Anyone us a LightingPassport spectrometer?

ThePlantInc said:
Incorrect. I care. Apparently the CoB vendors care. They don't want you to validate the performance of their products. After all, how would you know if they aren't using lower quality components? The only way to know is to test.
Click to expand...
The performance can be taken from crees website.......
Drivers and cobs have CXA or CXB on them.... And drivers say what they are on the manufacture stickers.

Your whole paragraph is invalid

Unless they're scratching the A off and putting on B. Wow mind blown. And changing driver bodies with cheap internals.

You really are butt hurt huh

Go be a poopy pants elsewhere
 
Maybe I should have qualified the request by asking for only those who have used the product to respond.

Look at that, a website with the same name that I randomly chose to use on this forum. Actually the .com TLD is being offered for sale so maybe you are trying to scam people into buying it?

Now if you want to keep digging to try and make this a credibility issue than you be sadly disappointed. I have a bunch of letters behind my name that say I am smarter than you. But this is the internet and any one can say whatever they want.

So, once again, whats the issue with vendors testing their products? Something to hide?

At best this is a case of the blind leading the blind.
 
Well they did 'threaten' to put me on ignore but they can't seem to stop themselves from responding.

It is pretty clear that they haven't used the device, or any spectrometer for that matter, but still feel the need to express themselves anyhow. At least it is easy to filter and can quickly identify those who are just a distraction.
 
ThePlantInc said:
Well they did 'threaten' to put me on ignore but they can't seem to stop themselves from responding.

It is pretty clear that they haven't used the device, or any spectrometer for the matter, but still feel the need to express themselves anyhow. At least it is easy to filter and can quickly identify those who are just a distraction.
Click to expand...

Who on God's green earth are you talking to? Are they in your head? Did they tell you we hate Jews and want to beat you up? Did they award you all those letters after your name?
 
ThePlantInc said:
Still no responses from someone that has used the device?

12 responses from people who haven't used the device (most likely any spectrometer at all) yet they seem to have some very strong opinions on the subject.
Click to expand...
I have used the MK350. And have tested at shows probably 15 others(many rebranded mk350's), and the passport was one of them. The sales guys Les, is why I liked the passport. Cool dude, and at the time was one of the only one to overlay with McCree and other action spectras. But now all do that.

But...it(all handhelds) are not that great of a tool. It's a spectroradiometer, and a quantum meter in one. It does not do anything to give total output numbers like a sphere would.
Many people have quantum meters(PAR meter), so the 2000-2500$ to know the intensity isn't appealing, or worth it.
Most people don't need to know the spectrum, as they use single spectrums that have already been put on multiple spectroradiometers to confirm spectrum.
And some of us have both.

You can get areal spectroradiometer with the cosine receptor for $2500 that has 4X+ the accuracy.
 
Greengenes707 said:
But...it(all handhelds) are not that great of a tool. It's a spectroradiometer, and a quantum meter in one. It does not do anything to give total output numbers like a sphere would..
Click to expand...
Like an Apogee and multimeter for less than 300$? What was it, multiply volts by 5? (Edit: Just did Google, millivolts, and it's for PAR readings)I think Apogee also makes a meter with the sensor for like 500$..
 
Greengenes707 said:
I have used the MK350. And have tested at shows probably 15 others(many rebranded mk350's), and the passport was one of them. The sales guys Les, is why I liked the passport. Cool dude, and at the time was one of the only one to overlay with McCree and other action spectras. But now all do that.

But...it(all handhelds) are not that great of a tool. It's a spectroradiometer, and a quantum meter in one. It does not do anything to give total output numbers like a sphere would.
Many people have quantum meters(PAR meter), so the 2000-2500$ to know the intensity isn't appealing, or worth it.
Most people don't need to know the spectrum, as they use single spectrums that have already been put on multiple spectroradiometers to confirm spectrum.
And some of us have both.

You can get areal spectroradiometer with the cosine receptor for $2500 that has 4X+ the accuracy.
Click to expand...

Do we know how many µmols or µmols/J the CXP-250 is making yet?

BTW, typo here: "The CX-250P is a designed to be used cumulatively..."
 
ThePlantInc said:
I have a bunch of letters behind my name that say I am smarter than you. But this is the internet and any one can say whatever they want.
.
Click to expand...

This statement sums up why no one here is interested in your opinion. Whatever information you may have or how many letters you have behind your name. The reason is not because it does not have merit but because you lack social tact and even the slightest modicum of grace.

What is your motivation for participating here? A self professed man of higher education who thinks the best way to spend his time is on a cannabis enthusiasts forum. Berating and labeling individuals you know nothing about.

If your reasons were not for financial gain then it appears to be driven by a grandiose view of your own talents and a craving for admiration.

You speak to others as if you are the only individual on the planet who has an education or has read a book. Time and money was invested in your implied education. The fact that you choose to use it in an attempt to denigrate others is evidence that it is lacking in the fundamentals.

images (4).jpg
 
More non-constructive posts from the ignorant? As I posted earlier, respond if you have actually used the device.

Your opinion on something you haven't used isn't useful and judging by the general level of intelligence by the forum posters here, it would most likely be wrong anyhow. Nor do I care about what you think my opinion is on anything since it makes no benefit to me whatsoever. I only came to ask a question, nothing else, and have no interest at all in being associated with this community.

You can sling mud all you want but it doesn't change the fact that none of the CoB vendors are validating performance, or even properly testing their products. The simple fact is that those who are defiantly defending the vendors in these forum threads are those who have the most to lose. They don't want to you test the components to find out that they sold you lower binned version under the guise of using the performance characteristics of top binned products.

So ask once again, what's the issue with getting the CoB vendors to have their claims independently verified? The only reason not to get certification is to avoid being caught using lower quality components. The fervent pitch of the forum parrots suggests that even they know that is likely the case.

In the end it is your money, do what you want with it. You can believe in whatever you want but until something is independently verified, it is all hype.

Somewhat ironic that it is the same argument made against asian manufacturers by the CoB promoters.
 
Last edited:
ThePlantInc said:
More non-constructive posts from the ignorant? As I posted earlier, respond if you have actually used the device.

Your opinion on something you haven't used isn't useful and judging by the general level of intelligence by the forum posters here, it would most likely be wrong anyhow.

You can sling mud all you want but it doesn't change the fact that none of the CoB vendors are validating performance, or even properly testing their products. The simple fact is that those who are defiantly defending the vendors in these forum threads are those who have the most to lose. They don't want to you test the components to find out that they sold you lower binned version under the guise of using the performance characteristics of top binned products.

So ask once again, what's the issue with getting the CoB vendors to have their claims independently verified? The only reason not to get certification is to avoid being caught using lower quality components. The fervent pitch of the forum parrots suggests that even they know that is likely the case.

In the end it is your money, do what you want with it. You can believe in whatever you want but until something is independently verified, it is all hype.

Somewhat ironic that it is the same argument made against asian manufacturers by the CoB promoters.
Click to expand...

Wow one of these evil vendors replies politely with actual hands-on knowledge of the spectrometer you asked about, and you respond by calling them a crook. Classy.
 
Greengenes707 said:
I have used the MK350. And have tested at shows probably 15 others(many rebranded mk350's), and the passport was one of them. The sales guys Les, is why I liked the passport. Cool dude, and at the time was one of the only one to overlay with McCree and other action spectras. But now all do that.

But...it(all handhelds) are not that great of a tool. It's a spectroradiometer, and a quantum meter in one. It does not do anything to give total output numbers like a sphere would.
Many people have quantum meters(PAR meter), so the 2000-2500$ to know the intensity isn't appealing, or worth it.
Most people don't need to know the spectrum, as they use single spectrums that have already been put on multiple spectroradiometers to confirm spectrum.
And some of us have both.

You can get areal spectroradiometer with the cosine receptor for $2500 that has 4X+ the accuracy.
Click to expand...

Thank you for your response. It took 2 pages before someone who has used the device to post.

Of the units you tested how does it compare with the others? Any pros/cons? Would you recommend any of the other products for consideration?

One feature that is of particular interest is for data acquisition. The older units are quite time consuming to transfer data often using different formats. .

Most units we have looked at are certified for accuracy so we can assume that the resolution is accurate within stated parameters. Having said that, there are other measurements of interest (eg. weighted spectrum such as YPFD) that are useful for research purposes. Sure you can take the raw data and use some sort of calculation but having it available in real time is quite convenient.

I see that you are a CoB vendor. Do you test the light performance of your products? How about quality control?

The questions aren't intended to be antagonistic - they are fairly standard to ask of any product.
 
As gg said doing flat pane measurements with a handheld meter is like throwing a dart on the wall.......far from precise calc on qer/ler.

I do also agree it's about time we get a cob fixture(s) in the sphere and back up these 2.5 umol/j claims that some are throwing around.....running bare is the best shot! Lol, let's see anything dammit ........

We can't have next light panels being the only confirmed ppf/w# from the advertisers in here.......
 
ThePlantInc said:
Thank you for your response. It took 2 pages before someone who has used the device to post.

Of the units you tested how does it compare with the others? Any pros/cons? Would you recommend any of the other products for consideration?

One feature that is of particular interest is for data acquisition. The older units are quite time consuming to transfer data often using different formats. .

Most units we have looked at are certified for accuracy so we can assume that the resolution is accurate within stated parameters. Having said that, there are other measurements of interest (eg. weighted spectrum such as YPFD) that are useful for research purposes. Sure you can take the raw data and use some sort of calculation but having it available in real time is quite convenient.

I see that you are a CoB vendor. Do you test the light performance of your products? How about quality control?

The questions aren't intended to be antagonistic - they are fairly standard to ask of any product.
Click to expand...

Just in case you have not figured it out... You could have e-mailed the different vendors rather than start a thread.
 
Greengenes707 said:
I have used the MK350. And have tested at shows probably 15 others(many rebranded mk350's), and the passport was one of them. The sales guys Les, is why I liked the passport. Cool dude, and at the time was one of the only one to overlay with McCree and other action spectras. But now all do that.

But...it(all handhelds) are not that great of a tool. It's a spectroradiometer, and a quantum meter in one. It does not do anything to give total output numbers like a sphere would.
Many people have quantum meters(PAR meter), so the 2000-2500$ to know the intensity isn't appealing, or worth it.
Most people don't need to know the spectrum, as they use single spectrums that have already been put on multiple spectroradiometers to confirm spectrum.
And some of us have both.

You can get areal spectroradiometer with the cosine receptor for $2500 that has 4X+ the accuracy.
Click to expand...
I also use the asensetek and find it excellent. It does have a drawback though in that it does not have a cosine receptor and therefore cannot accurately record all the light it receives from angles greater than about 25 degrees (you can even see the light shadow the sensor at these angles). I recently bought the new SQ500 sensor (€500) and tested its accuracy against the asensetek passport from a light source pointed directly at it (results attached). It's accurate to 5% in my tests up to PPFD of 800. It's great as you can do a PAR map with a cosine corrected sensor that accurately records PPFD from multiple light sources in one reading.
 

Attachments

Shane Torpey said:
I also use the asensetek and find it excellent. It does have a drawback though in that it does not have a cosine receptor and therefore cannot accurately record all the light it receives from angles greater than about 25 degrees (you can even see the light shadow the sensor at these angles). I recently bought the new SQ500 sensor (€500) and tested its accuracy against the asensetek passport from a light source pointed directly at it (results attached). It's accurate to 5% in my tests up to PPFD of 800. It's great as you can do a PAR map with a cosine corrected sensor that accurately records PPFD from multiple light sources in one reading.
Click to expand...

The Passport is less accurate than the Apogee one for PPFD readings, or vice versa?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top