt enough for a 29 gallon, being so deep, but Ill find out in a day or two when I get it.

My 65 watt 65K setup finally pooped the bed and I have to do something. Being strapped for cash I tried this first.


----------



## Malefactor

Oh i'll vouche for the Ray 2. It does it's job and pretty well at that. I currently have a 24 inch on half my 55 gal, even at 18 inches it's doing a good job... It's just so freaking bright. Have to admit i even like how it makes my german blue rams and gourami look likes the blues and yellows are electrified on them as well, but my clown loaches aren't fans of how bright it is. Gotten good growth even before i started CO2 with it. Was just wondering if with the red / blue supplementation on the Planted + makes up for the brightness of the Ray 2. Would like to with something a little dimmer on the other half of the tank to keep the loaches from freaking out as much, but still get good growth.


----------



## dbot

the ray 2 just is super bright. it washed out the color on my plants because it was so bright. The planted+ is giving nice amount of light and also makes the reds "pop" more. Honestly I dropped my Ray2 and swapped for the planted+ and enjoy the color more


----------



## Malefactor

I ended up with both, but yeah... I like the color on the Ray2, and for a deeper tank it penetrates better. However, i agree if you don't have a large tank and want a better over all lighting the Planted+ is the way to go. Both do the job well, the Ray2 gets much better growth at depth though for those high light needs with a 24 inch on a 18 inch deep tank.


----------



## acitydweller

the LED diode positioning on both RAY II and Fugeray Planted+ are different. RAY II's have a higher density of LEDs and the Planted+ adds reds.

If you are a current RAY II owner and want some additional boost, consider adding a Monster Ray!


----------



## TropTrea

An interesting light. 0.12 Watt per LED is the part I would question. While the high wattage LED's are more efficient at lower wattage we are usually talking about running 10 Watt LEDs at only 2 to 3 watts for the efficiency. But the cost of more LED's usually offsets the cost of energy savings. 

If your persistently lighting 1/2 the length of the tank with a single unit then for color balance you want to match the other side with the same light otherwise you will get a weird two tone effect. However it you talking about a front and back light running the entire length of the tank then any difference will blend together almost unnoticed. My fear with the 7000K unit is that you would not be getting enough red light. So in a front and back lighting situation I would recommend the fuge ray. While the combination ios 2 7,000K to 1 Red in itself it could be overly red dominant but with a second all 7,000K unit like you already have I think it would be better balance where you get the best of both worlds. 

As a note on my DIY LED builds I found that the higher Watt LED's give more penetration for deeper tanks while more low wattage LED's give a more even light distribution for shorter tanks. 

Price wise looking at the 48" fixture I could not build a light for the prices I saw on Amazon for these. This is not the case with many other fixtures of higher total wattage. Usualy I can build them at 1/2 watt the retail price is at the most. If people are getting good results with these fixtures they are a good deal.


----------



## pandragon

Hi,
I was wondering about the difference between these two lights as well. Zappins recommended the Fuge Ray 2 for LEDs but didn't know much about the planted plus. I ended up choosing the planted plus because, along with the 7000k daylights evenly dispersed over bother rows, rather than one row of white and one of blue, it has the 660nm reds which theoretically would be better. 

"For green plants the lighting peaks that are most important:
chlorophyll-a: 430nm/662nm 
chlorophyll-b: 453nm/642nm 
carotenoids: 449nm/475nm 
Red pigmented plants use more light in the blue area of the spectrum." post from Newt

unless the white LEDs cover those spectrums, which I couldn't find information about, the Planted+ with its actinic blue and 660nm lights mixed in would do a better job of rounding out the spectrum coverage. As long as they are intense enough to transmit through 18 inches of water or so they should work a bit better than the pure white Ray 2. Unless my understanding of wavelengths and photosynthesis is lacking, in that case I would love clarification especially since I am still learning about all this. 

pandragon


----------



## TropTrea

pandragon said:


> Hi,
> 
> unless the white LEDs cover those spectrums, which I couldn't find information about, the Planted+ with its actinic blue and 660nm lights mixed in would do a better job of rounding out the spectrum coverage. As long as they are intense enough to transmit through 18 inches of water or so they should work a bit better than the pure white Ray 2. Unless my understanding of wavelengths and photosynthesis is lacking, in that case I would love clarification especially since I am still learning about all this.
> 
> pandragon


What is important is the balance. The white LED's are all basically Blue LED's with a filter on them that converts the blue light to longer wavelengths. Cool white led;'s are usually around 6,200K and have a strong red peak. Neutral Whties are about 4,000K and have a very good visual balance between blue and the other colors. Warm Whites are usually under 3,000K and have only a little bit of blue light in them.

Yes as you said the blue (430 to about to 480 nm) and the reds (630 to about 680 nm) are the back bone of plant growth. But if this were the only light the plants got and we saw everything would look purple to pink. Most LED's from Neutral Whites to higher K temps produce enough blue light. But the higher K LED's or any Highter K LED's lack in the red end for good plant growth. I like a 50/50 split between neutral whites and cool whites which is working great for me. But even just all Neutral whtes will grow plants. Yes the higher K the LED's are the more it important to supplement them with some red light. When you run 7,000K or even 10,000K it almost becomes a necessity.


----------



## Drowning

Michael said:


> I think Finnex gives PAR ratings for these fixtures on their web site. Take a look and see if there is a significant difference.


Unfortunately Finnex does not have any PAR ratings for these fixtures. I have look everywhere on their small site but they site a VERY LITTLE information.


----------



## Malefactor

I've seen the information. It exists out there, but I cant remember where exactly i saw it.


----------



## pandragon

I have had a finnex planted + for a few months now and it works pretty good, looks good too. I have it on a 29g tank (tall I think, about 18 inches high top to bottom) and it is growing wisteria, bacopa, wisteria, hygro compacta, egeria, anubias (which just sprouted 4 new leaves in a week or two after supplementing iron for deficiency showing up in hygros), java fern and a floating ludwigia ( peploides I think). The ludwigia floats an inch or two under the fixture and is growing pretty well, not insanely fast but enough to keep it alive and getting larger. The other plants are doing well also, fairly even growth across an uneven substrate. No hotspots apparent from plant growth or anything. I have noticed better growth when I keep all lights on for 8 hours a day and keep them off at night (no co2, mts substrate etc, only dose iron for deficiency most likely caused from med high ph). Coverage is pretty good, a second fixture would be better than a wider spread imo to maximize transmission through the surface of the water without reflecting or refracting as much. I am not trying to go for crazy growth or anything, but I would think a couple across a 12 inch deep tank 18 odd tall should be plenty. My tank is also in an area that gets very little ambient light of any kind, so 90-99% of the usable light is coming from the finnex. There are things I would change about the light though, the mount sucks, I ended up adhering it to the rim of the tank with velcro to keep my kid and myself from knocking it into the tank with the slightest bump. You would have to buy or build a dimmer/driver for it and/or timer (I heard finnex has a dimmer/timer for it in some comments but haven't looked into it). So, ya crappy mount and no timer or dimmer for cons, but all in all its been pretty good so far. I have noticed the finnex grows plants better than a phillips 5000k flood 13w about 10 inches or less over my quarantine tank that also gets some ambient sunlight. The ludwigia did not like the flood at all, wouldn't put roots out or anything after a couple weeks, stuck it back in the main tank and fresh roots grew in 2 days.


----------



## Drowning

Malefactor said:


> I ended up with both, but yeah... I like the color on the Ray2, and for a deeper tank it penetrates better. However, I agree if you don't have a large tank and want a better over all lighting the Planted+ is the way to go. Both do the job well, t36he Ray2 gets much better growth at depth though for those high light needs with a 24 inch on a 18 inch deep tank.


What is considered "deep". I think my tank is about 18 inches from the light to the substrate. With 3 Amazon Swords, the oldest of which is having babies with my Quad Odyssea 36" light running with 1 HO 6500 1 HO Colormax, 1 NO colormax and 1 NO 6500 on two timers. Which would be better to replace it? It really difficult to know since Finnex hides their PAR data for the Planted+ and had no PAR data in their web site. It is only here. I have a Planted+ 16" I got for future Refugium and one of those plus a weak ass. I tried a Current USA LED+ light which seems about as bright as a NO light at probably 40 PAR but the Planted + is brighter then NO but I think the Colormax burned out but less then HO pair when the colormax works. I suspect if I unplugged it the single HO is probably doing the same 60 PAR or so. Maybe another 30-40 par HO for the Colormax?

The Satellite LED+ has 36 PAR at 12" and 28 PAR at 18" deep. A Ray 2 would get 50-60 PAR at 29 watts and assuming the 26.7 watt Planted plus uses the same 3014 LED's plus the 660 NS ones it seem it should get a healthy 48-57 or so but it's just a guess.

I want the ability do dusk and dawn and do not know if I should Satellite LED+ with a ramp timer and a Planted+ or Satellite LED+ with a ramp timer and a Ray 2 or 36" Ecoxotic E-90 Full Spectrum LED which costs about as much as a Sat + Timer + (Planted or Ray2). I worry about all the light coming from a single location with the Ecoxotic E-90 rather then from two lights but am I just be silly. It seem two lights would provide more even lighting then just one narrow E-90. I have a canopy so the sleek look matters not.


----------



## acitydweller

If you can wait a few weeks, the new line coming out by finnex will address many of these concerns.


----------



## BobAlston

Care to elaborate on the new Finnex LED line?

Bob


----------



## TropTrea

Drowning said:


> What is considered "deep". I think my tank is about 18 inches from the light to the substrate. With 3 Amazon Swords, the oldest of which is having babies with my Quad Odyssea 36" light running with 1 HO 6500 1 HO Colormax, 1 NO colormax and 1 NO 6500 on two timers. Which would be better to replace it? It really difficult to know since Finnex hides their PAR data for the Planted+ and had no PAR data in their web site. It is only here. I have a Planted+ 16" I got for future Refugium and one of those plus a weak ass. I tried a Current USA LED+ light which seems about as bright as a NO light at probably 40 PAR but the Planted + is brighter then NO but I think the Colormax burned out but less then HO pair when the colormax works. I suspect if I unplugged it the single HO is probably doing the same 60 PAR or so. Maybe another 30-40 par HO for the Colormax?
> 
> The Satellite LED+ has 36 PAR at 12" and 28 PAR at 18" deep. A Ray 2 would get 50-60 PAR at 29 watts and assuming the 26.7 watt Planted plus uses the same 3014 LED's plus the 660 NS ones it seem it should get a healthy 48-57 or so but it's just a guess.
> 
> I want the ability do dusk and dawn and do not know if I should Satellite LED+ with a ramp timer and a Planted+ or Satellite LED+ with a ramp timer and a Ray 2 or 36" Ecoxotic E-90 Full Spectrum LED which costs about as much as a Sat + Timer + (Planted or Ray2). I worry about all the light coming from a single location with the Ecoxotic E-90 rather then from two lights but am I just be silly. It seem two lights would provide more even lighting then just one narrow E-90. I have a canopy so the sleek look matters not.


From the sound of what you have now your running roughly 76 Watts of HOT-5 Lighting on your 36" long tank. The equivalent in LED Lighting will vary considerably by the quality of LED's the manufacturer is using. If they were using quality CREE X series LED's you would surpass your present light with about 40 watts of LED lighting. But if they are running some of the bottom the line LED's it would take at least 76 Watts to match what you have now.


----------

