MH vs T5

[cobysreef]

Id like to know your opinion on this topic considering we will be keeping all types of corals, fish, clams, ect. in a very large and deep tank. Lets say about 30 in. to 36in deep :Thinking:

 

[scarf_ace1981]

the fact that it's a deep tank and that you would like to keep clams i would go MH hands down. t-5 i would use for nano set-ups, shallow tanks or w/ corals that don't need intense lighting.

don't get me wrong there are some good t5 fixtures out there but nothing like MH.

 

[cobysreef]

Lets say it was only a 30 inch deep tank. From what I understood the T5's give a healthier spectrum of light than the MH and also much less heat. The T5 also goes directly on your tank where the MH's are 6-8 inches above and alot of the problems ive heard about them is that they crack from various things that happen (ie. jumping fish or water splash).
Lets do a pro's and con's debate on this topic.
Ive seen both and I really think the T5's give a nicer and brighter light than the MH. just my opinion, id like know everyone elses considering youve seen both.

 

[cali_reef]

From what I understood the T5's give a healthier spectrum of light than the MH and also much less heat.

You should do more research on this, your understanding is not 100% correct.

 

[loismustdie]

From what I understood the T5's give a healthier spectrum of light than the MH and also much less heat. The T5 also goes directly on your tank where the MH's are 6-8 inches above and alot of the problems ive heard about them is that they crack from various things that happen (ie. jumping fish or water splash).

I don't think you understand this 100% either.
T-5 can be placed very close to the water surface, but they still put out heat. Not as point directional as MH, but they put out heat over a larger spread, the length of the bulb. If you were to take all the spread of heat of a 4 foot t-5 and focus into 6 to 8 inches, it is just as hot as MH. MH placed 12 to 18 inches over the tank in a properly ventilated hood CAN be less of a heat factor than t-5 palced directly over the water surface.
Safeguards are also put in place to keep MH from getting wet. Proper plumbing being one of them. Proper height above the water line is another. When a T-5 is placed just above the water surface, they tend to build up salt creep, which changes it's intensity. Are you going to clean them everyday?
I'm not choosing one or the other or saying which is better. Just throwing other debatable observations I've noticed.

 

[Dmitry]

I switched from MHs to T5 and T5s don't give out nearly as much heat as my MHs did. When the MHs were on you could feel the temperature rising as you walked up to the tank. When I put my hand under the lights to feed the fish MHs would almost burn my skin. I feel just a little heat on the skin from T5s.

The length of the bulb is a factor, however. T5s spread light evenly across the entire bulb - and the tank. MHs spotlight the area directly underneath; the futher away you move the less light that area receives.

I have not noticed a drop in the electricity bill, however. That said, I do run a longer photoperiod with T5s.

Personally I've been happier with T5s. Another thing I like is that you can do more aesthetically with color of light. Mixing bulbs to get the perfect for your eyes result can be fun!

 

[cobysreef]

I did more research and found what I thought would be the best way to provide the right conditions.
400 10k Mh's with T5 actinic only. Homework pays off

 

[alrha]

good job coby!

 

[nanoreefer22]

I did more research and found what I thought would be the best way to provide the right conditions.
400 10k Mh's with T5 actinic only. Homework pays off

Since the tank is 30-36" deep 400watter are pretty much your only choice to be able to penetrate the water that far down.

 

[cobysreef]

Yup, 400 watts at the lenth of 8 feet with a 3 foot width and a 30 inch height. thats alot of lighting. wont need a heater for that! :duh:

 

[jenniebutterfly]

i think t5 would be a better option. i prefer them to halide. they are much brighter. when i was running my 4 x 24 watt 24" tek light it was nrighter and reached to the bottom of my 65 gallon. the halides i am running over my 15 (150 watt de bulb) is not nearly as bright as my t5's were

 

[nanoreefer22]

Yup, 400 watts at the lenth of 8 feet with a 3 foot width and a 30 inch height. thats alot of lighting. wont need a heater for that! :duh:

Thats 4 halides!!!!!:bigeyes: Good luck...Get yourself some Lumenarcs and you might get away with 3 halides....

 

[Quang]

If it was up to me, I'll get (2) 48" T-5 fixtures.

I also see that my Tek 4-bulb t-5's put out a lot more lighting than my 150w MH....however I was running a 20k XM bulb, so....

Also, having individual parobolic reflectors for each T-5 bulbs is very important. If you're going with a t-5 fixture, don't bother looking at ones that don't have them.

 

[neptune]

listen im running 8 54w t-5 410k and 4atinic my lights look like the ark of the covernant....but halides will give off those nice glitter lines all through the tank.i wish i went with halide....the bill evens out because you dont need them on that much....just have some vho's as backup...

 

[Quang]

neptune" data-source="" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

the bill evens out because you dont need them on that much....just have some vho's as backup...

I don't run my T-5's that long either.
I have the actinic bulbs on for 7 hrs and everything on for 4-5 hrs. I found that my corals were getting too much light and looking a little pastel. I might lower my hrs even more to get the corals a deeper color.
My point is that I haven't had any bad side-effects running my lights less...so amt of time you run T-5s, for me, can be as little as MHs.