Lighting MH vs PC vs VHO

[Tuner_Guy]

I understand that every person has his/her own formula for a good lighting setup. I also understand that about 4 to 5 watts of light per gallon is the minium for a reef setup. And I comprehend that lighting also depends on what you are housing. But dollar for dollar, best lighting system available, I thought the power compacts are dominant. But after reading some posts, my mind is starting to linger. What advantage does Metal Halide play over the power compacts? I love power compacts and dont really realize why some people live by metal halide. Please explain this to me, maybe I dont get something that could be beneficial to my tank. Also, I thought that VHO's were outdated. Why are people negliting the power compacts and still using the VHO setups? This is not for a specific tank, just knowledge in general. Any light you can shed on this subject (that pun was NOT intential) I would be very grateful and appreciative. Thank You

Brandon

 

[reefsnreptiles1]

PC's are newer technology as far as fluorescent lighting is concerned. In some applications (like on a very small tank) they are perfect.

VHO's are definitely not outdated though and it really comes down to a matter of preference when choosing between them and pc's. We run pc's on a couple of our tanks but still prefer vhos for supplementing halides (as do many people) with actinic lighting (having tested both we find that corals fluoresce better under vho actinics). Both pc's and vho's have similar abilities to penetrate the water and the only time I have seen much of a difference as far as intensity was concerned was when one was using a good reflector.

However, neither pc nor vho lighting has the ability to penetrate the water like halides. MH lighting uses a single point source that essentially focuses straight down "punching" through the water if you will. With PC and VHO lighting the light is spread out over the length of the tubes. 250 watts of pc or vho lighting is not as intense as the same wattage for halides.

 

[Anonymous]

I don't understand the people lingering on VHO either. Right now I'm using PC lighting (1/2 actinic) because that's what I had laying around from planted freshwater tank mania. Some day I will upgrade to MH. From what I understand the huge that MH casts is much better, so they are visually appealing. Also, the light is much more intense, and penetrates the water deeper. Many people have told me not to bother with the really tough stuff until I get MH lights.

-me

 

[ReefMan75-20-15]

I am by no means an expert, but from what I have read you will need MH or VHO to keep SPS. I just purchased my first MH fixture so I can not really speak from experience. Although I have tried to keep SPS with PC and I was able to keep them alive and growing very well they did not keep the color they had when I originally purchased them. GARF keeps everything under VHO I believe. They have wonderful colored corals from all of the pictures on their site. I guess it really depends on what you want to keep in the tank.

 

[Anonymous]

It really depends on what you want to keep and your specific tank. Watt for watt, there's no beating MH in terms of cost or light output. However, it would be silly to put MH over a 12" deep, soft coral tank.

I use PCs on my SPS tank, and they do fine. It is only 6" deep though

 

[ChrisRD]

T-5s are now an interesting alternative to PCs or VHOs.

 

[Anonymous]

Welcome to RDO!


Besides what has already been said, one of the benifits to MH is 'glitter lines', the sparkly lines you see on the ocean floor on in a pool. You only get these from a single point source, and man, they look cool.

I started with PC, and loved them till I got MH DE's. I then used the PCs for actinic supplmentation, and was blown away when I switched to VHO. MH (single ended or double ended) plus vho is a real nice combo.

Reefman, be wary of photos on some sites - photoshop is a very useful tool...