HPS vs. Fluorescent advice needed.

I am currently on 2 600w and 1 400w HPS with the higher efficiency ballasts.
In the summer I dump down to just the 2 600w sometimes just one depending on heat and size of crop.
My local gardening place has been talking me into trying these new or newer high output fluorescents. They claim to hit the same amount of spectrums and lumens as my HPS’s but with less heat and way less energy. I am wondering if any one has gone from HPS to fluorescent and had some advice like how many of these light fixtures I’m going to need and if I’m going to have issues with yield or lack of light.

Without comparative tests, there's no way to say for sure which is better and new technologies often don't have these yet. You could try them out and write an article about it. The one thing we want to mention is that HID bulbs emit their light from a much finer point than fluorescents and many other types. When you spread out the source of the light, it becomes less intense. You may end up with the same total amount of light, lower wattage and less heat, but you won't have as bright a light, just more dimmer ones. Great results can be had from CFL's but current technology can't reproduce a good HID's light with a fluorescent one.

Welcome to the forums.

Yea I know there’s no consumer testing company although there should be with the constantly advancing technologies.
I figured because these have been out now for at least a year or two someone may have had a crop to compare and give me some input for clarity purposes these are like the lights I’m talking about:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0043WO11U/ref=asc_df_B0043WO11U1428271?smid=APGCKI9KVGNA9&tag=pgmp-788-95-20&linkCode=asn&creative=395105&creativeASIN=B0043WO11U
The people I have talked with at the store say either they are the bomb and get almost exact same results with these, but I have also herd they are fine for veg but not for bloom.
On my quest yesterday I came across these LED lights and also cant find one convincing report or study done.
We need a underground consumer research organization to give scientific studies of this crap so we can know before we buy damn it.

i've seen pics of some pretty impressive grows by CFLs. but to be honest, i would have wanted to laugh at the local gardening place. imo going from HPS to CFLs is a huge downgrade. CFLs are more for small setups and supplemental lighting. you wont get as much yield even if the wattage is equal. the only advantage is they are much cooler and have a better color spectrum. i dont mind having to cool my HPS because since i dont yet have a CO2 generator, my ventilation constantly provides fresh air for my plants.

I agree with weeds. An hps works for everyone else on this forum and if you wanted to hold your light close enough to the plants that they would be too hot then you wouldn't get the same surface area that you would normally. If you think your having a problem with heat then use a fan and back up some. Those guys are salesmen and they must think your stupid. If you want to get in close range of your buds then do some low watt cfls along with your hps. As for the power, everyones got to deal with that problem.

It comes down to penetration.T5 Florescent lights can do very well if you do a scrog or sog. take a look around at some t5 grows. Very impressive, also there are some very nice color spectrum bulbs available that are amazing!

thanks guys got some good input end result not guna buy those t5's ill stick with what i got and keep banging my head into a wall trying to vent the room enough. thanks

gms585 said:

I am currently on 2 600w and 1 400w HPS with the higher efficiency ballasts.
In the summer I dump down to just the 2 600w sometimes just one depending on heat and size of crop.
My local gardening place has been talking me into trying these new or newer high output fluorescents. They claim to hit the same amount of spectrums and lumens as my HPS’s but with less heat and way less energy. I am wondering if any one has gone from HPS to fluorescent and had some advice like how many of these light fixtures I’m going to need and if I’m going to have issues with yield or lack of light.

Click to expand...

Do they have any evidence that their claims are true? Unless some new technology has come out that has made fluorescents much more efficient than they currently are(were), they're lying. The amazon link has T5s that are a tad less than 100 lumens per watt. Which is pretty decent. (best CFLs are around 70 per watt, if I recall right) But 600 and 1000 watt HPS bulbs get around 140 lumens per watt. If a lamp has less lumens per watt, you have to use more electricity and create more heat than a lamp that has more lumens per watt. Opposite of what they claim.
The T5s don't seem bad, but IMO it's highly unlikely to improve your situation seeing as you already have (and spent money on) better efficient lighting.

they were just talking out of their bunghole.

t5´s grow allright, but weak plants compared to the hps. most plants like say orchids or whatever do fine under t5´s, but cannabis is a lightloving plant ona par with tropical plants, even tomatoes dont grow that good under t5´s either.

they are just giving you old spiel, from when t5´s first came out (always ridiculously overpriced too)

that hps spectrum is hogwash, they are talking about 2700-3000k bulbs, bulbs that look blue next to hps.
turn on a t5 system under a 600w and you wont see any noticable increase in light, just a tad if you got the bulbs right next to the plant.t5 lights just dissapear in 600w hps light.

its the same deal with the salesmen saying leds outmatch hps.

frankly i dont see the point in paying any attention to the salesman.
at best he will repeat what he read off the box, perhaps decorate it bit.
at worst,lie you silly or repeat something he was told to say to sell it.

its just as good to just read what the box says or better to go online and research what you are buying.

zeropercentthc said:

Do they have any evidence that their claims are true? Unless some new technology has come out that has made fluorescents much more efficient than they currently are(were), they're lying. The amazon link has T5s that are a tad less than 100 lumens per watt. Which is pretty decent. (best CFLs are around 70 per watt, if I recall right) But 600 and 1000 watt HPS bulbs get around 140 lumens per watt. If a lamp has less lumens per watt, you have to use more electricity and create more heat than a lamp that has more lumens per watt. Opposite of what they claim.
The T5s don't seem bad, but IMO it's highly unlikely to improve your situation seeing as you already have (and spent money on) better efficient lighting.

Click to expand...

Watch out comparing straight lumens. 100lumens per watt 2" from the plant is 100 lumens usable to the plant. 140 lumens per watt 2' from the plant is 35lumens usable to the plant. And that isn't taking into consideration the spectrum. Floros emit 90% of their spectrum in the given Kelvin rating whereas HPS and MHs are all over the place. A good blue enhanced HPS bulb is like %45 in the correct red/orange range, 25% in the correct blue spectrum and the rest helps to a degree but mostly just ends up as heat.

I wouldn't throw away HIDs to go buy floros but they are somewhat comparable if used correctly

Gastanker said:

Watch out comparing straight lumens. 100lumens per watt 2" from the plant is 100 lumens usable to the plant. 140 lumens per watt 2' from the plant is 35lumens usable to the plant.

Click to expand...

Gastanker you make some good points. But I wonder about this detail. When a bulb's lumens are rated, my understanding is that they're rating the total amount of emitted light. With a MH or HPS bulb, two inches from the bulb is just a few inches from where *all* the light is emitted. With a T5 or T8, that total light output is spread over a long long tube, so wouldn't the lux count at 2 inches from a T5/T8 be much lower than a HPS/MH bulb of the same total lumen output? I could be wrong. On the plus side of that, obviously the T5/T8 light will be spread out more evenly to a larger space. Would be awesome to see an actual lux test for various types of lights at various distances.

It seems like you can't ask advice on lighting or nutrients anymore without running into a shill.

hmm, t5 spectrum (as mh) is much in the green light.

making a lot of its light, quite unusable. probably 1/3rd

hps probably has lots more light available that the plant can use, since green is the colour we see the best (the more green the higher lumens rating)

I settled on an in between bet that worked out nicely for one of my rooms. Air cooled VHO hoods. Each tube boasts 95 watts and claims 65%+ more output than HO. Not sure if it's quite that much more but it's DEFFINITELY a step better than the HO's I was using. Absolutely no heat till you get with in about half an inch had great results and no heat. If you can stand the cost might be someting to check out.

hi there, just thought i'd throw my 2 cents in, have you seen these T5's, http://cgi.ebay.com/48-4Ft-8-TUBE-T5-HO-FLUORESCENT-GROW-LIGHT-LAMP-TEK-4-/400167414842?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5d2bd62c3a looked rather interesting.

I use those T-5s for my mother plants (4 Lamp 4ft, HydroFarm). It's bright I guess, but it's still a florescent. Really doesn't have much light penetration when compared to my HID lighting. I would never even imagine flowering under them, let alone actually do it.

By the book I just finished my first grow.
I had a 150watt hps, a 6 bulb 4foot t5 and a 90 watt ufo.
The plant under the 250 had big buds like the UFO.
The plants under the T5 were smaller.
The T5 can be closer to the plants as well as the UFO.
the HPS needs more space unless you cool tube it.