Looking for the best LED maker out now

[Psyphish]

Apparently this one is currently the most efficient

 

[Prawn Connery]

Apparently this one is currently the most efficient

A good example of how easy it is to achieve efficiency with just the combination of white phosphor 5000K (and some 3000K by the looks of it) and 660nm monos.

But let's look a bit closer . . . This is what a high efficiency spectrum looks like.



This translates to an average CCT of 4000K and CRI80. There is no UVA and no Far Red. Indeed, the Red-to-Far Red ratio is 30:1! Sunlight is (on average) 1.7:1. Our lights are just over 3.5:1 (about half of sunlight but 8-10x more than typical grow lights).

Is this the best spectrum for flowering?



Efficiency calcuations are a bit bunk unless you are using a sphere or goniometer. Fact is, you can create as many test points as you like using a hand-held spectrometer – and then average those points – but there is a lot of margin for error.

Here is the PAR map. To arrive at 3.06 umol/j you divide average PPFD (960) by Watts/Joules per second (707W) multiplied by the total area (2.25m square).



Here is a Grow Llights Australia High Light 420 Gen2 PAR map using Dialux based on Viso goniometer IES files. This is a 1.5m x1.5m tent with 80% reflective walls. Average PPFD is 1232. Total power is 940W. "Efficiency" is 1232 PPFD/940W x 2.25m2 = 2.95 umol/j



What about the spectrum? CCT 3000 CRI94 10% Far Red and 1% UVA




Now we know our system efficiency is nowhere near 2.95 umol/j and the fact is, when you use a hand-held light meter instead of a sphere or goniometer to read PPFD, you are counting some photons twice, because they get bounced off the walls back into the meter. In a real grow, many of those same photons are absorbed by the plant before they get a chance to bounce off the walls.

It really pays to know what you're looking at.

With that said, I'm not knocking the GML light – it really is a very efficient light and possibly one of the most efficient lights on the market – but there are plenty of others otut there with similar spectra and efficiency. It basically comes down to, do you value efficiency over spectra . . . or spectra over efficiency . . . or do you prefer a balance between the two?

When know that photons > spectra but once you reach light saturation, then spectra > additional photons.

The best test of a grow light is how it grows. It's that simple.

 

[Psyphish]

A good example of how easy it is to achieve efficiency with just the combination of white phosphor 5000K (and some 3000K by the looks of it) and 660nm monos.

But let's look a bit closer . . . This is what a high efficiency spectrum looks like.

View attachment 5333083

This translates to an average CCT of 4000K and CRI80. There is no UVA and no Far Red. Indeed, the Red-to-Far Red ratio is 30:1! Sunlight is (on average) 1.7:1. Our lights are just over 3.5:1 (about half of sunlight but 8-10x more than typical grow lights).

Is this the best spectrum for flowering?

View attachment 5333084

Efficiency calcuations are a bit bunk unless you are using a sphere or goniometer. Fact is, you can create as many test points as you like using a hand-held spectrometer – and then average those points – but there is a lot of margin for error.

Here is the PAR map. To arrive at 3.06 umol/j you divide average PPFD (960) by Watts/Joules per second (707W) multiplied by the total area (2.25m square).

View attachment 5333085

Here is a Grow Llights Australia High Light 420 Gen2 PAR map using Dialux based on Viso goniometer IES files. This is a 1.5m x1.5m tent with 80% reflective walls. Average PPFD is 1232. Total power is 940W. "Efficiency" is 1232 PPFD/940W x 2.25m2 = 2.95 umol/j

View attachment 5333086

What about the spectrum? CCT 3000 CRI94 10% Far Red and 1% UVA

View attachment 5333090


Now we know our system efficiency is nowhere near 2.95 umol/j and the fact is, when you use a hand-held light meter instead of a sphere or goniometer to read PPFD, you are counting some photons twice, because they get bounced off the walls back into the meter. In a real grow, many of those same photons are absorbed by the plant before they get a chance to bounce off the walls.

It really pays to know what you're looking at.

With that said, I'm not knocking the GML light – it really is a very efficient light and possibly one of the most efficient lights on the market – but there are plenty of others otut there with similar spectra and efficiency. It basically comes down to, do you value efficiency over spectra . . . or spectra over efficiency . . . or do you prefer a balance between the two?

When know that photons > spectra but once you reach light saturation, then spectra > additional photons.

The best test of a grow light is how it grows. It's that simple.

This is all very interesting and I know next to nothing about grow lights, all I know is I can't tell a difference between plants I grow under 3500K & 660 reds and 3500K, 730, 660, 400, 385nm lights. The light that yields the most is usually better for most growers. There definitely is something to the whole spectrum thing though, I still miss my 315W Philips green power CMHs. GML also has this light (LM301H, LM301H EVO, LM301H EVO MINT. Osram 450nm, 660nm, 730nm ), looks better?

 

[Rocket Soul]

A good example of how easy it is to achieve efficiency with just the combination of white phosphor 5000K (and some 3000K by the looks of it) and 660nm monos.

But let's look a bit closer . . . This is what a high efficiency spectrum looks like.

View attachment 5333083

This translates to an average CCT of 4000K and CRI80. There is no UVA and no Far Red. Indeed, the Red-to-Far Red ratio is 30:1! Sunlight is (on average) 1.7:1. Our lights are just over 3.5:1 (about half of sunlight but 8-10x more than typical grow lights).

Is this the best spectrum for flowering?

View attachment 5333084

Efficiency calcuations are a bit bunk unless you are using a sphere or goniometer. Fact is, you can create as many test points as you like using a hand-held spectrometer – and then average those points – but there is a lot of margin for error.

Here is the PAR map. To arrive at 3.06 umol/j you divide average PPFD (960) by Watts/Joules per second (707W) multiplied by the total area (2.25m square).

View attachment 5333085

Here is a Grow Llights Australia High Light 420 Gen2 PAR map using Dialux based on Viso goniometer IES files. This is a 1.5m x1.5m tent with 80% reflective walls. Average PPFD is 1232. Total power is 940W. "Efficiency" is 1232 PPFD/940W x 2.25m2 = 2.95 umol/j

View attachment 5333086

What about the spectrum? CCT 3000 CRI94 10% Far Red and 1% UVA

View attachment 5333090


Now we know our system efficiency is nowhere near 2.95 umol/j and the fact is, when you use a hand-held light meter instead of a sphere or goniometer to read PPFD, you are counting some photons twice, because they get bounced off the walls back into the meter. In a real grow, many of those same photons are absorbed by the plant before they get a chance to bounce off the walls.

It really pays to know what you're looking at.

With that said, I'm not knocking the GML light – it really is a very efficient light and possibly one of the most efficient lights on the market – but there are plenty of others otut there with similar spectra and efficiency. It basically comes down to, do you value efficiency over spectra . . . or spectra over efficiency . . . or do you prefer a balance between the two?

When know that photons > spectra but once you reach light saturation, then spectra > additional photons.

The best test of a grow light is how it grows. It's that simple.

Im familiar with the migro tests but i allways thought it was just average ppfd / W at the wall. I dont understand the reasoning for multiplying the area. Did he do that on all his tests?

Edit: also, in your example of the High Lights, are you using board watts or at the wall?

 

[Prawn Connery]

Im familiar with the migro tests but i allways thought it was just average ppfd / W at the wall. I dont understand the reasoning for multiplying the area. Did he do that on all his tests?

Edit: also, in your example of the High Lights, are you using board watts or at the wall?

PPFD is density of photons per square meter per second. For total photons you need to multiply by the area. Then divide those photons by the number of watts per second (= joules) and you have umol/j. That's what a goniometer and sphere do: they measure total output per second. Average PPFD x surface area/Watts is the poor man's sphere.

Yes, you picked up on my oversight: the GLA figure is board watts not from the wall. At 5A per board the Mean Well drivers we use are maxed out at around 94-95% efficiency, so the total power consumption figures are around 5-6% worse.

 

[compassionateExotic]

No offense but I don’t see gml led’s being around in 1-5 years, the dude thinks of himself as a god level and can’t take any bad review or competition. Shoot how much did hlg do for him and also promote him and first thing he did was act like hlg is a fraud and crap. What a liar but also even if that was true it really seems like his 100% ethier jealous of hlg or just hating for his own sales. Watch his videos before he had his own led brand? He was sucking the owners d whole time and acting like hlg was best led? Now it’s worse?


it’s not the efficiency or quality that steers me off of gml led, it’s the cockiness but also hate. Hlg was smart to never bitch about it publically and kept going . hlg doesn’t need to do that for sales but also never needed to get to tht lil baby level debates. hlg will have my sales and referral but most def never gml , not Like anyone but slime % will ever heard of em lol

 

[PopAndSonGrows]

Didn't SpiderFarmer just drop the newest "most efficient" LED thus far? the LM b Evo or something rather?

 

[tstick]

These "most powerful"/"most efficient" light discussions get more attention than the plants. Some of these lights are just made to be able to claim bragging rights to power/efficiency. Ironically, the most powerful/most efficient light a few years ago, is already obsolete. Lights are just going to keep edging up the power/efficiency scale forever it seems. But, as a grower, you just have to jump in at some point and hope that you get a light from a company that will be around for more years than their stated "warranty" period, and then use it to grow some plants.

 

[thisusernameisnottaken]

These "most powerful"/"most efficient" light discussions get more attention than the plants. Some of these lights are just made to be able to claim bragging rights to power/efficiency. Ironically, the most powerful/most efficient light a few years ago, is already obsolete. Lights are just going to keep edging up the power/efficiency scale forever it seems. But, as a grower, you just have to jump in at some point and hope that you get a light from a company that will be around for more years than their stated "warranty" period, and then use it to grow some plants.

This is the best led light ever, remember this grower?

 

[PopAndSonGrows]

These "most powerful"/"most efficient" light discussions get more attention than the plants. Some of these lights are just made to be able to claim bragging rights to power/efficiency. Ironically, the most powerful/most efficient light a few years ago, is already obsolete. Lights are just going to keep edging up the power/efficiency scale forever it seems. But, as a grower, you just have to jump in at some point and hope that you get a light from a company that will be around for more years than their stated "warranty" period, and then use it to grow some plants.

All very fair points. I use this analogy often; light manufacturers are the same as auto manufacturers. . .. are Fords the best? --no, but they probably have a model that you really love for various reasons. And really, a Toyota Camry is "more efficient" than a Porsche but is it better? --depending on your needs, maybe still "yes"

 

[Rocket Soul]

This is the best led light ever, remember this grower?

I most definitely do! Realstyles was from the older generation of the led section; afaik know he was the first on riu to get Alibaba cobs from Jerry @ kingbrite and confirmed good performance in comparison to Mouser/digikey cobs which really opened up the DIY game for us. For sure, someone else would have done it if he never had but i really think that a big part of modern ledgrow history was kinda his responsibility as he made white high efficiency light price competitive.
Realz, if your out there; we remember.

Also the video is hilarious.

 

[compassionateExotic]

This is the best led light ever, remember this grower?

Why didn’t he give it to another grower, my guess already died lol

 

[tstick]

I have experienced TWO so-called "great" companies that packed up and left town in the middle of the night: Area 51 (back in 2013) and Nextlight (just a year or so ago). EVERYBODY raved about both companies. And, to be fair, BOTH the lights I bought are still working perfectly and have long-surpassed what the warranty period was. Many of these lights are hundreds of dollars and they are probably the biggest single-component investment of any tools an indoor grower can use. Of course, it makes sense to get a good one, but, as time goes on, there's only so much light needed to fill a tent and the newest technology has already surpassed that by a mile. That's why these discussions never focus on the plants' needed light requirements in a given space. They just flex data points and charts against each other. To this day, some of the most delicious smelling/tasting weed I've ever smoked was grown under fluorescent shoplights....and we all know how terrible and inefficient those things are...Of course, this was back in the day, when the weed strains were tastier....but, still....

Plants need "X" amount of light in a given period. They don't really care what the light source is. After that, "best light" discussions are just a contest of data points. My advice would be to just make sure you choose a light made by a company that has been (and will continue to be) around for awhile. I like my new HLG 300 Red Spec for many reasons...but one is because they were kind of "invented" by people who used to be here and that idea eventually turned into HLG. Another company that always treated me well was Timber.

 

[sh0wtime]

This is all very interesting and I know next to nothing about grow lights, all I know is I can't tell a difference between plants I grow under 3500K & 660 reds and 3500K, 730, 660, 400, 385nm lights. The light that yields the most is usually better for most growers. There definitely is something to the whole spectrum thing though, I still miss my 315W Philips green power CMHs. GML also has this light (LM301H, LM301H EVO, LM301H EVO MINT. Osram 450nm, 660nm, 730nm ), looks better?

Yet another overpowered 4x4 light with bad uniformity

 

[farmingfisherman]

Why didn’t he give it to another grower, my guess already died lol

Then why bother taking the time to destroy it? My guess is he really wanted likes on YouTube. Pretty dumb either way. Hell I feel dumb for watching the video.

 

[PopAndSonGrows]

I have experienced TWO so-called "great" companies that packed up and left town in the middle of the night: Area 51 (back in 2013) and Nextlight (just a year or so ago). EVERYBODY raved about both companies. And, to be fair, BOTH the lights I bought are still working perfectly and have long-surpassed what the warranty period was. Many of these lights are hundreds of dollars and they are probably the biggest single-component investment of any tools an indoor grower can use. Of course, it makes sense to get a good one, but, as time goes on, there's only so much light needed to fill a tent and the newest technology has already surpassed that by a mile. That's why these discussions never focus on the plants' needed light requirements in a given space. They just flex data points and charts against each other. To this day, some of the most delicious smelling/tasting weed I've ever smoked was grown under fluorescent shoplights....and we all know how terrible and inefficient those things are...Of course, this was back in the day, when the weed strains were tastier....but, still....

Plants need "X" amount of light in a given period. They don't really care what the light source is. After that, "best light" discussions are just a contest of data points. My advice would be to just make sure you choose a light made by a company that has been (and will continue to be) around for awhile. I like my new HLG 300 Red Spec for many reasons...but one is because they were kind of "invented" by people who used to be here and that idea eventually turned into HLG. Another company that always treated me well was Timber.

While all true, ANY light even THE WORLD'S BESTEST light will lose efficiency and intensity just over time alone, hell even if it sits in a box unused for 10 yrs it'll be less efficient than when it was brand new (very maginally, but still. it's a thing with electronics, and light intensity specifically). Therefore, even though your LED fixtures of, say 10+ yrs are "working", they may not be providing that level of intensity for precision stress to produce optimal cannabinoids and trichomes.

 

[bluegill]

10 yrs it'll be less efficient than when it was brand new (very maginally, but still. it's a thing with electronics, and light intensity specifically).

It really shouldn't unless it's vintage... like carbon resistors or paper capacitors vintage... Modern electronics shouldn't degrade while unused unless they are stored in suboptimal conditions. Large temp fluctuations will cause cold cracked solder joints, for instance.

 

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Bugbee for the win

 

[sfw1960]

Stephen and his wife, family and company are folks who NEVER seem to have forgotten where they came from and they have treated me like a preferred customer would like to be treated! (I'm not a preferred customer but have built several dozen fixtures with their brand name on them)
I only run UVA during seedling phase and I have very little far red or IR. The majority of the QB's are 3000k and a few are 4000k with the SMDs being Sammy 301B and the Lumiled 2835HE.
Nearly 100% all v1 boards and although they might not compete with the very latest on a lumens/watt efficacy, they sure fool the girls into grunting out a little bit of flower and for not a lot of KWH.
I see the new QB272 (Rspec FR) are available targeted directly to compete to the chiminilly willy boyz and I might just have to get a few to add to the mix lol!
Low price and NOTHING to NOT like with a warranty I can get serviced if I ever have a failure!
Not everyone has the means to build their own but I recommend it - buying a fixture outright, you're at the mercy of the company to do you right and I don't have any respect for the "asian business model " because I can get screwed over almost anywhere...
So IMO best is a quality @$z kicking product and the customer service and support that's standing behind the customer.
Good posts people!

 

[Prawn Connery]

Didn't SpiderFarmer just drop the newest "most efficient" LED thus far? the LM b Evo or something rather?

Spider Farmer is absolutely full of shit. Let's look at just one of their models and the claims thay make.

Outstanding heat disspation? So all that heat is supposed to come out the end of the bar . . . but then they put a plastic cap on it? In reality, this is a spurious claim, as heat disspiation is about surface area that comes into conact with moving air (active or convective). The heatsink with the largest surface are is the more efficient heatsink, and in this example, the "other" at the bottom would appear to be more efficient because it looks like it has a larger surface area – assuming the mouting surface for the LED stips is the same. In other words, if they both use the same sized LED strip, then the aluminium extrusion on the bottom has a larger surface area and better heat dissipation.


100,000 hour lifesapan? Fuck. Right. Off.

How the fuck does this fixture have a 100,000 hour lifespan when the diodes theselves are only rated to 50,000 hours? Not to mention the driver will never make it that long. 100,000 hours is 25 years of continuous 12/12 use – so why doesn't Spider Farmer offer a 25-year warranty?



But what's this? 80,000 hours – I thought it was 100,000 hours?



But wait, Spider Farmer is now telling us its Samsung diodes are only rated for 50,000 hours:

A Complete Guide on Samsung LED Grow Lights

Discover everything you need to know about Samsung LED grow lights, including main series, outstanding features, and tips to identify real Samsung grow lights.

www.spider-farmer.com

One of the standout features of Samsung LED grow lights is their durability. The average lifespan hovers around 50,000 hours

Oh, and what about that "30-60%" increase in yield by extending the bars a couple of inches? Again, absolute bullshit. In fact, extending the bars until they almost hit the walls of the grow tent is a WASTE of light, because more of it reflects off the walls (and most tent walls are only 70-80% reflective – even less once they get dirty).



Chinese LED manufacturers are pretty much all full of shit. It doesn't matter which brand it is, they all make stupid claims like "3g per watt" (Mars Hydro) or "100,000 hour lifespan" or "2.9 umol/j system efficiency" or "full-spectrum" etc.

You get what you pay for.