# pros and cons of LEDs



## babydragons (Mar 14, 2012)

Ok so me and my boyfriend have been looking at LED lighting. He really wants to buy one but can't find enough benefits of LED to justify spending so much money. So our question is what are the pros and cons of LED lighting?

Edit: Just want to clarify this would be for a freshwater tank


----------



## Couesfanatic (Sep 28, 2009)

its cheaper in the long run. problem solved.


----------



## sayurasem (Jun 17, 2011)

Its a product of a more advance technology. LEDs are much more sufficient from bulbs.


----------



## DogFish (Jul 16, 2011)

Now that I have them over one tank I won't go back to T5 tubes.

However, I would advise you take a critical look at the size tank and decide what your commitment is to that size. If you have a 20L but, know you want to go to a 70gl.... wait. There is little benefit getting a LED fixture that will last 5-7years if you don't plan to keep that size tank that long. Used aquarium equipment is basically worthless.


----------



## gordonrichards (Jun 20, 2009)

Consider wattage/electric savings.
Over 1-2 years you'll end up saving money on electric.

-G


----------



## AquaPipes (Jun 4, 2012)

LED's
Pros
- On a properly made LED light, they should last 5+ years vs needing to replace every 6 months like T5HO
- Use less power
- Less heat generation

Cons
- There's no standard on converting watts into lumens, so you need to google a bit to find out what brand of LED light is giving you the level of output you are looking for


----------



## Matt1977 (Feb 17, 2012)

AquaPipes said:


> LED's
> Pros
> - On a properly made LED light, they should last 5+ years vs needing to replace every 6 months like T5HO
> - Use less power
> ...


Agree, 100%.


----------



## lochaber (Jan 23, 2012)

As said above, mostly greater efficiency, lower heat generation, and longer bulb life.

Plus, you don't need a reflector.

As to the bulb life, amazon has fugeray listed at ~40,000 hours. thats something like over 4 years, constantly on.

A typical light cycle will probably extend that to something in the range of 8-12 years useful lifetime, but a lot of that depends on how well the led's are cooled, and whether they are under or overpowered, etc.


----------



## acitydweller (Dec 28, 2011)

Led 
Pros...
Thin and sexy profile
Lower power consumption
Depending on the model, medium to high light now possible with the RayII
Runs cooler than t5ho, ESP in summer.
Now available in 6500-7000 Kelvin spectrum.

Cons...
Slightly higher price than t5ho lamp.
Tall tanks may require a second fixture to achieve the same par rating as t5ho lamp.
Limited stock but plenty of vendor options.


----------



## Jules (May 20, 2012)

Another con: some people (like me) just don't like how the light they produce looks aesthetically, so before you fork over the big bucks spend some time seriously looking at high-end LED lit tanks vs. high-end non LED lit tanks to make sure you're happy with the LED look.

Unless you run a ridiculous number of lights you shouldn't base your decision on power savings, since LED's will produce negligible savings (in financial terms) over an efficient non-LED system. But as for the coolness factor, LEDs kick everything else's butt.


----------



## sanj (Jan 11, 2004)

T5 fluorescents generally dont need replacing every 6, 9 or 12 months. They need replacing when they fail.

Plants adapt well enough.

I use T5 and Led on different tanks. Youve got to get the right led unit, dont opt for cheapo makes. One of the downsides of leds can be colour rendition vs T5s. 

There are mid range units comparable in price to good T5 units.


----------



## Dany08fa (Jul 3, 2012)

Leds are known to give the shimmering effect to the tank which i like. And lots of the leds have the lunar leds.


----------



## DogFish (Jul 16, 2011)

Jules said:


> ....Unless you run a ridiculous number of lights you shouldn't base your decision on power savings, since LED's will produce negligible savings (in financial terms) over an efficient non-LED ....


I don't agree, 40,000 to 50,000 hours is a long time even if you are running one 1 duel T5 fixture. Even it if that isn't sufficient, the replacement cost of T5 tubes along justifies the LED initial cost. Even more true as LEDs become more popular and prices continue to drop


----------



## Jules (May 20, 2012)

DogFish said:


> I don't agree, 40,000 to 50,000 hours is a long time even if you are running one 1 duel T5 fixture. Even it if that isn't sufficient, the replacement cost of T5 tubes along justifies the LED initial cost. Even more true as LEDs become more popular and prices continue to drop


Last time I did the math for converting my large fixtures to LED (two years ago), the power savings was small enough that it would have taken over a decade to offset the added expense. I don't doubt that LEDs have continued to get more efficient and cheaper, and I don't deny that the savings can eventually add up to offset the higher initial expense when replacement costs are taken into account, I just think the savings angle gets over-hyped. 

The actual reduction in the power bill an average hobbyist can expect is probably still pretty negligible - you'd probably get as much or more savings by just cutting the power to all your electronics when you're not using them (the stupid "stand by" setting everything is made with these days is not the same as being "off"). 

As to replacement costs - I guess that depends on what you're using. I don't know anything about T5s, but I use power compacts and they can be run until they die (mine average 5-6 years) and then replaced for around $30 (for 96W).


----------



## bethyMT (Nov 22, 2012)

I am noob here, so take what I write with a grain of salt.

I was really having a hard time figuring out which type of light to buy for my 55g. I knew I wanted plants, so I needed at least moderate power. One of the things that sold me on the LED fixtures was the lack of heat (or less heat anyway). You don't need fans, you don't need to worry about placement so much. The shimmer effect looked awesome too.

After buying a LED fixture (moderately priced one), it still does throw off a good bit of heat, but it's manageable without fans and nothing will burn. Also, 36watts of LED is more than sufficient lighting for most things in my 55g long tank...it's high light for sure. And I don't have to worry about those bulbs that can break and need to be replaced. I like that there is no glass, and the low profile of the light is very easy to work with.

I am at the point now that I wouldn't do anything but LEDs on my tanks, and my new 10gallon is testament to this. This is using cheap LEDs for a low light low tech betta tank, and it's really working great.


----------



## DogFish (Jul 16, 2011)

Jules said:


> As to replacement costs - I guess that depends on what you're using. I don't know anything about T5s, but I use power compacts and they can be run until they die (mine average 5-6 years) and then replaced for around $30 (for 96W).


Jules I can provide a more Par with 36W of LED than I can with 78W of T5 florescent .You can dismiss that as negligible but old math /new math, American math/ Canadian math it's still and always will be 50% less electricity providing more light.

I am unaware of any florescent Compact or standard tube that is not losing substantial quality light levels after 6mos. Will it run for 5 years maybe, will it provided Par needed to grow plants? ... just not going to happen.

That's why just about every Aquarium and Hydroponic site recommends swapping out fluorescents at 6mos.


----------



## Jules (May 20, 2012)

DogFish said:


> I am unaware of any florescent Compact or standard tube that is not losing substantial quality light levels after 6mos. Will it run for 5 years maybe, will it provided Par needed to grow plants? ... just not going to happen.


I'm familiar with the theory behind swapping out bulbs - but I quit doing it ages ago since I don't see any difference in the fullness, growth, colour or health of my plants when I do put a new bulb in. (I did back in the day when I was running old-style tubes, but not with compacts.)

I don't measure PAR and I don't worry about the spectrum - I just watch my plants, I figure they'll let me know pretty fast if there's a problem. My current bulb is going on year five (8 hour photo-period) and my plants are still growing beautifully with lots of nice red highlights. The tank is in a dark corner, so gets no natural light at all. But I don't grow anything all that tricky - Ludwegia, Hygro, some crypts.


----------



## somewhatshocked (Aug 8, 2011)

What specific "look" do you mean? The shimmer effect? Color temperature? Something else?

I'm honestly interested in what you mean specifically because it's easy to have LED fixtures that produce lighting that looks the same as any other.



Jules said:


> Another con: some people (like me) just don't like how the light they produce looks aesthetically, so before you fork over the big bucks spend some time seriously looking at high-end LED lit tanks vs. high-end non LED lit tanks to make sure you're happy with the LED look.


----------



## DogFish (Jul 16, 2011)

Jules - As long as you are happy with your light choice, that is really all that matters as you are the one that looks at the tank.

Personal ascetic observations just are not debatable. :smile:

My comments were not intended to be competetive, merely to provide the newer members with accurate info to help make an informed choice.


----------



## Saltybob (Dec 12, 2003)

Coming from the reef side of lighting, LEDs produce a narrow spectrum and therefore have a lack of color where T5 bulbs a wider spectrum. Mixing of emitters can widen the spectrum but still have sharp drops in color. 
That being said I will only run LEDs as the pros out way cons by far.


----------



## BriDroid (Oct 7, 2012)

My Ray 2 is scheduled to be here tomorrow for my 72 gallon bow front. I'm excited about using LEDs over T5s or T8s. The smaller fixture was the winning point for me! I also like how they use less wattage and lower heat output. The UPS man is KILLING me right now! I want my light LOL!


----------



## Jules (May 20, 2012)

DogFish said:


> Personal ascetic observations just are not debatable. :smile:
> 
> My comments were not intended to be competetive, merely to provide the newer members with accurate info to help make an informed choice.


Ascetic? Freudian slip from the LED devotee no doubt 

Anyway, in the case of my last post it had nothing to do with aesthetics, and everything do with pointing out that your statement about kind of old florescent bulbs being incapable of supporting plants is just wrong. As I said before, I don't know anything about T5s, but I can tell you as a matter of empirical fact that my 5 year old power compact is growing my plants just as well as it did on day one. Is that because my plants aren't terribly demanding? Who knows, maybe - but clearly and old power compact bulb can grow Ludwigia and Hygro just great.



somewhatshocked said:


> What specific "look" do you mean? The shimmer effect? Color temperature? Something else?
> 
> I'm honestly interested in what you mean specifically because it's easy to have LED fixtures that produce lighting that looks the same as any other.


The light from LEDs just looks dead to me (which is perfect for moonlights or deep water effects, but doesn't work for me as sunlit shallow water). 

It's not just a matter of the colour, mixing in various colours helps but doesn't get rid of the underlying deadness of the light. Maybe it's just the uniformity of the light they put out I'm reacting to, maybe it's the staccato-like spectrum - don't know exactly. It has something to do with how the light behaves though, since high-end LED systems look fine to me in pictures, just don't like them in real life.


----------



## blink (Feb 22, 2012)

Jules said:


> Ascetic? Freudian slip from the LED devotee no doubt
> 
> Anyway, in the case of my last post it had nothing to do with aesthetics, and everything do with pointing out that your statement about kind of old florescent bulbs being incapable of supporting plants is just wrong. As I said before, I don't know anything about T5s, but I can tell you as a matter of empirical fact that my 5 year old power compact is growing my plants just as well as it did on day one. Is that because my plants aren't terribly demanding? Who knows, maybe - but clearly and old power compact bulb can grow Ludwigia and Hygro just great.
> 
> ...


I've never run power compacts over fresh water but I can tell you that an old power compact over a reef tank quickly creates an algae farm. By old I mean 6-12 month old bulbs vs new, the difference was shocking actually.
Based on my experience, using old power compacts is opening yourself up for potential problems.


I'm very much a fan of LED but I currently light my planted tank with compact fluorescent lights, a Philips daylight spiral in a brooder lamp. Growth is good and cost cant be touched by anything out there, I've got $30 into my setup including a timer and 3 spare bulbs.


----------



## DogFish (Jul 16, 2011)

Jules said:


> Ascetic? Freudian slip from the LED devotee no doubt
> 
> Anyway, in the case of my last post it had nothing to do with aesthetics, and everything do with pointing out that your statement about kind of old florescent bulbs being incapable of supporting plants is just wrong. As I said before, I don't know anything about T5s, but I can tell you as a matter of empirical fact that my 5 year old power compact is growing my plants just as well as it did on day one. Is that because my plants aren't terribly demanding? Who knows, maybe - but clearly and old power compact bulb can grow Ludwigia and Hygro just great.


AESTHETIC... Not Ascetic. Hardly Freudian, Dyslexia + a Cataract = typos. :icon_redf

I don't doubt you can manage keep low light demand plants alive with tired old bulbs. I never posted "old florescent bulbs being incapable of supporting plants ", I posted about loss of PAR. I believe you did understand my meaning as you posted " don't measure PAR and I don't worry about the spectrum " Twisting the meaning of my posts is weak and beneath you.

There is a major difference between Survive and Thrive. Unless you can produce some independent test data you don't have an "empirical fact" you have biased personal opinion.

What I can believe happened is you had way more light (PAR) levels that you needed in the beginning, it's degraded over the years as ALL florescent tubes do, and now you left with enough to keep the plants alive.


----------



## Lia (Aug 2, 2007)

I use the flourescent power compact bulbs and wow they are bright and my vals have taken off like crazy in the short time which I have had them but the bulb fixtures look bit lame and ONLY due to that am I looking at LED but if the fixture doesn't bother you, the bulbs are great (White light type).
This is a 36 inch long, 30 gallon tank and 2 -13 watt bright white bulbs, I found the daylight type gave off to much of a blue tinge.


----------



## nalu86 (Oct 19, 2010)

Lia said:


> I use the flourescent power compact bulbs and wow they are bright and my vals have taken off like crazy in the short time which I have had them but the bulb fixtures look bit lame and ONLY due to that am I looking at LED but if the fixture doesn't bother you, the bulbs are great (White light type).
> This is a 36 inch long, 30 gallon tank and 2 -13 watt bright white bulbs, I found the daylight type gave off to much of a blue tinge.


Those are CFL's not PC bulbs.

CFL= Compact fluorescent light
PC= Power Compact

with the daylights, do you mean the ones from HD 5000K's?
Costco has the 6500K's, in what is it 17 or 18watts.

And LED's as lighting for aquariums and my aquaponics... Still looking for that good payed job...


----------



## Lia (Aug 2, 2007)

nalu86 said:


> Those are CFL's not PC bulbs.
> 
> CFL= Compact fluorescent light
> PC= Power Compact
> ...


Thanks I do not know much about lighting.

These were just called 'Bright white' from eco-smart ,came in plastic package with red label, the same company makes 'day light' bulbs with blue label.

Got them at Home depot.


I tried the 'day light' but to much of a blue tinge so used them in garage.

They are 13 watts and according to package give off light output of 60 watts.

I do not know anything about lumens,etc but just know the plants are taking off with these bulbs and very bright.

I find the light thing rather confusing and will just use this till I figure out what LED is good for this tank.

The LED systems I was looking at come with lunar lights and do not want that, want this light spectrum but again the light dome look , isn't the best look which is why want to change it.


----------



## jester56 (Oct 28, 2012)

BriDroid said:


> My Ray 2 is scheduled to be here tomorrow for my 72 gallon bow front. I'm excited about using LEDs over T5s or T8s. The smaller fixture was the winning point for me! I also like how they use less wattage and lower heat output. The UPS man is KILLING me right now! I want my light LOL!


FWIW, I've got two Ray 2's on my 50 Gal acrylic and I love them. I had a little problem with algae. But with some direction from forum members, I've gotten it under control by cutting the "on" time and a few other tips. They ARE bright! You should like them. :smile:


----------



## Jules (May 20, 2012)

DogFish said:


> AESTHETIC... Not Ascetic. Hardly Freudian, Dyslexia + a Cataract = typos.


Likely story. Your "slip" was clearly a subconscious manifestation of your deep seated conviction that I'm wilfully depriving myself of the pleasures of the diode.



> I never posted "old florescent bulbs being incapable of supporting plants ", I posted about loss of PAR. I believe you did understand my meaning as you posted " don't measure PAR and I don't worry about the spectrum " Twisting the meaning of my posts is weak and beneath you.


No. No, *NO*, *NO!  * I can't cope with invalid arguments (we all have our cross to bear). 

You said a 5 year old bulb will not provide “the Par needed to grow plants.” 
If a bulb does not provide enough X to grow plants, then that bulb is unable to grow plants.
“Unable to support plants” (what I said) is just another way of saying “unable to grow plants.”
Don't make me post the laws of logical entailment, man, 'cause I'll do it. 



> There is a major difference between Survive and Thrive. Unless you can produce some independent test data you don't have an "empirical fact" you have biased personal opinion.


1. _Opinion?_ Oh come on - tell me it’s not glaringly obvious whether a plant is merely “surviving” vs. “thriving.” I bet you a bucephalandra you could tell from across the room with both hands tied behind your back. 

2. Fine, empirical this: two days ago I had to trim 6"-8" off my Hygro. A month before that I had to trim to 6"-8" off my Hygro. Two months before that I had to trim 6"-8" off my Hygro. And so on for as long as I’ve been growing the stuff - 6"-8" needs to come off every month.



> What I can believe happened is you had way more light (PAR) levels that you needed in the beginning, it's degraded over the years as ALL florescent tubes do, and now you left with enough to keep the plants alive.


Could be, if by "alive" you mean "continue to thrive" (but this wouldn’t change the fact that your statement about my old bulb being unable to grow plants is simply wrong (just thought I’d point that out :smile). 

But since even my current old bulb causes my Ludwigia’s leaves to go very red as it approaches the surface; if a new bulb really supplies dramatically more energy wouldn’t you expect the near-surface leaves to burn to a crisp every time I put a new bulb in?


----------



## DogFish (Jul 16, 2011)

Jules - Thank you for reminding me to be to be more precise in my writing. I acknowledge I presented my thoughts on the effective service life of CFLs in too broad and general terms.


----------



## Jules (May 20, 2012)

That's it?

We almost had this thread _completely_ hijacked, and now you're just going to sit there and let it go right back on topic?


----------

