|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/8/2006 10:44:39 AM
Posts: 32,
Visits: 65
|
|
Hi Anthony, first time posting in your forum....glad I found it!
I actually posted something like this in the lighting section here, but since I really want your opinion, this seems like a better place for it 
I'm getting ready to upgrade to a 240 gallon 36 inch tall acrylic bowfront. I plan on keeping a mix of things, but predominantly softies and LPS...although I would like to try my hand at some of the hardier SPS corals at some point. Now, I have no problem placing things where they need to go in the aquarium (e.g. higher or lower) for lighting purposes...however I may want to put a clam in the sand bed, and they need a decent amount of light. When it looked like I would be getting a slightly smaller tank, I was planning on the Coralife Aqualight Pro fixture with 3x250W M-H and 4x96W actinic PC, but I'm worried that the 250W M-H won't suffice for a tank that deep. Total wattage per gallon is around 4.7 with this setup, but I'm not sure how meaningful that is, given the depth. Do I need to go to 400W? I was trying to avoid the heat and UV radiation (the tank comes with a stand, but no canopy) but I guess if that's what I need, then that's what I need.
Any thoughts?
Thanks in advance,
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 11/19/2009 1:09:50 PM
Posts: 4,172,
Visits: 2,691
|
|
| what is the length and width of the tank? What species of clam? Are you willing to keep most corals in the top 18-24" of the aquarium surface?
. Anthony Calfo
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/8/2006 10:44:39 AM
Posts: 32,
Visits: 65
|
|
The tank is a bowfront, approximately 6' x 2' x 3' tall.
The clams I was looking at were t. crocea, and I looked at some t. derasa as well. Also, corals such as open brains ideally should be placed in the substrate as well, right? I have a feeling if I went with the 250s and a top 18-24" requirement, I would end up regretting it and ultimately upgrading the lighting 
I haven't actually seen the tank in person yet...I'm having it shipped to me. I asked however, and was told there are two openings in the top...for a six foot tank I was expecting three. Say I go with the 400W M-H lights, I'm not sure the footprint would be adequate with two light, on the other hand I don't want to melt anything.
jds
[quote]Anthony Calfo (2/3/2006)
what is the lengthand width of the tank?
What species of clam?
Are you willing to keep most corals in the top 18-24" of the aquarium surface?[/quote]
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Moderators
Last Login: 11/19/2009 1:09:50 PM
Posts: 4,172,
Visits: 2,691
|
|
| if you can enjoy a Tridacna derasa or Tridacna squamosa (or even the unique Hippopus sp. Tridacnids), and if you will specifically select for red (deepwater) LPS types like red Cynarina, red Trachyphyllia, etc for your sand bottom specimens (there are other options too... purple tipped Catalaphyllia, many Fungiids...)... then you most certainly can enjoy considerable savings and success with just three 250 watt MHs. I'd strongly recommend 10k K colored lamps or warmer (not bluer... use your fluorescents to give you blue light)
. Anthony Calfo
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/8/2006 10:44:39 AM
Posts: 32,
Visits: 65
|
|
Thanks for helping Anthony! Its good to know there are a couple different ways to go about this (of course that also makes it harder to make a decision  )
jds
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/8/2006 10:44:39 AM
Posts: 32,
Visits: 65
|
|
To add more fuel to the fire, a couple folks over on RC are telling me to forget about MH and go all HO T5 w/ individual reflectors, saying that it has better penetration than MH. Then someone else said, sure, but that test pitted 20Ks in cheap reflectors against T5s in Icecap reflectors, so it wasn't valid. The more I learn the more confused I get. Any thoughts on this suggestion?
I kind of like the effect you get with MHs, but wonder if 250s with T5 could alleviate the need for 400s (I had pretty much decided to bite the bullet and go with dual 400s).
jds
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/7/2009 6:27:39 PM
Posts: 374,
Visits: 1,180
|
|
Woah. Ignore those folks over at RC.
I am a big fan of T5 HO lighting. I just outfit my new 55G tank with 5 54W T5 HO lights and pretty little reflectors. I am very happy with it and think it will be great for my mixed reef, predominately softies and lps with an eye toward some hardy sps.
However, my tank is only 20 inches deep. And while the reflectors reduce light loss due to scatter and increase light penetration, there is no way in reef heaven that they'll be able to compete with the penetrative capability of a 250W MH light.
Now, for your actinic flourescents bulbs you'll add (probably) for a dawk/dusk effect and to bring out some additional colors, I'd say T5 HO are a much better choice then PC or VHO.... They will save you on electricity somewhat because they light a tank better with less watts simply by aiming more of it at the tank.
Go with the 3x 250 MH + some T5/PC/VHO option. You'll be happy you did so.
Paul Thompson
South Ascot, Berkshire, England
Board - West London Reef Club
Webmaster - Central Oklahoma Marine Aquarium Society
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 3/7/2006 10:01:56 AM
Posts: 15,
Visits: 111
|
|
| I have a 300 gallon tank with 1800 watts of MH over it. I have one 1000 watt light in the center which is 12,000K, and two 400 watt lights that are 20,000K on either end. I also use ozone which helps the light penetrate the depth of the water. I have a Torch, a Hammer, and a Frogspawn about mid tank which all 3 are doing well and colorful. I also just added a Hydrophora that I placed on top about 12 inches under one of the 400 watt lights. I have a yellow scroll about mid tank level under the 400 watt light, and various mushrooms all over the tank. All of the corals seem to be doing well with this lighting, but my billfold is showing some recession from the electricity bill.
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2/10/2006 2:30:08 PM
Posts: 2,
Visits: 22
|
|
| Sicklid how far from the top of the tank are your metal halide lamps.
|
|
|
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 9/12/2008 8:34:40 AM
Posts: 340,
Visits: 608
|
|
Woah. Ignore those folks over at RC. We have only been here a month with the new format and already resentment to the ancestors  My personal preference is MH, T5 then VHO. I will use night lights before using PC as primary lighting again. I also follow the school of though that if you use MH, the supplemental lighting can be what ever your heart desires...even PC is fine...doesnt matter. My only reason for using VHO on my tanks is that I can't buy T5 locally and I prefer shopping locally over internet for consumables, even if it costs a little more, but then that's a different argument. On my next tank, I will use 10k MH, 250W with VHO actinic supplement. I want the spot light effect of the metal halide so that I can create 'low-light' area in and around the rockwork and in crevices, this would be harder to do with flourescent as the lighting is very uniform (sometimes desirable). My personal belief with the MH-T5 debate is just that. The MH punches the water so you get a very well illuminated substrate and rocktops, but also gets dark areas around the rockwork in crevices and such. The T5 is far brighter than the VHO because of the reflection issues and uniformly lights the tank as a VHO, but better. The higher illumination and uniform lighting makes it appear brighter the MH as you have less dim areas around the rockwork. A light meter will say for certain but I dont plan on buying one. I suspect you would find less intensity on the substrate and more within the rockscaping with T5...but then mounting option will play a big part in that and given that there are so many options to choose from, how do you compare 'fairly'. The most common recommendation I am seeing currently is 250W MH at 10k-14k with T5 supplementation, noting that the blue bulb is better/softer than the true actinic. I am also seeing that people with T5 supplementation are going from 2 bulbs to 4 bulbs and are mixing at least 1 white bulb. This is the current trend as I saw it researching my lighting option and it will change with time...it always has.
I think Anthony has a great suggestion (of course he does, its his forum  ) but its all in what you want to stock. You have not mentioned mounting options yet, so I dont know where you are going yet with the lights, but I am ordering the Icecap pendants which are compatable with both 250W & 400W DE, you just swap out the ballasts and the bulbs. In a few years when we move and I get to upgrade bigger, I will have the upgrade option for lighting and the pendants are still good. In the end, it is so subjective that don't forget you really can't go wrong...it's all in what you want. JMO, Chris
|
|
|
|