Someone correct me if I'm wrong but typical screw-in led bulbs are around 90-100 lumen/watt, the strip light I built about 3 years ago is around 175 and many newer grow lights are something like 200.
2 Mars Hydro TS1000 + Mars Hydro 1 SP 150 / or FC 3000 ? 5x5 ( Mars Hydro Users Opinions :)
- Thread starter GoodoldSlapNuts
- Start date
-
- Tags
- #fc3000 #sp150 mars hydro ts1000
Frank Nitty
Well-Known Member
Sister... She is a woman...
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
It's the PAR rating that counts. You can get to around 1.8 umol/J with light bulbs.
The specialized grow lights use expensive red LEDs, which is the main reason why they're more efficient. However, also (much) more expensive.
I think if power is cheap where you live, it's more economic financially to use more LED bulbs to make up for the lost efficiency. Not so great from an eco standpoint, however.
Also there are places where you really just need adequate light and not more (clones, mother plants, short veg), and then why waste an expensive grow light.
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
Which bar lights emit the least heat?
Practically-speaking, a lot of us probably use ~700W units. Someone might have multiple, but 680-720W might be a good measurement to compare. With enough feedback, we'd either see measurable differences or conclude it's hype. Newbies -- I consider myself still in this category -- may not be...
rollitup.org
Reds are not the main reason grow lights are more efficient, it's better diodes and drivers, but reds can help. My light is 3500k with no reds and it's 175 lumin/w, nearly twice the efficacy as 90lumin/w LED bulbs. I understand PAR measures a wider spectrum including reds, but the lights I just mentioned have no reds (or UV) so measuing in lux is a valid comparison.
Last edited:
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
LED bulbs have a lot more than 90 lumen/W, more like 120 lm/W (Philips bulb I just looked up, €3 per piece).
They're not going to reach the efficiency of grow lights for the reasons you've mentioned, but they're also a lot cheaper per Watt.
I still think a good part of the PAR efficiency comes from the red LEDs, it's by far the most efficient light (PAR wise) for plants, and those LEDs are not included on regular light bulbs.
Which LED bulbs are 120lm/w? What €3 Philips bulb did you just look up?
cobshopgrow
Well-Known Member
1212ham is comparing apples to apples here when comparing white light led strips to white light led bulbs.
youre trying to make an orange out of an apple.
even white light only led strips are way above 1.8 umol/J, no need for added red to beat the bulbs.
dont forget to factor in the bulb holders btw and make a price comparsion of your philips bulb to some strips.
not even a dollar each incl. free shipping, f.e.
these arent the best you can get, just an example, so you may get the picture.
youre trying to make an orange out of an apple.
even white light only led strips are way above 1.8 umol/J, no need for added red to beat the bulbs.
dont forget to factor in the bulb holders btw and make a price comparsion of your philips bulb to some strips.
not even a dollar each incl. free shipping, f.e.
these arent the best you can get, just an example, so you may get the picture.
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
13W (100W) E27 Warm white Non-dimmable Bulb | null
View the highlights and technical specifications of the LED 8718696586273 by Philips
www.lighting.philips.co.uk
That's the one I found on Amazon in a pack of 6 for €3 a piece. There are others with even more lm/W.
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
If you look at grow lights, the measured results are usually way lower than what the manufacturers report.
E.g. Spider Farmer reports 2.6, reviews then come out at about 2.0, and so on.
The highest (measured) I've seen so far in a review was 2.6.
The 1.8 umol/J for the bulb array was measured by the person who built the array (see video). That is pretty close to the lower end panels you can buy (e.g. cheap Mars Hydro).
To push to actual 2.6 umol/J, red LEDs are probably necessary, in any case only the most expensive lights feature such numbers. If it was easy to squeeze out that much efficiency just by optimizing the drivers, everybody would be doing it. They all use pretty much the same LEDs (usually Samsung).
In any case, if the lights are in heavy use, at full power, and you can use all available light, then it's better to go for more efficient setups, and not LED light bulbs, simply because it conserves a lot of energy (no matter the actual power costs).
Lenin1917
Well-Known Member
You’re gonna want a 600w or higher led for a 5x5 if you want to fill it. Mars hydro fc/fce 6500 or 8000 (I’d go with the 8000 in a 5x5) vmedicgrow fold 8/easy 8, volt vfl1 are all pretty solid budget options. I’m probably going with the fce8000 when I size up in a month or so.
cobshopgrow
Well-Known Member
@ComputerSaysNo
"if you look at grow lights, the measured results are usually way lower than what the manufacturers report."
no one stated that the usable ppfd isnt lower then the manufactorer reported data, the same is true for your philips bulb.
of course its ppfd what counts in the end, but if you compare same spectrum leds to each other (bulbs vs. strips)
and only have the lumen per watt ratio given you can derive the ppfd from this (known spectrum given).
or, what will make you think that your philips bulbs magically put out more ppfd then they normally could according to the manufactorer data?
"To push to actual 2.6 umol/J, red LEDs are probably necessary, in any case only the most expensive lights feature such numbers. If it was easy to squeeze out that much efficiency just by optimizing the drivers,
everybody would be doing it. They all use pretty much the same LEDs (usually Samsung)."
were only trying to tell, that you get more usable ppfd out of led strips then you get out of led bulbs, you bring up ready made grow lights and 660nm reds and assume the rest.
you can push 2.6 with white leds only, just take enough of them, drive them low, and not all lights use samsung leds, especially not the low end grow light you brought to the table.
some of the very cheap grow lights use inferior driver concepts, use bad leds and drive them too hard (like your bulbs), to save the last penny.
i was just saying that you easily get more usable ppfd then 1.8 out of cheap led strips compared to the bulbs, apples to apples.
youre very limited which what you can achieve by using bulbs, as they usually drive the leds quite hard and their internal drivers are quite bad, (exept the dubai lamp maybe, which isnt 3€ at your doorstep).
so lets compare the philips bulb to the old bridgelux strip offered for 0.83 cent.
your bulb is 3.33€ on amazon.
the bulb is 1521 lm at 13W, 117 lpw.
a strip is 1205 lm at 7.7W and 156 lpw therefore.
so we need 2, gives 1.66€ vs. 3.33€.
half the price and more then 20% ppfd more output for less money.
the savings for the bulb holders almost compensate the price fo a quality driver, a cheap driver will be even less.
btw. electrical safety is way higer using a real led driver as a bonus for your lifetime.
and were comparing allready the best bulb vs. a very cheap strip here, recent strips goes up to 220, 240 lpw is doable with the newest stuff, more then a usable 2.6 achievable, easily., incl all losses, do the math.
edit: typos
"if you look at grow lights, the measured results are usually way lower than what the manufacturers report."
no one stated that the usable ppfd isnt lower then the manufactorer reported data, the same is true for your philips bulb.
of course its ppfd what counts in the end, but if you compare same spectrum leds to each other (bulbs vs. strips)
and only have the lumen per watt ratio given you can derive the ppfd from this (known spectrum given).
or, what will make you think that your philips bulbs magically put out more ppfd then they normally could according to the manufactorer data?
"To push to actual 2.6 umol/J, red LEDs are probably necessary, in any case only the most expensive lights feature such numbers. If it was easy to squeeze out that much efficiency just by optimizing the drivers,
everybody would be doing it. They all use pretty much the same LEDs (usually Samsung)."
were only trying to tell, that you get more usable ppfd out of led strips then you get out of led bulbs, you bring up ready made grow lights and 660nm reds and assume the rest.
you can push 2.6 with white leds only, just take enough of them, drive them low, and not all lights use samsung leds, especially not the low end grow light you brought to the table.
some of the very cheap grow lights use inferior driver concepts, use bad leds and drive them too hard (like your bulbs), to save the last penny.
i was just saying that you easily get more usable ppfd then 1.8 out of cheap led strips compared to the bulbs, apples to apples.
youre very limited which what you can achieve by using bulbs, as they usually drive the leds quite hard and their internal drivers are quite bad, (exept the dubai lamp maybe, which isnt 3€ at your doorstep).
so lets compare the philips bulb to the old bridgelux strip offered for 0.83 cent.
your bulb is 3.33€ on amazon.
the bulb is 1521 lm at 13W, 117 lpw.
a strip is 1205 lm at 7.7W and 156 lpw therefore.
so we need 2, gives 1.66€ vs. 3.33€.
half the price and more then 20% ppfd more output for less money.
the savings for the bulb holders almost compensate the price fo a quality driver, a cheap driver will be even less.
btw. electrical safety is way higer using a real led driver as a bonus for your lifetime.
and were comparing allready the best bulb vs. a very cheap strip here, recent strips goes up to 220, 240 lpw is doable with the newest stuff, more then a usable 2.6 achievable, easily., incl all losses, do the math.
edit: typos
Last edited:
ComputerSaysNo
Well-Known Member
That is true, I wouldn't completely trust the lumen figures on the bulb packaging either.
However, the 1.8 umol/J I've cited (for LED bulbs) are actually measured, with bulb heads cut off.
The only relevant number is what reaches the canopy from the optimal hanging height, manufacturers numbers can't be trusted in either case (bulb or grow light).
The main reason to use bulbs is because they're cheap as fuck. They only need to be reasonably efficient, or else the power bill will eat up all the savings.
Major downside to the bulb is that they all come with their own driver and socket, and that's of course not very elegant. On the other hand they can be replaced or switched individually. Lots of mini-grow-lights, basically.
If money is not an issue, then going with a high quality bar light is obviously better than building a bulb array.
cobshopgrow
Well-Known Member
i didnt question the measured 1.8, its just no impressive number compared to what you can get for even less money when using led strips.
its true that only counts what is reaching your canopy, its going to be more when you use some cheap led strips instead of led bulbs.
the strips are better in every aspect and can be even cheaper.
it very well can be that the manufactorer data given, philips bulbs, blux strips, will be based on the diode datasheet, so beeing quite idealized, which will look the best also on paper (you get the concept
).
i know that some believe removing the dome make your 120 lumen light a XX more lumen light.
could more think that removing the bulb brings you closer to the idealized diode based 120 lumen data the manufactorer is allready stating, thats all, there is no proof for else.
its pure speculation without a real independent sphere test.
removing the dome is also just a mediocre good idea, as you need to be aware that their electrical safety concept is relying on beeing enclosed in plastic.
you have exposed main this way and not a single barrier in between.
real led drivers are galvanic isolated for this reason, so the led they drive are allowed to be unenclosed.
as youre refering to prebuild lights often, am astonished how cheap they got.
i saw halfway decent 150W lights with real drivers for about a good 50$.
its true that only counts what is reaching your canopy, its going to be more when you use some cheap led strips instead of led bulbs.
the strips are better in every aspect and can be even cheaper.
it very well can be that the manufactorer data given, philips bulbs, blux strips, will be based on the diode datasheet, so beeing quite idealized, which will look the best also on paper (you get the concept
).i know that some believe removing the dome make your 120 lumen light a XX more lumen light.
could more think that removing the bulb brings you closer to the idealized diode based 120 lumen data the manufactorer is allready stating, thats all, there is no proof for else.
its pure speculation without a real independent sphere test.
removing the dome is also just a mediocre good idea, as you need to be aware that their electrical safety concept is relying on beeing enclosed in plastic.
you have exposed main this way and not a single barrier in between.
real led drivers are galvanic isolated for this reason, so the led they drive are allowed to be unenclosed.
as youre refering to prebuild lights often, am astonished how cheap they got.
i saw halfway decent 150W lights with real drivers for about a good 50$.
VincenzioVonHook
Well-Known Member
2 TS 1000s on one side and a tsl2000 in on the other would be a good starting point.you know what that might just do the trick, I'm just a heavy stoner, such will do the needs, if the coverage is good then I shall advance with getting one to support finishing this harvest and buy onether one for the next so ill be in pole position with them 2 TSL 2000 your suggesting, man i think you might have just enlightened me!
That way, on a budget you would only have to fork out for the TSL2000.
chronnie49
Well-Known Member
That's still not enough light to cover a 5x5. You would be better off having a 4x4 canopy and using the whole space when you can afford more light.
VincenzioVonHook
Well-Known Member
It's still better than what he has. I've pulled 5 ounces under 11w/m2.
I guess you missed "starting point".
Got a mate with 4xts 1000s in a 5x5. Just pulled 1.55g per watt with his latest harvest.
Last edited:
chronnie49
Well-Known Member
I understand we all have to start somewhere but I dont see the point in using a 5x5 area without adequate lighting when a 4x4 would be fully covered and likely produce more.
How many watts are those xts each??
VincenzioVonHook
Well-Known Member
150w each. Were dimmed the first half of the run though.
I assumed it was common sense to reduce the footprint in the tent anyway.
With the 4xts1000s the intensity at the edges was between 500-600, and the centre of each light was at around 1100umol at 16". Certainly enough to reach DLI during flower.
It's not perfect, but it doesn't have to be. You can get surprising results. This was at 11w/ft2 in a 2x4, one auto. Results will be way different with photos tho.
chronnie49
Well-Known Member
He didn't mention reducing the footprint but if that's the plan then I think he would have better results. 600 watts in a 5x5 packed full will leave with you with a lot of larf on the outer plants in most cases.
I'm by no means a pro or pull maximum yields in my space but I just like to use the lights to their full potential. Plus I hate trimming larf haha.
If your buddy is happy pulling 388 grams out of a 5x5 then thats great for him. We all have different expectations but personally I wouldn't be satisfied with that