FishProfiles.com Message Forums

I'd be happy to plant wisteria and the like on the outer edges, provided that I get to put my red & high light plants "somewhere". Add to the criteria, that I can't get 6,700K PC tubes here in Aus - I'm stuck with a combination of 10,00K and 8,500K (you might remember we talked about this earlier in this thread). I can get the 6,500K, but I have to order from overseas, which really is a hassle (but not impossible). On replacement of initial tubes, I might order the US ones, but would probably go with the AUS ones to start with.

I want the best of both worlds, minimum of algae & high light plants.

The tank is only 19inches fill depth, & 14 inches width. Does this effect things?

So, maybe the question really should be would a combination of a twin PC with 4 x 55W be the cause of too much algae, rather than being my gateway to the highlight plants without increased algae?

Cheers
TW

Hi
Given the situation, and your desires, I'd go with the
combination of bulbs that you mentioned. The 8800K and
10,000K bulbs. The 8800K bulb may moderate the "washout"
effect that the higher K rating bulbs have.

As to the use of a timer... If you have all high and
medium demand plants, I'd give some thought to running
them both at the same time. If you are going to have
a hodge podge of plants from all sorts of demand categories
then I would use a timer and run the 8800K for 10 hours
and expriment with the 10,000K for time. Starting at
a two hour "on" period, and moving up to a four hour "on"
period. Center the "on" period in the middle of the
10 hour "day." Decide upon the "on" period by what gives
you the best plant growth with the least algae. Realize
that if you go with these lights, pushing into the 3+ wpg
area, that you will have to provide CO2 as well.

Frank

-->>> The Confidence of Amateurs, is the Envy of Professionals <<<--

Tankwatcher,

Either let should work, but I would go with the lesser wattage. The fact that you might not be able to put a high light plant in the corner will be of minimal importance compared to the problems you will have running over 4 wpg and not having everything working close to perfection (co2, ferts, low fish load, feeding schedule, healthy plant mass, etc.)

My Scapes

Thanks Frank & Tetratech,

Frank, both options come with 50% of the lighting being 10,000K & 50% being 8,500k.

The question is do I go for the extra wattage (4 x 55W) that the 4ft unit gives me, or do I go for the 3ft which gives me 2 x 96W. I don't know why it is so, but the 4ft light will not take 2 x 96W.

I think by Tetratech's advice, I'm going to go for the 3ft light, unless someone else has thoughts as to why I shouldn't. I don't want to have zero error margin for algae.

Thanks for the replies.

Cheers
TW

unless someone else has thoughts

I have some thoughts, but I don't know how helpful they are.

- both units would be useless if they don't provide the option to turn on one row of lights individually. If not then the light output is too high for a full day.
- both units should be have half the lights turned on for all day and the other for only a few (1-5) hours to mimik midday.
- At high light (all on), there is a mere difference of 0.5wpg of output between these units, whereby the shorter one is more intense in the middle of the tank than the longer one, as all output is focussed on 3' rather than 4'. Basically, I believe it is at least as high than the longer one in specific areas of the tank.
- Either or unit is strong enough to not permit errors.
- On low light (half on), the shorter one makes more sense to me as it brings the tank to about 2wpg, closely followed by the longer one with only 0.25wpg less.

Overall - it is a toss, at least that is how I see it. As such I personally would elect the longer one as it shines over the entire tank. But hey, it wouldn't be the first time that I made the wrong call.

Ingo

EDIT: Robyn, the 96w does not come in 4' as the length of the bulb dictates the length of the unit. If both bulbs would start on one end then the remaining over 12" would be empty, if they start on opposite ends then over 6" on each side would only have half the light.

---

Proud Member of the New Jersey Aquatic Gardeners Club

Thanks for your thoughts Ingo. As with everyone's advice, they are always helpful. Yes, I have made sure I can turn both sets of lights on separately (2 power cords, so two timing sequences). This option wasn't easy to find here in Aus (either the twin cords or the fact they take the PC's).

So I really don't know what to do. I respect both opinions & admire both of your tanks, but know that I am a little scared of giving myself an algae problem.

Ingo, so you think even the 3ft with 2 x 96W tubes, run on 2 separate timing sequences would still be enough to make me have no room at all for error? The only reason for getting the smaller fitting was if it does give me, at least a small difference, in my error margin.

Thanks for any further advice.



Cheers
TW

Robyn,

As you know, I have a 6' tank with twice the light you would have if you get the 36" unit. And I have more than twice the water and my tank is taller (I think). And do I have algae? Yes, not so much that I have to panick, but enough to fill pages in my log discussing it. And why do I have algae? Because I have a small margin of error that could be tolerated and I made more errors than that (fish load, messing with tank, and what not).

High tech / high light tanks are more demaning, and I don't believe that either or unit in consideration would quailify as not being high light (when both are turned on).

I know that this information is not helpful in a sense of making a decision here, sorry about that.

Ingo

---

Proud Member of the New Jersey Aquatic Gardeners Club

As I mentioned either light would work and as Ingo points out both are "High Light" for your size tank. Robyn nothing is black and white and I don't want to give you the impression that the 196w would give you a big margin of error it wouldn't. That's the same light I have on my tank and it's almos 20gallons bigger. By even though the higher light is .5wpg difference it's still more and would require that much more control IMHO.

I would also stick with 6700k bulbs. They work the tank looks nice. There's a reason most people use them. Don't still experiementing with 10k, etc. Look I have a total of 192 watts on my 72g (2.7wpg) and what makes it worse it's a bowfront. The front of the tank doesn't get direct light either and I have riccia pearling and my blyxa I fine as long as I don't shade them from the Canopy (right Frank). There are countless number of plants you'll be able to grow in the corners with the 3ft light. The only disadvantage is it has to set on the canopy unless you rig something. I use little rubber feet to raise it up a few inches and I've never had a problem. You could also buy coralife hinges and it will sit on top of the canopy as well.

My Scapes

Thanks again guys,

The repeated woe of fish things not being available in Aus, means that so far I haven't found 6700k PC bulbs here. Apparently, the market doesn't exist for them (but how do they know that, if they don't even make them available to us). Earlier in this thread I had a bit of a conversation about this & considered ordering the correct bulbs from the US. This is still an option & if I do so, I'd thought about 50% 10,000K & 50% 6,700K. The 10,000K was added to the mix, as I've heard some say the 6,700 gives the tank a green look. If the 10,000K takes me further towards the error margin, I will skip that - but can't if I take the Aussie bought pc tubes. The Aussie tube is 10,000K on one side, then does a U-turn on itself & the return strip is 8,500K. So really, it's just one combination tube that somehow changes the K rate on it's return. I will search harder around Aus & see if any other on-line supplier has 6,700K. The US Supplier doesn't guarantee that the tubes won't break in transit, so I'm not sure if this is really such a good option for me.

If I don't go down the track of the PC twin light unit, my next option is two separate twin units, each holding 2 fluro tubes of 30W. So 4 tubes with total of 120W. This will be a bulkier look on top of the tank - but would this be better? I want to grow high light plants & I'm not scared of the work of a C02 high light/high tech tank, but don't want it to be an impossible task, doomed to failure from the start. Seeings as my tank is so much smaller than either of yours, should I just go back to the bank of 4 fluro tubes (whch is actually 2 separate twin light units)?

Cheers
TW

Robyn,

No - you should not go back. Listen, this error margin thing has you way more worried than it should. Keep the tank tidy, don't overload on fish, do your water changes, feed ferts - and you will be fine . Basically, avoid all the things that I do wrong and do all the things that I do right .

There are people that run 300w MHs on a tank of your size. You want to grow high light plants, you gotta have light for them. 120w will not be enough, IMHO.

Hope this helps,

Ingo

---

Proud Member of the New Jersey Aquatic Gardeners Club

There are people that run 300w MHs on a tank of your size.

There are also people that can hit a 95mph fast ball or can swim the english channel. It's a learned art IMHO

My Scapes

Frank, Ingo & Tetratech

Thanks for all your help. I drew a deep breath today and ordered the 48" light. In the end, the choice was made by the supplier telling me that the 36" light would not be able to stand on the 48" tank. It has a stand, but he said it was designed to affix to the tank edge & would not work sitting on the tank top. I asked whether it would work if I could find little rubber feet to put on the edges to support it, and he thought not. So, that was what decided it.

I ordered it without globes & I'm waiting on shipping advice from a US site that will supply 6700K lights to me here.

Should I stick to all 6700K, or throw in a 10,000K to combat the green look some people mention the 6700K can give?

Thanks

Cheers
TW

Hi,
Honestly, I would stick with the 6700K bulbs. The water
does not look green, nor does anything else. 6700K is a
white light that contains the correct mix of red and blue
for plant growth but does not affect the true colors of
the plants or fish.

The higher you go in K rating the more harsh the "glare"
of the bulb. Think of it as stepping out into the sunlight
from a shaded area, you would squint, or need sunglasses.
If you are squinting, you will not see the true colors of
some objects as your pupils have contracted, and you
are not using the full capabilities of your eyes. When
you use bulbs in the 10,000K and higher range, the light
shining down on the tank is that much brighter and harsher
to look at. 10,000K is the max one would use on a fresh
water tank and not really necessary unless your tank is
2 ft or more in depth.
Using 6700K bulbs is not like using some sort of black
light that enhances the greens and makes them stick out.
Instead, it is using a light that allows a truer color
rendering (CRI) of what you are looking at.
I think you would be happier with the 6700K bulbs.

Frank


-->>> The Confidence of Amateurs, is the Envy of Professionals <<<--

Honestly, I would stick with the 6700K bulbs.

Well said Frank, I totally agree. The only reason my large tank looked so green was because I had the 5,500K on all the time .

The shorter unit would have fit like you described, that's what tetratech has. Your LFS guy has to meet tetratech, I guess

Ingo

---

Proud Member of the New Jersey Aquatic Gardeners Club

Thanks Frank & Ingo, ok, so I'll try & get the 6700K & probably only have the 2nd bank of lights on for a relatively short period of time.

I thought Tetratech said it would work, but on-line LFS was pretty strong that it wouldn't. As the light is in QLD & I'm in NSW, I can't even look at it for myself before buying, so I took the safe path of taking his word for it.

I hate decisions, but I hope this one will work out ok.

Cheers
TW

I hate decisions, but I hope this one will work out ok.

That is the beauty about high tech planted tanks, they force people to make decisions and a young lady like yourself can learn a lot from it

Seriously, I hear you. Every time I set up a new tank it seems like the options are endless and I have to narrow it down to just one solution. Maybe this is why we have so many tanks, this way we can implement different solutions at the same time.

Ingo

---

Proud Member of the New Jersey Aquatic Gardeners Club

It almost like, before you make the decision, your options are the world, you can do anything. And then you decide, and that's what you're stuck with. Oh, well.

Cheers
TW

Well, I put a hold on the light. I've ordered the 3ft light for my husband's marine tank, and when it arrives I'm going to see if it would be possible to rigg up little rubber feet, so that it fits on the 4ft tank. If I can rigg up something to raise it from the glass, then I'll order the 3ft light instead, if not, it's back to the 4ft light.

It's a woman's prerogative to change her mind.

Cheers
TW

Hi,
What bulbs did you order for the SW tank?
If you are keeping corals, or other invertebrates,
I would use the 20,000K and 10,000K with 1 or two
6700K bulbs mixed in to moderate the harshness of
the over all light.

The inverts need the high Kelvin light, and lots of
it to support the algae and enzymes and nutrients
that they need to live.
Frank


-->>> The Confidence of Amateurs, is the Envy of Professionals <<<--

Thanks Frank

I know that one of them is 10,000K, but I don't know the K rating of the return tube. (It's one of those tubes that does a U-turn, with 50% light being one thing, & the return being something different). I know that the 10,000K is "Marine blue artinic" & the return tube is "Marine White". Apparently, I dont' have much choice, unless ordering from O/S. For this light fitting, I'm sticking with the tubes available in Australia (not ordering from US). So, I'm stuck with the limited Aussie choice that is available.

It was hard enough to convince hubby to order a light on-line (he does not like doing this - wants to walk into a shop & pick up what he buys, but this light is not available in a shop). I would never convince him to order the tube from overseas.

Thanks for your advice Frank.

Cheers
TW

I've ordered the 3ft light for my husband's marine tank, and when it arrives I'm going to see if it would be possible to rigg up little rubber feet

If it's the coralife fixture you and have a glass top you don't even need the rubber feet. I just put them there so it looks alittle more (intended). The coralfife fixture do not run hot, so it's really not an issue. So as long as you have a glass top, you could raise it alittle with anything: rubber feet, small strip of wood, anything really.

If it's not a coralife I can't attest to how hot it gets. Current USA and AGA I know run hotter. I've cracked a glass versa top using an AGA 110w cf fixture that was placed right on the top.

My Scapes

Hi,

I have a 4ft planted at the moment and just about to replace my standard fluro with PC light.

I usually order my hardwares off the internet because they are much cheaper, and only $8 extra for express postage.

The double compact fluro gives you 4x55W which is 220 Watt on a 4ft.
Or you can go with a single, still 2watt/gal
Aquaria Warehouse

You'll need to buy tubes separately, which can be found on the site. I recommend the one with combined 10000K and 6500K.

I've ordered from that site in the past, excellent service. Products delivered the next morning.
Highly recommended.

Regards,
Jim

If it's not a coralife I can't attest to how hot it gets.

Tetratch, no it's not. It's a Aqualina Twin Power compact, so unless I can rigg up feet, I may be a little nervous putting it straight on the glass, hearing of your cracked glass story. I have no idea how hot it runs.

Jim, thanks for the lead on the tubes. I have no problem ordering the PC lighting fitting itself, but my supplier (Age of Aquariums) told me I can't get 6,700K tubes in Aus, but you say you can get 6,500K? I'll certainly give your lead a try for the tubes I want.

Planted tank guys, would 6,500K be ok, if I can't get 6,700K?

Cheers
TW

Robyn,

Never having had 6,500K bulbs I cannot say for sure that this would be ok. I would assume though that it should be pretty close and almost emit the same color as the 6,700K does.

If it is available, you could also look at bulbs somewhere in the 8,000K range, that may work as well (never had these either). But I know that you don't shy away from being a Guinea Pig for us

Ingo

---

Proud Member of the New Jersey Aquatic Gardeners Club

Thanks JQW,

Aquaria Warehouse can give me a combo light tube of 10,000K & 6500K, but have confirmed they cannot give me 6700K or even 6500K without the combination of the 10,000K. That's just how the light tubes are made.

I'm hoping that Frank may see this, as Frank previously recommended that I stay away from 10,000K if I can & to stick to 6700K only. Seems I can't, unless I order from US. The previous combo Frank recommended to avoid was 10,000K + 8500K. Is this new combination (10,00K + 6,500K) any better, or still one best to avoid?

I can still pursue the US source, but the downside of this is possible breakages on a longer transit trip & the money I lose on conversion (our AU$1 = US$0.73). If there is a big benefit in ordering the 6700K tube, I will follow up some more, but if the benefit is minor, it may not be worth the hassle?

Any opinions of continuing to pursue 6700K tubes, or just go with what I have found, would be appreciated.


Cheers
TW

Hi Robyn,
Just passing through on the way to hit the rack and saw
your note. I'd go for the 10,000K and the 6500K. The idea
is that the 6500K bulb will "mellow out" some of the
harshness of the 10,000K bulb.
I think you will be satisfied with the results.
Frank


-->>> The Confidence of Amateurs, is the Envy of Professionals <<<--

Excellent, thanks Frank.

Now, that I have the tubes sorted out & I can get them in Aus (much easier) now, I just have to decide if I'm getting the 4ft or 3ft.

I'm glad that sorted out and thanks to everyone for the advice given.

EDIT: Frank - hit the rack - that sounds painful ? ? ?

Cheers
TW

Hi, thanks for advice so far.

I'm revisiting this issue, cause maybe I'll sell the current 4ft tank I have (which is only 53G) and instead buy a wider & deeper one (still 4ft). When I was still only thinking of the shallower 53G tank, I decided, after listening to all the advice, to go with a 3ft light that had 2 x 96W compact fluro, as being the right choice for this smaller tank.

But if I up the size of the tank to 74.8G, this is what the 2 different lights would give me.

If I go for the 3ft light (2 x 96W) I would have:-
When both lights are on: 2.56 wpg
When one light is on: 1.2 wpg


If I go for the 4ft light (4 x 55W) I would have:-
When all lights are on: 2.94wpg
When only one row on: 1.4 wpg

Excuse the maths if I got the calcs wrong. Not my strong point.

Is the 4ft light still too many watts for that volume of water?

Thanks in advance for any advice.

EDIT: Just re-read an earlier post here from tetratech

I have a total of 192 watts on my 72g

So that answers it, if the 3ft can work (with little feet etc) on the 4ft tank, that is still the one to get. Thanks anyway.

Cheers
TW