# How decent is the Fluval LED light that comes with the 200L tank?



## Muso1981 (31 Mar 2021)

Hi all,

I'm in the process of setting up a new tank, I bought the Fluval 200L LED as it is the largest tank I could get into the space I needed. I'm currently upgrading from an old Juwel Lido 120 with the old style bulbs and I was wondering if the LED which comes with it will be decent enough or is it total pants? I'm a bit noob with all of this stuff and have limited budget, ideally I would like to keep the LED and not have to buy a new lighting system I guess the light will limit the types of plants I'm going to grow?

Cheers,


----------



## oreo57 (31 Mar 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I'm in the process of setting up a new tank, I bought the Fluval 200L LED as it is the largest tank I could get into the space I needed. I'm currently upgrading from an old Juwel Lido 120 with the old style bulbs and I was wondering if the LED which comes with it will be decent enough or is it total pants? I'm a bit noob with all of this stuff and have limited budget, ideally I would like to keep the LED and not have to buy a new lighting system I guess the light will limit the types of plants I'm going to grow?
> 
> Cheers,


Are you referring to this for your current light?
This is the old style.. 
T5 2 X 24w​
Never mind that's not the LED style..
Are you referring to Jewels LEDs or led that came with the Fluval?

Is this the size of the new tank?
Measurements: W100 x D40 x H55cm
From base to just under lid: approx. H50cm
Capacity: 200 Litres.

IF this is the light you are referring to then yes a replacement is recommended except for say fish only or really low light plants:

53 US Gal / 200 L aquarium
Decorative accent strips in Black
Bluetooth LED lighting system with 12.5 W LED light which encourages plant growth and enhances fish colour
50W of lighting is probably the starting point.


----------



## Muso1981 (31 Mar 2021)

Hi, the old tank is T5 bulbs, the new one is a fluval Roma 200l those measurements look correct. It's 12.5 watt according to the web site. 50 watt led?


----------



## oreo57 (31 Mar 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> Hi, the old tank is T5 bulbs, the new one is a fluval Roma 200l those measurements look correct. It's 12.5 watt according to the web site. 50 watt led?


Depends on your goals.. 50w in a new light that's dimmable is a beginning.
25W would be bare bottom w/ leds..
39.x inches (say 40) (100cm) is a difficult size to fit most standard lights.

Next comes cost considerations.
Some dulling on the ends will come w/ a lower cost.
22" depth is another sticking point if you want sufficient light at the bottom.

Fair price 32W.. would be better w/ 2
Amazon product






Raising it above "standard" would fix some things at the expense of others.


----------



## Muso1981 (1 Apr 2021)

Thanks mate, so as far as I understand it's all about lumens rather than watts right? Ideally Id like something programmable, the fluval plant 3.0 looks good but it's crazy expensive. To be honest I'm annoyed as when the fish shop sold me the tank they said it would be good enough for plants!


----------



## Kevin Eades (1 Apr 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> Thanks mate, so as far as I understand it's all about lumens rather than watts right? Ideally Id like something programmable, the fluval plant 3.0 looks good but it's crazy expensive. To be honest I'm annoyed as when the fish shop sold me the tank they said it would be good enough for plants!


It all depends what plants you are looking to grow. The standard light will be ok for very easy plants. I find the fluval lights are very narrow so not so bright in the corners of the tank. I use the nicrew planted 24/7 on my roma 90 on 100% for 8 hours. This is a co2 injected tank and grows well I just struggle with carpet as depth of tank. I may add a second unit as 2 together still cost less than say a twinstar


----------



## John q (1 Apr 2021)

The standard light will be ok for easy listed plants, but don't expect miracles, one of the  problems with the light in a roma tank is the spread of light due to its close proximity to the water ~30 mm. 
I ended up adding an extra aquasky 2 to the tank pictured below to get that spread.

Tank in this pic is a roma 240, but uses similar stock led. Low tech and about 2 months old at the time.


----------



## Muso1981 (1 Apr 2021)

@John q Thanks for posting that picture, beautiful tank you have there. I think I'm going to stick with the original light and go for beginner plants. If it all starts to go wrong I might upgrade the light.


----------



## oreo57 (1 Apr 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> THANKS! mate, so as far as I understand it's all about lumens rather than watts right? Ideally Id like something programmable, the fluval plant 3.0 looks good but it's crazy expensive. To be honest I'm annoyed as when the fish shop sold me the tank they said it would be good enough for plants!


Technically it's more about PAR or PUR but one needs to start somewhere or deal with all they are given.
Current guess would be 100 lumens per watt of leds for good leds.
1250 lumens.
Lumens are weighted in the green spectrum. That is its weakness.
Lux is lumens per area. Even better than lumens but is height dependent.
"PAR" (common useage it is really PPFD, not PAR) is photons per area per second of all photons in the 400 to 700nm range.
Lux to par conversions are possible (getting Lux is cheap by lux app or cheap lux meter) but one needs to remember that different spectrums have
different conversion factors.

1000 Lux of natural daylight is est at 23PPFD (PAR) where if you measure 1000 Lux under pure 450nm blue light that would convert to 115 "PAR"
For future reference.

Fluval aquasky splits the difference between the 2.
By the stock lighting pic does look better than one would assume but physics is physics.

Rule of thumb:








						Lighting The Aquarium, lights, par, lumens, RGB, LED, T5, Metal Halide, 6500k
					

Proper lightning in your planted aquarium is necessary to fast grow healthy aquatic plants. Lights, Lumens vs Wattage, LED, T5, Metal Halide,6500k, RGB.




					plantedaquarium-chicago.com
				





> Generally a regular *planted aquarium* will require around 30-50 *lumens* per liter of water(1 gallon-3.785 liters). How much light is enough for plants? That all depends upon which plants you have chosen for your *aquarium*. If you have chosen nothing but “Easy” plants, 10-20 *lumen* (0.25 to 0.5 watts) per liter is adequate.



World advances...sometimes... the above estimates are probably conservative since they assume 40 Lumens/watt.. about 1/2 of current LED efficacy.
Going bare minimum 10L/Liter  = 2000 Lumens or (current 100L/w) 20W


----------



## John q (1 Apr 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> It's 12.5 watt according to the web site. 50 watt led?


Have you actually looked on top of the led and seen the wattage rating? I know its advertised at 12.5 watts but check what is stated on the fixture.

The only reason I ask is the 240 supposedly comes with a 14.5w light, the one that came with mine is 24w, just wondering if at some point they've upped the wattage? although there is no literature online to support this.



I've two roma 240's and both tanks came with this light.


----------



## oreo57 (1 Apr 2021)

Power supply ratings don't count.  will only tell you the possible max diodes it can power.


----------



## John q (1 Apr 2021)

Thanks for clarifying that oreo.
Everyday is a school day as they say.
Was just trying to figure out why the light seems so bright yet only 14.5w.


----------



## oreo57 (1 Apr 2021)

John q said:


> Thanks for clarifying that oreo.
> Everyday is a school day as they say.
> Was just trying to figure out why the light seems so bright yet only 14.5w.


LED's are just that good.. 


> *incandescent* lamps have *efficiency* ratings around 10 lumens/watt.


Good LEDs are like 100 Lumens /watt

Things like a kill a watt meter will tell you what it's pulling from the wall.
Actually w/ these constant voltage arrays not all the wattage is diode wattage. There are resistor losses in each parallel string (long-ish story)
With correct design (voltage and diode voltage and number of diodes) loss is minimal. 
There are other losses  i.e ac/dc conversion but also minimal w/ good switching power supplies..


----------



## Muso1981 (28 Apr 2021)

Hi,

So I've had my new tank setup and plants/fish all moved over for a week now. 
Some plants arn't doing too well (the leaves are getting holes in them) and there is some algae forming on the glass.
Water levels are good and I have the light on for 8 hours a day. 
Do you guys think the plants arn't doing well due to lack of light?
I don't plan to use CO2 so have read I shouldn't have too much of a powerful light.
Also how does lighting work in terms of power and time? I.e. would a less powerful light being on longer be equivalent to a more powerful light being on a shorter time?


----------



## John q (28 Apr 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> Do you guys think the plants arn't doing well due to lack of light?


I doubt the issues are being caused by lack of light. The fact you have algae on the glass actually points at to much light.

Giving a list of fertilisers dosed and a full tank shot would help. Also what percentage are you running the light at?


----------



## Muso1981 (28 Apr 2021)

The lights running on the daylight setting, which says red 68, green 100, blue 100 and white 90%. I added the first dose of aquadip when I moved everything across on Saturday, it was the standard dose for the 200l tank.

The tank isn't in direct sunlight. So you think I have enough light then?


----------



## John q (28 Apr 2021)

I don't have a crystal ball muso but suspect your light is a tad high. I can't remember my exact settings on the tank pictured above but was set at something like red 70, blue 70, green 60 and white 50%. I do know at some point I upped the settings to around 80% and ended up with bba and lower leaf melt.

Just try turning the light down a bit, with a lower light setting you could at some point, but not yet, start to extend your light period if thats what you want.


----------



## oreo57 (28 Apr 2021)

John q said:


> Have you actually looked on top of the led and seen the wattage rating? I know its advertised at 12.5 watts but check what is stated on the fixture.
> 
> The only reason I ask is the 240 supposedly comes with a 14.5w light, the one that came with mine is 24w, just wondering if at some point they've upped the wattage? although there is no literature online to support this.
> 
> I've two roma 240's and both tanks came with this light.


I've managed to track down that light. Info can be found if using Hagen a13294 not Fluval.








						FCC ID 2ANPT-A13294 Aquarium Luminaire by Rolf C. Hagen Inc
					

FCC ID application submitted by Rolf C. Hagen Inc for Aquarium Luminaire for FCC ID 2ANPT-A13294. Approved Frequencies, User Manuals, Photos, and Wireless Reports.




					fccid.io
				



Lists it as 1950 Lumens..
24V at 0.96-ish Amps

46" model


----------



## John q (28 Apr 2021)

Thanks oreo, so that would equate to about 8 lumens per litre, well below the 10-20 level that's often quoted for low level plants.

Edit:

Having slept on it @oreo57  it begs the questions that lumens in and of themselves are meaningless in relation to plant growth, which isn't really ground breaking news.

Or these modern led's put out far more par values than the wattage would once of a day suggest there capable of.

The light compensation point of aquatic plants is far below what was previously assumed.

Or I've somehow got lucky and managed to defy the laws of physics with my lights.


----------



## sparkyweasel (28 Apr 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> I added the first dose of aquadip


Does the label tell you what it contains? Their website isn't very forthcoming.


----------



## oreo57 (29 Apr 2021)

John q said:


> Thanks oreo, so that would equate to about 8 lumens per litre, well below the 10-20 level that's often quoted for low level plants.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> ...


Watts can be a rough indicator of lumens based on most LEDs (and actually most other light sources i.e tubes metal halide)
They have an efficiency of about 70-100L/watt.
Old style 3 watt-ers were around 40-60 though.

Yes lumens are err "antiquated" in this day and age. Does help to at least compare led lights.
Mostly because the "delivery" is equal.
120 degree beam angle for 80% of the lights out there.
No worries of reflector differences and not much for shields except if "frosted".

Next measurement up would be LUX which is lumens/area.
Using simple math and some stats one can determine LUX







						Lumens to lux (lx) conversion calculator
					

Lumens (lm) to lux (lx) conversion calculator and how to calculate.




					www.rapidtables.com
				




Then LUX to PAR.





						Convert Lux to PPFD - Online Calculator |         Waveform Lighting
					

Online calculator to convert illuminance (lux) to PPFD (micromoles per second per meter squared).



					www.waveformlighting.com
				




But complicated and prone to errors though it can get close.
"PAR" or more correctly PPFD is the defacto standard.

So since LEDs are very directional and usually hung low on the tank you can "beat" physics by not wasting photons.
At one time standard thinking was 1/2W LED = 1W t5
Efficiency was similar, delivery was not.

LED's currently are in the 120-150L/watt 20-50% more efficient than tubes.
That's diode  efficiency not system but if using "state of the art" diodes and the delivery efficieny you can "beat" 
T5's ect. easily in less watts/PAR

Last thing is lumens are weighed around the green spectrum so blue "lumens" are recorded as less than green
lumens though they (assumption) both generate the same amout of photons (PAR).


----------



## John q (29 Apr 2021)

Thanks again for a very thorough explanation oreo, still trying to get my head round those calculators but I'm fairly persistent so will get there eventually.

I think I mentioned at some point in the thread that I added an aquasky 2 to my set up, that light is 33w and rated at 2260 lm, yet the 14.5w standard aquasky delivers 1950 lm. Surely they wouldn't have used less efficient led's in the newer light... or would they?


oreo57 said:


> So since LEDs are very directional and usually hung low on the tank you can "beat" physics by not wasting photons.



I think that is possibly the answer here, the roma range positions its light about 30mm above the water line and they're hooded so no valuable light escapes, maybe this explains why a seemingly weak light can work in its intended surroundings.


----------



## Muso1981 (30 Apr 2021)

Thanks for the replies, I must admit most of what you're saying is over my head though. 

The Aquadip has ran out and I threw the bottle away so have no idea what it contains. I have bought become Tropica Premium Nutrition.

I know it's hard to recommend what to do but on one hand I've got a bit of algae which I understand means too much light?? Funny thing is how I had no problem with the old t5s in the juwel tank but now the plants are in the new tank they're not doing so well.

Edit: just re-read the thread again and it sounds like my current light isn't strong enough. Thanks for all the info, looks like I will be getting the fluval plant 3.0 light then.


----------



## Muso1981 (30 Apr 2021)

I've just done some basic calculations using lumens.

The 120 Litre tank with the T5 tubes equated to 29 lumens per litre 

The new 200 litre tank with stock LED equates to 9.75 lumens per litre.

So it sounds pretty darn obvious now that the stock LED isn't going to work for plants. I feel a bit miffed as the guy in the fish shop told me that the LED would be a good upgrade for growing plants.

Thanks everyone for your help with this situation, now I just need to get a new light to save my plants.


----------



## Muso1981 (30 Apr 2021)

Can anyone confirm if the fluval plant 3.0 is the light to get? It's 46 watts so not massively powerful and pretty expensive at around £200. But it will fit the tank perfectly.


----------



## John q (30 Apr 2021)

I can confirm that you'll get seriously good algae growth and melting plants with an extra 46w in your low tech tank.

On a serious note and as I've said previously I think the issues you're having aren't related to lack of light. If however you decide to get another light then the plant 3 will fit the tank well and running it alongside the basic aquasky will give you a far better spread of light.

Just make sure you run the light at a very low percentage and when you do increase the intensity, do it slowly.


----------



## Muso1981 (30 Apr 2021)

Hi @John q I'm totally confused now, the calculated lumens per litre I mentioned above. The previous tank was way higher that what I have now. 

My previous tank had horrible blue gravel as I didn't know better. The new tank has Tropica Soil powder which is for plants. 

I don't see the point in buying a more powerful light only to run it at low power?
Should I just get another of the same light?

What do you suggest, maybe leave it a bit as the plants have been in a week and also I have the tropica fertilizer?

Cheers


----------



## John q (30 Apr 2021)

Look I'm no expert, let's make that clear.

If it was my tank I'd lower the light intensity a little bit, make sure the flow in the tank is good, and get some additional potassium to add in with your tropica premium. Adding the extra potassium, and ensuring good  flow will rule out that being the reason for the holes in your leaves.

Give it a couple of weeks and see if there's any improvement, if not then go out and get a new light. I'd probably get the aquasky 2 which is cheaper and combined with the standard light should be ample light for low tech, but again that's only my opinion.

Edit: I should add the tropica premium contains no nitrogen or phosphate, so unless you've got a decent fish load you might want to get a fertiliser that has that.


----------



## Muso1981 (30 Apr 2021)

Cheers John, valuable advice and much appreciated. I will go with that and give it a couple of weeks.

Thanks


----------



## sparkyweasel (30 Apr 2021)

I agree with John, you need a complete fertiliser. I think the Aquadip is missing Nitrogen and Phosphorus too, but the makers don't seem to want to tell us. 
Assuming the algae you mentioned is green, I think it's unlikely you have too little light. I would certainly try other options before buying an expensive light that could make things worse. 
As Oreo says, lumens are not straightforward, but we struggle on using them, because they are often the only measurement available.


----------



## ceg4048 (1 May 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> I've just done some basic calculations using lumens.
> 
> The 120 Litre tank with the T5 tubes equated to 29 lumens per litre
> 
> ...


These numbers are completely irrelevant. Lumens are a measurement of how human beings perceive the world because the human visual cortex is relatively insensitive to blue and red. This measurement has absolutely nothing to do with  how plants perceive the world because plants and algae specialize in their ability to perceive to blue and red as well as all the other wavelengths in the visible spectrum. So not only is Lumens a poor judge of the power of a light bulb, but "Lumens per Liter" is an even worse metric for determining the power of a lamp because Liter is a volumetric measurement and the behavior of light is a function of a linear distance, i.e., the light falloff follows the inverse square rule, and a volume tells you nothing of the distance from the bulb to the leaf.

Even Oreo's Lux to PAR conversion does not give exact results because the conversion depends on the distribution of wavelength content of the bulb.

This is why LED lamps are more powerful than most people ever imagine and of course this is why we get into more trouble than we bargained for. If you think getting a new light will save your plants you will be sorely disappointed.

Plants grow by their use of CO2, NOT only by their use of light. Focus more on CO2, if this is a CO2 tank and if it isn't a CO2 tank then focus more on severely reducing the light intensity until your plants can adapt to their environment.

Cheers,


----------



## Muso1981 (2 May 2021)

Thanks @ceg4048  this is all very interesting stuff and I feel like I now need a degree in science to grow plants.

I really don't want to be getting into injecting CO2 as it's too much of a faff. It feels now like everyone is saying my light is powerful enough and it's some other kind of issue. I've got a fairly heavy stock of fish in there and have the new tropica fertilizer so will see how it works for a week.

The reason I've been going down the lighting rabbit hold as old tank had no problems, new tank does. The main difference is the light so did that maths based on the tropica recommendation (they rate their plants difficulty as lumens per litre). And well here I am.


----------



## sparkyweasel (2 May 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> (they rate their plants difficulty as lumens per litre).


I wish they wouldn't.
We know lumens are not very useful.
We know the the volume of the tank doesn't determine how much light it needs. Different shapes of tank with the same volume will not need the same lighting.
The amount of light does not relate to how difficult to grow a plant is. If plant A needs more light than plant B, it isn't harder to grow, it's easy enough to buy a more powerful light if it's actually necessary.


----------



## Muso1981 (3 May 2021)

Hi @sparkyweasel I was just wondering who you are referring to as "we"? 

Can anyone point me to an up to date article which explains all of this please? I'd love to understand this more.


----------



## John q (3 May 2021)

I think Clive's explanation was a fairly straightforward one, well at least in my eyes.

I found this blog @Muso1981  that maybe explains it in more layman's terms.

"LED lights require new thinking about the way we measure light spectrum for use by plants. The typical rating most growers are familiar with is the “lumen”. The definition of the lumen is the total light produced within the range of the human visual response. It tells us nothing about the distribution of that light energy over the spectrum, and most importantly, it doesn’t tell us how much is useful for plants.

The problem with lumens is especially pronounced when measuring light at the far ends of the human visual response curve. Consider three lamps—red, green and blue—each emitting the same number of watts of optical energy. The red and blue lamps would have much lower lumen ratings compared to the green lamp, simply because the human visual response is very low at red and blue, and the highest at green.

That’s why a high lumen rating does not necessarily make a lamp better suited to growing plants.
Similarly, light meters that measure in “lux” tell us very little about a lamp’s plant-growing power. The light sensors in lux meters have their own spectral response curves which may over- or under-measure light at various colors. This is why lux meters usually have different settings for “sunlight,” “fluorescent” and “incandescent” lamps. Again, because lux meters are meant for measuring the amount of light usable by humans, they don’t tell us anything about how plants will respond."









						Demystifying Lumens, Lux and PAR (2019) • LumiGrow Learning Center
					

LED lights require new thinking about the way we measure light spectrum for use by plants. Expand your understanding with this fundamental information.




					www.lumigrow.com


----------



## Muso1981 (3 May 2021)

Thanks @John q that's a really good link which explains a lot. It still doesn't help determine how much LED light you need though and pretty much every site I look at mentions watt per litre or lumens per litre. I'm guessing this is because PAR is difficult to accurately measure. So it seems a lot of this light work is down to trial and error due to the variables, but it's possible to work with some basic logic and to start with less rather than too much.

Cheers


----------



## John q (3 May 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> It still doesn't help determine how much LED light you need


No it doesn't.

What specific par readings might work for my tank, might not necessarily work for yours.
In that respect i think for the average Joe like you or me, especially in low tech tanks, Par readings, lumens, lux or wattage are probably irrelevant!

Its all about trial and error, and to be fair that pretty much sums up planted tanks in general, not just lights.


----------



## oreo57 (3 May 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> Thanks @John q that's a really good link which explains a lot. It still doesn't help determine how much LED light you need though and pretty much every site I look at mentions watt per litre or lumens per litre. I'm guessing this is because PAR is difficult to accurately measure. So it seems a lot of this light work is down to trial and error due to the variables, but it's possible to work with some basic logic and to start with less rather than too much.
> 
> Cheers


Par isn't difficult to measure just err expensive
For a manuf to measure lumens isn't cheap either.

As to leds, since easily dimmed for the most part I'd lean to getting more light than less. 

As to the article...few planted tank-ers need to maximize yield at the likely expense of visual enjoyment.

My usual rant about definitions and the poor use if the "word" PAR .



> About PAR, PPF, And PPFD
> UNDERSTANDING THE NUMBERS
> If you have been researching LED horticulture lighting systems for your plant growth facility, you have likely been bombarded with a variety of metrics that lighting manufacturers use to market their products. Some terms and acronyms you are likely to see include: watts, lumens, LUX, foot candles, PAR, PPF, PPFD, and photon efficiency. While all of these terms do relate to lighting, only a select few really tell you the important metrics of a horticulture lighting system. The purpose of this article is to define these terms and acronyms, correct some common misunderstandings, and help growers understand which metrics are applicable to horticulture lighting systems, and which ones are not.
> 
> ...











						About PAR, PPF, And PPFD
					

If you're shopping for horticulture grow lights, you may have seen the terms watts, lumens, LUX, foot candles, PAR, PPF, PPFD, and photon efficiency.




					fluence.science
				




PPFD which is what most are referring to as "PAR" is photosynthetically usable photons (by ONE definition ALL photons between 400-700nm) per second in a defined AREA, micromoles per *square meter per second* (μmol/m2/s).

Btw many LUX meters use a green filter to emulate the lumen curve. Removing that filter will get one a "better" meter, depending on the photodiode used.
Unfortunately many photodiodes are sort of natural lumen sensors. See S1787-04


----------



## sparkyweasel (3 May 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> Hi @sparkyweasel I was just wondering who you are referring to as "we"?


I think that includes you now. 
John and Oreo's links are very useful if you want to get into the technicalities.
If you do decide to invest in new lights, I think the most useful improvement over incandescent and fluorescent light is that so many LED lights are dimmable, so trial and error is easier and cheaper to do.
I think if you give your plants a couple of weeks with your new fertiliser regime and existing lights you will see an improvement.


----------



## oreo57 (4 May 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> Hi,
> 
> So I've had my new tank setup and plants/fish all moved over for a week now.
> Some plants arn't doing too well (the leaves are getting holes in them) and there is some algae forming on the glass.
> ...


Maybe time to get back to your initial issue..
First  I want to add that I'm terrible at following my own advice but do rely on others and the err scientific method so here goes.
1) Dealing with a new tank and initial growth (generally not depending on no matter how many small plants you start with) it's easy to over light it esp. w/out CO2 and well established plants.
Doesn't mean you have too much light only too much initially.
2) Now on to the Fluval. Initially in the upper portions of the wide tank you have dull zones. Combination of a narrow light, 120 degree beam angle, and closeness to the surface of the water line.
Best idea for your tank and demand would be to raise the light (risers can be bought or made or one could suspend it w/ the extra hanging kit).
The whole point and really w/ any light IF one wants max coverage top/bottom, front back, and some side/side (better to get that w/ a light that fits exactly but not as necessary w/ leds than say t5's)
You should have plenty of "PAR" for now (dimmed) and in the future when the tank fills out more.
As the width decreases so does PAR btw but not extreme, AND this is just the center.
If this is the PAR of 59W led imagine the PAR of lesser wattage types.
Keep in mind that the Fluval has plenty of light that reports low in a lumen measurement but isn't a lot different from a "normal"
led fixture inc RGBW , just whites, and even RGB  though suspect that is a bit lower as to recording lumens.
Anyways the point is w/ quality diodes the l/w or PAR/watt will all correlate well between like fixtures.


*71PAR @ 18" 59 Watts, 4250 Lumens    1.2Par/watt .017Par/lumen @ 18" 48" light*






Finnex 24/7CC  48" 46W, 18" 60 PAR,_* 1.3PAR/watt *_*??PAR/Lumen*_* It would surprise me if it wasn't in the range of 4000 lumens @18" 48" light*_
Beamswork 48" 18" 48 PAR 5200 lumens 60W     _*0.8Par/watt*_*     .009PAR/lumen  @ 18" 48" light

Difference of 50,60,70 PAR per fixture is somewhat irrelevant.
Difference in the Fluval lumens from the other 2 is probably mostly due to "pink" and warm white (good deal of red/blue) diodes.
Beamswork watts was est using 120 x .5W emitters. Probably inaccurate on the high side.*

Of course this all assumes relative watt efficiency of like diodes and this is a rough estimate.
Point is if you can tolerate a little slop in this watts, lumens, reported par are fairly good indicators of strength.
This does not apply to COB based, larger emitters (1-3W) smaller emitters (well haven't really crunched them ie .1-.2W) or diodes driven on constant current drivers.
Nor does it include more than the "hot spot" so spread and optics (120 vs 90 ect) are not included either. Like I said like fixtures, mid power average diodes , 120 degree lenses, constant voltage, optimized design (low resistor losses)
Feel free to debate this, it's really only a hypothesis not an absolute.

*Anyone care to add 18" par measurements 48" light vs wattage of their fixtures "we" could confirm or refute this. *
Dead center max readings.
I'm not including lumens only because the only easy measuring device is the
Seneye and I believe it is flawed.
The PAR readings are acceptable, the lumens is way off AFAICT. 

Nothing beats real life measurements though.

Again I guess I've drifted off point but again having more power (dimmable) will allow you to adj a bit as your tank grows in.
I'm not encouraging you to spend money as of now.
Nor deviating from the need for "balance" in Ferts/CO2/light.

One more..


> *2xChihiros Serie A 120cm . 65W . 8000ºK
> now with water . 120x50x50 tank . 6,5cm fixture high + 2cm water level = 8,5 cm LED to water*
> cm PAR PAR (with apogee converter factors**)
> 10 265 213
> ...


Say 48 is close to 45 (18")
130W 122 PAR
*.94PAR/watt

so we now have 1.2, 1.3, 0.94, 0.8 PAR/watt
Easily round it to 1PAR/Watt for all of them for a "ballpark" estimate

AT 40 w that would be 48, 52, 37.6, 32
Sample of a classification system.
Except for the 32 most would end up in what the below considers "medium light" 37.6 ..close enough




Plenty of lights here to play w/ numbers.
Assume the difference between 40-50cm and wattage.


*



*Twinstars are a bit of an outlier
49 @ 33W 1.48PAR/watt 600ES*
ZetlightQmaven 96W 1.14PAR/watt
Zetlight Lancia (out of water) 1.18PAR/watt








						Product Review - ADA | WASMAS | ZETLIGHT | TWINSTAR | CHIHIROS  | LED PAR DATA  [The power of light]
					

This is my older son tank with Chihiros on top:    For reference, i took this image side by side with my big tank (7 x 6000ºK + 3 x 4000ºK LED) As you can easely see it's much more cold!  (Sorry about phone pictures), Cheers  Really like your son's tank, does he have a journal for the scape?




					www.ukaps.org
				




Keep in mind that the measurements should be from the light face to the sensor top of 45cm and preferably 120cm lights or a bit shorter.
Since you are measuring the diode overlap as well as the diodes directly above the sensor.

Seems watts is a slightly better estimate than lumens of possible PAR. 
Of course it all changes if diode efficiency increases any more.
Anyways enough (too much) for now.

LAST THING ..AS TO NUMBERS.
Finnex vs Fluval
Watt ratio .78
Par ratio .84
Under 10% difference.








						Fluval Plant 3.0 vs. Finnex Planted+ 24/7 CC
					

Fluval Plant 3.0 vs. Finnex Planted+ 24/7: what light should you spend your money on?    Well, you’re here because you want to grow plants in your fish tank, because otherwise you’d probably be looking at cheaper




					coolfish.network


----------



## Muso1981 (4 May 2021)

Thanks @oreo57 that's quite an analysis there but I couldn't see anything specifically about my 12.5 watt led light. I haven't bought the plant light yet and don't think I will now. If I do get a new light I think it would make sense to get another one the same as what I've got so it would be doubling the power, spread the light out, a lot cheaper than that plant light.


----------



## oreo57 (4 May 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> Thanks @oreo57 that's quite an analysis there but I couldn't see anything specifically about my 12.5 watt led light. I haven't bought the plant light yet and don't think I will now. If I do get a new light I think it would make sense to get another one the same as what I've got so it would be doubling the power, spread the light out, a lot cheaper than that plant light.


12.5 par at 18" assuming around a 80-100cm led light.

Lets look at a weaker light. Beamswork EA.
30" ea is 11-15 par at 18"..

The BeamsWork EA FSPEC LED 60cm - 24" features 27x 0.50W
13 .5w
36"
Includes 42 LEDs
2000 Lumen
Energy efficient 0.50 watt LEDs
21w

30" would be between the 2 in est wattage
About 17w @ 1par/watt @18".


----------



## John q (4 May 2021)

oreo57 said:


> Anyone care to add 18" par measurements 48" light vs wattage of their fixtures "we" could confirm or refute this.


The 1.2~1.3 par to watt ratio isn't that far out with the fluval aquasky 2 light. 1150mm length, 33w.
Here's fluvals claimed readings.


----------



## oreo57 (4 May 2021)

John q said:


> The 1.2~1.3 par to watt ratio isn't that far out with the fluval aquasky 2 light. 1150mm length, 33w.
> Here's fluvals claimed readings.
> View attachment 168085


Thanks.

33 at 1PAR/watt or 44 as listed... Difference is generally unimportant.
Found this support:











						[PAR comparison] Best LED lights for planted tanks from small to large
					

Best planted aquarium LED lights with a PAR comparison table and guides for choosing high output lights that grow aquatic plants




					portlandaquarium.net
				




The 2:1 Watts vs par of t5's vs led is pretty well documented though I "lean" more to 1.5:1. Safety factor.
3:1 is err extreme.
THIS is so one doesn't make MAJOR mistakes not a fine tuning.
Helps those that want to replace t5's w/ LEDs.


----------



## ceg4048 (6 May 2021)

Well, there are no such things as high light plants. Also that has always been a misleading metric and that's why we spend most of our time sorting out algae problems.
A more achievable rule of thumb is as follows:
Do not exceed 30-40 umoles as measured at the substrate - assuming flow/distribution and CO2 levels are adequate.
This will keep most out of trouble from a light intensity aspect.
This is the same regardless of the type of light fixture.

Cheers,


----------



## Muso1981 (6 May 2021)

oreo57 said:


> 12.5 par at 18" assuming around a 80-100cm led light.



Thanks Oreo, based on this I don't have enough light. I actually contacted Fluval today about the existing light and they said I would need at least 2 of the stock lights to provide the power I was getting out of the juwel T5s which were fine in the old tank.

So I'm thinking I will get the plant 3.0 light which I can dim if it's too much and sell the existing one. It should be plenty for my needs.

Thanks to everyone for contributing to this thread, I've learned so much. 😃👍


----------



## John q (6 May 2021)

Muso1981 said:


> Thanks to everyone for contributing to this thread, I've learned do much. 😃👍


Fair enough, be sure to update us with the results, good or bad.


----------



## Muso1981 (7 May 2021)

John q said:


> Fair enough, be sure to update us with the results, good or bad.


Sure thing John, thanks for all your help. I will no doubt be soon asking for which settings but at least I now have a rough understanding of PAR.


----------



## Muso1981 (4 Jun 2021)

Hi everyone, I just wanted to update this thread with how it's all been going. So I replaced the standard light with the Plant 2.0 and used one of the default profiles for "planted" and have been running it for 8 hours a day with an hour each side within those 8 hours of sunrise/sunset. I've had really good success, plants are growing well now, I've added a few more. Algae is much less than before and I think it will reduce further as the plants grow which is what I'm noticing. 

I'm so glad I upgraded the light.


----------



## John q (4 Jun 2021)

Brilliant, glad its worked out for you.


----------

