# New Luxeon M LED-- near perfect for freshwater planted.



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

Anyone reading this that has a reef, only go with neutral white and not cool white! Colors come out so much better with neutrals!

Now that that's out of the way, I'm glad that Philips is finally making an XM-L competitor. Bridgelux has theirs (which is far superior to the XM-L, but also $12 apiece), and now Philips. Unfortunately, as per previous Luxeon Rebel pricing, this will be more expensive. The average Rebel ES is ~$8 for one with a high CRI, but Stevesleds.com has 70 CRI cool white at 5600k for $3.50 each.

Luxeon Rebel ES royal blues are also substantially more powerful than the CREE XT-E (1390mW of flux at 1A vs 940mW of flux at 1A on the CREE), putting out nearly 40% more flux. For a good 12,000K look, you need roughly a 1:5 ratio of lumens of white to flux of royals, so for these new LEDs combined with Rebel ES royals at 1A, it'd be a 1:3.5 ratio, for XT-E mixed with this LED would be a 1:5.25 ratio.

I've done a ludicrous amount of research on these LEDs in the past few weeks trying to figure out exactly what to get for my reef. 6x CREE XM-L at 3A, 24x 440nm Rebel ES royal blue, 12x 420nm true violet, 6x 660nm deep red, and 6-12x 495nm turquoise to round out the spectrum.


For a planted tank, I would actually go with the cool white, mixed with a very, very small amount of 470nm cool blue, 660nm deep red, and 495nm turquoise if you want to make your shrimp colors SCREAM. 

EDIT: Also, according to the datasheet, at 1A, these LEDs would produce over 1200 lumens!!!


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

jedimasterben said:


> Anyone reading this that has a reef, only go with neutral white and not cool white! Colors come out so much better with neutrals!


Their "cool white" is a 5700K which is distinctly warmer than what most other "cool whites" are sold as. Many of the Crees are rated 6500-8000K. It would look just fine 

I do agree with you that using the neutrals (4,000K) look better in tandem with the appropriate number of royal blues.



> Bridgelux has theirs (which is far superior to the XM-L, but also $12 apiece),


I have several Bridgelux 402's which are a 10-watt LED (ie, like an XML at full 3.0 amps), and while they look nice, they are really not all that efficient. What Bridgelux LED are you talking about, and in what way are you considering it "superior"? I own several of each, and they have their uses, but I'll take the XML (or this Luxeon M) over the Bridgelux anyday. 




> Luxeon Rebel ES royal blues are also substantially more powerful than the CREE XT-E (1390mW of flux at 1A vs 940mW of flux at 1A on the CREE)


I had forgotten this, thanks for pointing this out. Where do you prefer to buy these at?





> I've done a ludicrous amount of research on these LEDs in the past few weeks trying to figure out exactly what to get for my reef. 6x CREE XM-L at 3A, 24x 440nm Rebel ES royal blue, 12x 420nm true violet, 6x 660nm deep red, and 6-12x 495nm turquoise to round out the spectrum.


FWIW, I own a freshwater tank with a very similar color distribution to what you just listed (just, more white, but still with every color you list) and I despise it. I'm taking this tank down for the moment to make room for our 2nd child in June, and will set it back up as a reef in about a year once we move. I'll revamp the LED array for more reef-spec LEDs. 

My 11g reef is just white and blue, and looks stunning, and I've seen a lot of gorgeous LED-only tanks that just had white and blue----- I really suspect using all the fancy exotic spectrum LEDs is just overthinking and overcomplicating it. But at the same time, it's only money if you can afford it. 

Just do what you can to put those exotic colors on their own dimmable driver.


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

Is the image of the Luxeon LED showing up for anyone (the big square near the top of the original post)? It was showing up earlier today for me, not now though.


----------



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

redfishsc said:


> Their "cool white" is a 5700K which is distinctly warmer than what most other "cool whites" are sold as. Many of the Crees are rated 6500-8000K. It would look just fine


Well, they aren't exactly 5700k. I'd imagine the range would be 5000-7000K, but with a nominal value of 5665K.



redfishsc said:


> I do agree with you that using the neutrals (4,000K) look better in tandem with the appropriate number of royal blues.


Oh gosh, you need to see the cluster that EvilC66 on Nano-reef put together with 4x Bridgelux N1203 and 8x CREE XR-E. It's gorgeous, but blasterman (also on the forum) put together his own fixture with a Bridgelux BXRA-40E0950-B-00 and 6x CREE XT-E royals and one 470nm cool blue, and apparently it was identical to a 14k metal halide.



redfishsc said:


> I have several Bridgelux 402's which are a 10-watt LED (ie, like an XML at full 3.0 amps), and while they look nice, they are really not all that efficient. What Bridgelux LED are you talking about, and in what way are you considering it "superior"? I own several of each, and they have their uses, but I'll take the XML (or this Luxeon M) over the Bridgelux anyday.


The BXRA 950-B is what I was talking about. It has a better CRI, and puts out 1140 lumens at 500ma (21v), whereas the XM-L at 3A puts out 845 lumens. Also, the maximum current on the 950-B is 1400ma. At that amperage, you could probably see it from space. :icon_eek:



redfishsc said:


> I had forgotten this, thanks for pointing this out. Where do you prefer to buy these at?


Stevesleds.com , he stocks them in 440nm, so they have a beautiful purple fiji T5 look! And at $3.50 apiece, they are the absolute best. He also has custom-made drivers available in tons of configurations. And he's a really nice guy, to boot.



redfishsc said:


> FWIW, I own a freshwater tank with a very similar color distribution to what you just listed (just, more white, but still with every color you list) and I despise it. I'm taking this tank down for the moment to make room for our 2nd child in June, and will set it back up as a reef in about a year once we move. I'll revamp the LED array for more reef-spec LEDs.


Really? Are the colors dimmable? If not, red and turquoise are incredibly overpowering.



redfishsc said:


> My 11g reef is just white and blue, and looks stunning, and I've seen a lot of gorgeous LED-only tanks that just had white and blue----- I really suspect using all the fancy exotic spectrum LEDs is just overthinking and overcomplicating it. But at the same time, it's only money if you can afford it.


White and blue are missing key parts of the spectrum, 420nm violet, which is where photosynthesis takes place. The violet LEDs put out incredible PAR, as well, and can make standard white & blue tank without enough light for SPS, be SPS ready with a very small amount!

660nm red is another space that is sorely lacking from even neutral white, along with 495nm turquoise; these provide little par, and are for coloration purposes only. These exotics, combined with a good base of NW and RB will make colors scream without cranking up the royals and turning down whites (like most do, especially the big coral websites that use LEDs when they take pics of their stock).



redfishsc said:


> Just do what you can to put those exotic colors on their own dimmable driver.


This more than anything. Red is very overpowering, use one per 12-16" square, turquoise isn't as bad, you can run 2:1 with red and it will look great. Violet LEDs make almost no visible light (damn our human eyes!), so you can add as many as you want and it won't change the look but just a fuzz.


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

jedimasterben said:


> Stevesleds.com , he stocks them in 440nm, so they have a beautiful purple fiji T5 look! And at $3.50 apiece, they are the absolute best. He also has custom-made drivers available in tons of configurations. And he's a really nice guy, to boot.


Checking those out right now. 




> White and blue are missing key parts of the spectrum


Yet halides and T5s are missing even more than the white/blue LED combo, yet they work fine. Just because every possible photosynthetically active wavelength isn't represented by your array, that doesn't mean your coral/plants are lacking anything. You do realize that after about 30 feet in the water, you only get a trifle of anything but blue light in the ocean, right?

Plants, in freshwater, seem to grow differently depending on the light available to them, but they still grow just fine under any basic "white" light. 



> 420nm violet, which is where photosynthesis takes place.


420nm is where a small portion of photosynthesis takes place. The blue, and then red, are much more active, according to most of the charts I've seen. 

I don't doubt/deny the usefulness of the 420's and wouldn't mind including some on my tank in the future, but at the same time I think they can be overhyped as "where it all happens". 




> The violet LEDs put out incredible PAR, as well, and can make standard white & blue tank without enough light for SPS, be SPS ready with a very small amount!


I would like to see data on this. I've spent many, many hours with a PAR meter (and T5, halide, and LEDs on hand) and I have yet to see anything producing only 420nm light to give even half the PAR of a similar daylight or 460nm bulb. 

Granted, I've never checked a 420nm LED, but I suspect what you are saying here is incorrect regarding PAR output. Please link me to your source for this info.



> 660nm red is another space that is sorely lacking from even neutral white, along with 495nm turquoise; these provide little par, and are for coloration purposes only.


Actually, the 660nm is sitting squarely on one of the most active photosynthetic peaks of them all, it should send a PAR meter through the roof. I have yet to test this, as I do not own a 660nm red. I do own a stockpile (well, 10) Cree XPE reds, but they are a bit different wavelength (still extraordinarily red). Next time I have them out I'll compare them to a white Cree on the PAR meter. I bet they rival each other, if not perhaps show the red beating the white.


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

I don't think it is the LED drive current that is the parameter to look at as far as how hot the LED gets is concerned. It is the LED power, watts, not amps. LEDs that run at higher voltages will run at lower currents for the same power, but should have about the same heat loss. The disadvantage of higher forward voltage is that a 48 volt LED driver, for example, can't drive as many in series as it can with a lower voltage. And, most of us are going to end up driving the LEDs at considerably less than full power, just because planted tanks do so much better with low medium light than with high light which most DIY lights seem to be designed to produce (just in case).

But, competition is what drives prices down, so I'm happy to see another competitor for Cree XM-L LEDs.


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

Hoppy, if I read you correctly, you are advocating the use of lots of lower-wattage driven (ie, dimmer) LEDs as opposed to using a handful of higher wattage, brighter LEDs, correct? 


The main reason I posted this was because you could potentially save money on LEDs, by driving them harder, which was always one of the benefits I saw in the XML, except that nobody could find a good 3-amp driver that would only run a couple of them..


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

redfishsc said:


> Hoppy, if I read you correctly, you are advocating the use of lots of lower-wattage driven (ie, dimmer) LEDs as opposed to using a handful of higher wattage, brighter LEDs, correct?
> 
> 
> The main reason I posted this was because you could potentially save money on LEDs, by driving them harder, which was always one of the benefits I saw in the XML, except that nobody could find a good 3-amp driver that would only run a couple of them.


No, I am just responding to your statement about the higher forward voltage of this LED meaning it can be run at lower current and thus, lower heat rejection to the heatsink. I don't believe that is correct. The heat rejection is proportional to the wattage, not the current. If an LED were a resistor, then the current would be the same as the wattage, but it isn't.


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

Hoppy said:


> No, I am just responding to your statement about the higher forward voltage of this LED meaning it can be run at lower current and thus, lower heat rejection to the heatsink. I don't believe that is correct. The heat rejection is proportional to the wattage, not the current. If an LED were a resistor, then the current would be the same as the wattage, but it isn't.



That wasn't me saying anything about the voltage/current and heat issue. I knew it was wrong as well I just didn't bother to comment on it. And now, that comment that you were responding to by the other dude appears to have been edited out. I can't find it. 


The reason I'm mentioning the higher voltage and lower current is because, unlike the XML, we can get the full 1,000 lumens from these using the Meanwells and other 1,000mA capable drivers. Which means, we'd need fewer LEDs total. 


4 of these might be enough for a 55g tank, on a Meanwell.


----------



## samamorgan (Dec 31, 2011)

redfishsc said:


> 4 of these might be enough for a 55g tank, on a Meanwell.


This statement right here is what makes these amazing. From arrays of 12-20 LEDs to 4 on a 55g is a huge step in difference. That also makes T5s and metal halide totally and completely obsolete.

What would the estimated cost at that point be with a DIY setup you think? I'd say around $50-70 bucks for the whole thing.


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

samamorgan said:


> This statement right here is what makes these amazing. From arrays of 12-20 LEDs to 4 on a 55g is a huge step in difference. That also makes T5s and metal halide totally and completely obsolete.



I wouldn't quite say that...... quite . 

Also keep in mind that 4 of these over a 55g is speaking in terms of a planted freshwater tank. 




> What would the estimated cost at that point be with a DIY setup you think? I'd say around $50-70 bucks for the whole thing.


The LEDs alone might cost you $50, I am not aware of anyone selling them on PCB stars yet (I haven't looked much either). If they are indeed in the $7 range, plus $40 for a Meanwell/plug/10v dimmer, and another $15 est. for the heatsink and associated materials, you're still looking at $80-100. 

But it would be fully dimmable and the LEDs themselves should last for a decade, and the driver perhaps also. My Meanwells are a couple years old, with no problems at all.


----------



## Steve001 (Feb 26, 2011)

There already is an led light utilizing various color leds to nearly cover all par wavelengths. It's the AcanLighting Prism LED 600PA-18S
According to the site it contains:
• 32 white
• 8 blue
• 9 royal blue
• 2 red
• 2 amber
• 2 green
• 2 cyan
• 6 magenta
It's also programmable as I recall. Check youtube.

I posted info on it plus other led lighting info for other products.
http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/lighting/166543-useful-full-spectrum-led.html

*
*


----------



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

redfishsc said:


> Yet halides and T5s are missing even more than the white/blue LED combo, yet they work fine. Just because every possible photosynthetically active wavelength isn't represented by your array, that doesn't mean your coral/plants are lacking anything. You do realize that after about 30 feet in the water, you only get a trifle of anything but blue light in the ocean, right?


This is true, but why replicate that when we are able to get better growth and coloration by giving them a wide spectrum?


redfishsc said:


> Plants, in freshwater, seem to grow differently depending on the light available to them, but they still grow just fine under any basic "white" light.


This. For them, it's usually the amount of total light that makes them react differently.


redfishsc said:


> 420nm is where a small portion of photosynthesis takes place. The blue, and then red, are much more active, according to most of the charts I've seen.
> 
> I don't doubt/deny the usefulness of the 420's and wouldn't mind including some on my tank in the future, but at the same time I think they can be overhyped as "where it all happens".


See here:








418nm is possibly _the_ most important wavelength in the spectrum, as far as photosynthesis is concerned. And this may also be specific to zooxanthellae, as well.

So 420nm true violet, 440-450nm & 452-455nm royal blue, 475nm (hits 485nm, too) cool blue, 495nm turquoise, and 660nm deep red (also hits 630nm) will allow for a full-spectrum LED build that will not only cause colors to fluoresce, but will give the best opportunity for growth and coloration of coral. This doesn't necessarily apply to freshwater plants, though. 


redfishsc said:


> I would like to see data on this. I've spent many, many hours with a PAR meter (and T5, halide, and LEDs on hand) and I have yet to see anything producing only 420nm light to give even half the PAR of a similar daylight or 460nm bulb.
> 
> Granted, I've never checked a 420nm LED, but I suspect what you are saying here is incorrect regarding PAR output. Please link me to your source for this info.


I have never seen PAR data for solely violet, however, adding two 420nm LEDs, a 660nm red, and a 495nm turquoise to a PAR38 bulb (originally had 6x royal blue and 4x cool white) led to an over 300 PAR increase at 12" through saltwater (all the LEDs were run at 1.5w).




redfishsc said:


> Actually, the 660nm is sitting squarely on one of the most active photosynthetic peaks of them all, it should send a PAR meter through the roof. I have yet to test this, as I do not own a 660nm red. I do own a stockpile (well, 10) Cree XPE reds, but they are a bit different wavelength (still extraordinarily red). Next time I have them out I'll compare them to a white Cree on the PAR meter. I bet they rival each other, if not perhaps show the red beating the white.


I wrote that down wrongly. I posted all that from my phone originally, and I had other things going on lol.


Hoppy said:


> But, competition is what drives prices down, so I'm happy to see another competitor for Cree XM-L LEDs.


This. Kinda how the Bridgelux BXRA 950 runs at 21v and 350ma, vs 3.35v and 3A for the CREE XM-L to output the same lumens.

And I don't think this will drive down any costs. XM-Ls wholesale are around $2.50, XP-Gs around $1.50, and regular Luxeon Rebel ES at $3, so they're already making ludicrous amounts of money, and I doubt this LED will change that, especially since the M will most likely cost more.


redfishsc said:


> The main reason I posted this was because you could potentially save money on LEDs, by driving them harder, which was always one of the benefits I saw in the XML, except that nobody could find a good 3-amp driver that would only run a couple of them..


This is definitely a benefit of larger LEDs, but only if they are efficient and have the spread you need.


redfishsc said:


> The reason I'm mentioning the higher voltage and lower current is because, unlike the XML, we can get the full 1,000 lumens from these using the Meanwells and other 1,000mA capable drivers. Which means, we'd need fewer LEDs total.
> 
> 4 of these might be enough for a 55g tank, on a Meanwell.


This.


samamorgan said:


> This statement right here is what makes these amazing. From arrays of 12-20 LEDs to 4 on a 55g is a huge step in difference. That also makes T5s and metal halide totally and completely obsolete.
> 
> What would the estimated cost at that point be with a DIY setup you think? I'd say around $50-70 bucks for the whole thing.


A single XM-L cool white is 910lm at 3A & 3.35v, so 10.05w each. 6x would be 5,460 lumens. 60.1w total

A single Luxeon M in cool or neutral is 1,220lm at 1A & 11.42v, so that's 11.42w each. 5x would be 6,100 lumens, 10% more light than the XM-L. 57.1w total

Figure Luxeon M on a star board would cost around $11 each, XM-Ls are $7.25 each. A driver for 6x XM-L at 3A is about $30. To drive 5x Luxeon M would be about $30, as well, because of the high forward voltage. Heatsink would be about $35 for either setup.

XM-Ls look to be a cheaper option at estimated pricing on Luxeon M's. 


redfishsc said:


> But it would be fully dimmable and the LEDs themselves should last for a decade, and the driver perhaps also. My Meanwells are a couple years old, with no problems at all.


This.


Steve001 said:


> There already is an led light utilizing various color leds to nearly cover all par wavelengths. It's the AcanLighting Prism LED 600PA-18S
> According to the site it contains:
> • 32 white
> • 8 blue
> ...


Looks to me like they didn't do their research as to what corals truly need, spectrum-wise, nor did they figure out what kind and how many LEDs to use. They could have built a better fixture for less money using quality high-power LEDs instead of the cheapest 1w'ers they could find. It probably won't have better PAR than the Radion (which, surprisingly, has crappy PAR for as much as it costs), and coloration will be the same.


----------



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

Steve001 said:


> There already is an led light utilizing various color leds to nearly cover all par wavelengths. It's the AcanLighting Prism LED 600PA-18S
> According to the site it contains:
> • 32 white (10000k, _awful_ when combined with royal blue)
> • 8 blue (470nm, awful Windex-look when there are too many compared to royal blue or when paired with cool white, but help photosynthesis and color "pop" when just the right amount is used)
> ...


My thoughts in red.


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

Well at least I know that I am no longer the king of overthinking an issue.


----------



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

I've spent now over 72 hours researching LEDs, wavelengths, photosynthesis, spectrums, wattage, amps, volts, over the past two weeks. I can calculate how efficient an LED versus another will be and what it should look like when combined with colors just based on its specs. lol


I also learned a nasty truth about "true violet" LEDs. Don't know if I should say more than that yet.


----------



## Relativistic (Mar 5, 2012)

jedimasterben said:


> I've spent now over 72 hours researching LEDs, wavelengths, photosynthesis, spectrums, wattage, amps, volts, over the past two weeks. I can calculate how efficient an LED versus another will be and what it should look like when combined with colors just based on its specs. lol
> 
> 
> I also learned a nasty truth about "true violet" LEDs. Don't know if I should say more than that yet.


And knowing is half the battle! :red_mouth


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

jedimasterben said:


> I've spent now over 72 hours researching LEDs, wavelengths, photosynthesis, spectrums, wattage, amps, volts, over the past two weeks. I can calculate how efficient an LED versus another will be and what it should look like when combined with colors just based on its specs. lol


The lovely part of DIY LEDs is that you learn a great deal about DC electrical circuits in the process. 




> I also learned a nasty truth about "true violet" LEDs. Don't know if I should say more than that yet.


You mean other than:
1) They are very dim to the eye and few people notice they are even on...
2) They cost 2-3X as much as royal blue LEDs of the same brand...
3) They are pretty inefficient compared to T5HO actinics 420nm? :biggrin:


----------



## DaveFason (Aug 15, 2011)

Jedi - Dont take this the wrong way but until you get all the colors together and really see it in person I would not judge stuff from data sheets. There is a ton of speculation out there about colors and what works best but until you really test it that is where you see what works. I see a ton of info out there that is TERRIBLE! 

With this being a planted tank forum ( I am working on a light for this ) we dont have to worry about all those insane colors. Keeping it simple is much easier than over complicating things with multiple drivers for each color, blending, ect. 

From MY testing ( 6-8 months for just FW ) I have found some new observations. I am even working on the FW/planted 13Up module. The biggest problem that I have seen with LED's and plants is getting reds to really pop like you see with the T5 & MH units ( Everything else looks wonderful ). What I have found to work and I will have some gnarly photo's soon...

CW/NW/WW/Deep Red/amber

Keeping the CW separate and the WW,NW and red/amber together. Now amber does nada for anything but brings out some great stuff. Best of all you only need 1-2 per 13-24 LED rigs. 

Back to the subject about the Luxeon M. I am super excited about this! I have and always will prefer the Luxeon models over CREE models. While CREE is less expensive and easier to purchase, Phillips colors are much more "accurate". 

I'll see if I can get my hands on a few of these. I know of a few of Luxeon models that are coming out soon as well.  

-Dave


----------



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

Keyword there was "should be able to..." lol, there is a lot of stuff that datasheets leave out, and then there's differences in binning and such. Endless possibilities, really, but a general idea can be had.

If I had to make two completely different sets of LEDs with different colors, one for fresh and one for salt, I'd probably go nuts lol.

The amber LED addition is interesting, I'd love to see your pics of it, post soon!


----------



## DaveFason (Aug 15, 2011)

P.S - A few problems with ordering single LED's from multiple places is binning. Most of the time you will have the same color LED but with completely different binning. Making each neutral white or cool white look different. This is how a lot of places that sell LED's for cheap get the super cheap pricing. Cut tapes of LED's that are someones leftovers. They need to turn them and in return you get them for dirt cheap.


----------



## audioaficionado (Apr 19, 2011)

What is the angle of light spread/optics of this LED?










Nice chart roud:


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

The primary optic on the Luxeon M is 120 degrees.


----------



## AaronT (Apr 11, 2004)

DaveFason said:


> From MY testing ( 6-8 months for just FW ) I have found some new observations. I am even working on the FW/planted 13Up module. The biggest problem that I have seen with LED's and plants is getting reds to really pop like you see with the T5 & MH units ( Everything else looks wonderful ). What I have found to work and I will have some gnarly photo's soon...


I've had this same issue with MH lights too. This is why my first LED project will be a small one, to make sure I like it enough. It's hard to beat the colors that pop from T5 HO bulbs, especially when you mix red bulbs (i.e. aqua flora) with white daylight bulbs. Now if only they would shimmer and use less energy like LEDs...

A bit off topic, but where are you all purchasing the Bridgelux and Luxeon LEDs should I want to try those instead of the usual CREEs? I found Steve's LEDs. Is that a reliable source? It seems the Luxeons have better color rendering from reviews I've read.


----------



## audioaficionado (Apr 19, 2011)

Luxeon M data sheet .pdf

I hope these will have additional optional optics available to narrow the angle for deeper tanks.


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

AaronT said:


> A bit off topic, but where are you all purchasing the Bridgelux and Luxeon LEDs should I want to try those instead of the usual CREEs? I found Steve's LEDs. Is that a reliable source? It seems the Luxeons have better color rendering from reviews I've read.


You can get the "bridgelux" (lowercase, in quotation marks, because I'm mildly skeptical of the authenticity of these "bridgelux") from Aquastyle, which ships out of Hong-Kong. 

You can also get them from www.ledgroupbuy.com.


The issue is, they are quite inefficient. For the same price, you can order Cree XBD Whites, which are unbelievably more efficient, from Cutter (less than $2 each). 
http://www.cutter.com.au/products.php?cat=Cree+XBD


If you want genuine Bridgelux (ie, no doubting these at all) you can order them from Newark.com. They aren't necessarily more efficient but are going to be binned more accurately for color, in all likelihood. I ordered two 402- white 10watters and they look quite nice over a planted tank, and they come quite larger than that too.

I do not know where Luxeon M is sold, mounted to the star, ready to go, yet.


----------



## AaronT (Apr 11, 2004)

redfishsc said:


> I do not know where Luxeon M is sold, mounted to the star, ready to go, yet.


Thanks.  How about the Rebel ES ones? Are they available somewhere?

Those XB-Ds might be just the ticket for my nano cube build.


----------



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

AaronT said:


> Thanks.  How about the Rebel ES ones? Are they available somewhere?


Rebel ES are available now at Stevesleds.com , he now has cool white and neutral white. He can get the Luxeon M mounted on a star right now, but only in warm white, 3000K. He said as soon as they are available in neutral and cool, he will start ordering them. Said he expects to sell them for ~$8 apiece. Goodbye, XM-L :hihi:


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

I do indeed see these trump the XML in most of our units, but only because it's far easier to find a driver that handles 1,000mA than one that handles 3,000mA. If it weren't for that, the XML would be superior in terms of efficiency, but not necessarily in terms of overall looks. That will be more subjective. 


Glad to know Steve intends to carry these. I will likely be ordering some LEDs soon, and if he's going to have optics for them, I may actually order a couple to replace the Bridgelux 402's that I'm currently using.


----------



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

redfishsc said:


> I do indeed see these trump the XML in most of our units, but only because it's far easier to find a driver that handles 1,000mA than one that handles 3,000mA. If it weren't for that, the XML would be superior in terms of efficiency...


What? The XM-L NW only puts out 845lm at 3A, 10w. The Luxeon will be over 1200lm at 1A, 11w. The Luxeon M _spanks_ the XM-L in efficiency.


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

jedimasterben said:


> What? The XM-L NW only puts out 845lm at 3A, 10w. The Luxeon will be over 1200lm at 1A, 11w. The Luxeon M _spanks_ the XM-L in efficiency.


Alright, man, there are several things that need to be pointed out. 

First, the XML is an extraordinary product, and so is the Luxeon M, and saying that one "spanks" the other is just fanboy language. You are talking as if the XML is some sort of old dinosaur that died and fossilized, when in reality it is one of the most astonishing LED products ever produced. They both have their applications and both of them are light years beyond the current inefficient fluorescent and halide technology that we are using today. 

For what it's worth, the XML at 700mA will be extraordinarily more efficient than the Luxeon M at 700mA, just putting out less light (and consuming less wattage). So if you are wanting the most efficient white LED that you can run in on the same driver along with blues, the XML is a far better choice--- you'll be running it at it's peak efficiency, which is around 150-160 lumens/watt. No spanking going on here, it's just that the XML does have an advantage here.



Second, you appear to have done a few *days* worth of research (72 hours or something, which you said earlier), which I do applaud since many other people would just prefer to pay someone else to do it. But 72 hours worth of research doesn't exactly buy you the right to talk as if you're the jedi-master of the light world, but that's exactly how you've been talking. 


I've been doing LEDs for a couple years now and that doesn't buy me the right to do it either, but I do know how to read a datasheet, choose the proper LEDs and drivers, arrange and solder them all up, and how to help others with it. If you're interested in helping others, that's fine, but this fanboy banter is just another "my dad can beat up your dad".


Share what you've learned and leave it at that, nobody has any pissing contest to be won here. By the way, unless you've actually built, or seen with your own eyes in person, something that works, then be careful speaking authoritatively about it. You just might be wrong.



I would like to see the link documenting that the Luxeon M, in neutral white (4200K or so) produces 1200 lumens at 11 watts. Keep in mind when Cree released the XML they were running their mouths too, about 1,000 lumens, and it turns out it's producing 900 in cool white.... which is great.... but not the same thing they claimed. This may also be the case with Luxeon. Phillips is a company that has had a long history of selling bullchit-- I know because I got screwed one their automotive headlights, I ordered one of their "ice blue" or whatever, and it was piss yellow.


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

For those interested, this driver would be perfect for 1 Luxeon M, and it would be FREAKY bright. Enough to light a 10 gallon tank by itself, for low/medium level light. You will have some shadows--- I've done this with other 10-watt LEDs before-- so you'll have to aquascape with that in mind. 


http://www.dealextreme.com/p/10w-led-driver-110-220v-81475


----------



## audioaficionado (Apr 19, 2011)

Whatever system you go with, don't settle for sparse LED quantities to save a few bux. You'll want full end to end and front to back light coverage without hot spots. Overkill might cost more, but it will look a lot better in the end.


----------



## skanderson (Jul 25, 2010)

i was hoping for some update on this thread. still looking for what emitter to use on my next led build which will be over a 36x18x36 inch exoterra that will be a madagascar biotypic viv display. was hoping to use the luxeon Ms but still havent found them on stars. i have built a viv light using xmls cw and nw and have good numbers 60 inches below the light. i have my heat sinks in and my drivers have shipped so if anyone knows a source for the luxeon Ms on stars i would appreciate it. thanks, steve


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

Nearly any Cree or Rebel LED will give you about the same efficiency, for our purposes for a planted tank. I haven't found a source for Luxeon M's but I haven't really been looking for them either. 


My suggestion is that you use Rebel ES, or Cree XTE or XPG whites. 


Use caution-- with any of these LEDs, you run the risk of grossly overlighting your tank lol.


----------



## Jnad (Aug 17, 2012)

What about using Philips Luxeon ES warm white 2700K and mix in some few royal blue. This Philips 2700K led has CRI95 , witch is very close to the sun. A setup with ww and royal blue will give a great value in the red and blue specter.


----------



## redfishsc (Aug 29, 2010)

As far as plants are concerned, they'd grow just fine with that combination. 

As for looks, it would probably look fine as well, just don't overdo the royal blue. 1 to 5 ratio, maybe, and have them on their own dimmable driver.


----------



## Steve001 (Feb 26, 2011)

Jnad said:


> What about using Philips Luxeon ES warm white 2700K and mix in some few royal blue. This Philips 2700K led has CRI95 , witch is very close to the sun. A setup with ww and royal blue will give a great value in the red and blue specter.


The CRI of sunlight is always 100.
Don't be fool by that CRI of 95. It's rather easy to make a light source match closely the wavelengths the Sun outputs when it is rising or setting. It's much more difficult to make a match when the Sun is at or near it's zenith.


----------



## corwinlame (Sep 13, 2012)

Awesome, LED Lights have lighted the globe with their arrival. This Luxeon M LED is looking very nice and perfect to me. This kind of white LED is always powerful and good to use.


----------



## skanderson (Jul 25, 2010)

now looking for the luxeon m for another build. i still cant find them mounted on stars. does anyone have a source?


----------



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

Stevesleds will have them soon - they've been held up getting the MCPCB for them because of hte Chinese new year.


----------



## skanderson (Jul 25, 2010)

thanks for the quick response


----------



## Jnad (Aug 17, 2012)

Hello!

Look at the colors in this planted tank using only Philips 2700K 
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2192354

Jnad


----------



## AaronT (Apr 11, 2004)

Jnad said:


> Hello!
> 
> Look at the colors in this planted tank using only Philips 2700K
> http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2192354
> ...


He's also using blue LEDs and the color looks way too blue for my taste.


----------



## Jnad (Aug 17, 2012)

Yes you have right, i did not see that. Maybe only 2700K leds would look better for plant tank.



AaronT said:


> He's also using blue LEDs and the color looks way too blue for my taste.


----------



## skanderson (Jul 25, 2010)

just as an update these are now on the steves site in 5k color mounted on a copper square. really considering getting a few and playing with them over my new viv.


----------



## limige (Jul 20, 2012)

Well i pulled the trigger and made an order from steves.
28 nuetral white 
28 royal blue
With his quad drivers and power supply.
Im doing a 5' long 125 galon freshwater planted. Its setup with presssured CO2 and is mostly swords right now till i get something worked out for lights


----------



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

limige said:


> Well i pulled the trigger and made an order from steves.
> 28 nuetral white
> 28 royal blue
> With his quad drivers and power supply.
> Im doing a 5' long 125 galon freshwater planted. Its setup with presssured CO2 and is mostly swords right now till i get something worked out for lights


That's gonna be a crazy amount of blue light. Too much for a planted tank IMHO.


----------



## limige (Jul 20, 2012)

Well thats why its dimmable right?!

Honestly i couldnt find much on freshwater so i thought i would start there. We have some injected fish i figured the blue would bring out the color


----------



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

limige said:


> Well thats why its dimmable right?!
> 
> Honestly i couldnt find much on freshwater so i thought i would start there. We have some injected fish i figured the blue would bring out the color


You don't need much to do that. Steve's bin of the M put out ~1,280lm in white and ~6,070mW of royal blue with the diodes at 1000mA.

You got the number almost right with white - you'll need 24x of the M, using 63 degree Ledil Minnie WWW reflectors (which you can get here: http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail...EpiMZZMtokFGYinOTjiJni6%2br2eioKm2v%2bGdWb2c= ) to achieve approximately 60 PAR on the substrate (all according to Hoppy's calculator). I'd use no more than four or so of the royal blue M. I would also spread around some warm white or deep red LEDs - the 5000K M isn't the best in the deeper red wavelengths.


----------



## limige (Jul 20, 2012)

Sorry your post confused me some..
"Steves bin of the m"
"Youll need 24x of the m"

I dont follow exactly. Ideally for a 24"x60" setup like mine what amounts of what color would be your recomendation?

I do follow your points of warm whites and reds but i can tweak it. If i overkilled blues they should be easy to sell on the reef sites.


----------



## jedimasterben (Aug 21, 2011)

limige said:


> Sorry your post confused me some..
> "Steves bin of the m"
> "Youll need 24x of the m"
> 
> I dont follow exactly. Ideally for a 24"x60" setup like mine what amounts of what color would be your recomendation?


What I gave above.




limige said:


> I do follow your points of warm whites and reds but i can tweak it. If i overkilled blues they should be easy to sell on the reef sites.


You did. I would either try and send them back or have them not send that many if they haven't shipped yet.


----------



## limige (Jul 20, 2012)

Oh my fault, you know what i ordered the lux es 3watt led's.
The only M i saw where 12w


----------

