between 250-380 dispensary charges, they mark up quite a bit normally.
What does anyone think about that 600W led in my previous post, only $700. I noticed they use mostly 620nm LED, although its it 5 spectrum. Anyone guess any reason for that ?
LED Grow Light Review
- Thread starter 123ABC
- Start date
between 250-380 dispensary charges, they mark up quite a bit normally.
What does anyone think about that 600W led in my previous post, only $700. I noticed they use mostly 620nm LED, although its it 5 spectrum. Anyone guess any reason for that ?
Hello everyone. I started a thread on the EarthFireGardens 288 watt light if you want to stop by and check it out.
EarthFireGardens 288 Watt LED Light - Munki's Experience
It has been really neat seeing the LED technology mature. Very exciting time to be growing! BTW,
EarthFireGardens 288 Watt LED Light - Munki's Experience
It has been really neat seeing the LED technology mature. Very exciting time to be growing! BTW,
Hello everyone. I started a thread on the EarthFireGardens 288 watt light if you want to stop by and check it out.
EarthFireGardens 288 Watt LED Light - Munki's Experience
It has been really neat seeing the LED technology mature. Very exciting time to be growing! BTW,
$1500 for 288W? expensive
The discussion I read compared gram/watt results so it was normalized for light size. In those grows irish did not get a decent g/w result from the 126 HGL but he did with the 600 watt. To be fair other have shown .7 to 1 gram/watt results with the 126 watt HGL light
BritishBulDog
New Member
thanks for your coments....the laws in the UK are similar but although the eye in the sky needs 'due cause' in order to be up there casing people's homes with thermal imaging devices, once there up there any 'incidental' homes with hot spots found can be searched after warrants are issued
(check this youtube video YouTube - Cops use helicopter and heat to detect marijuana grow operations in UK. )
I think i'm gonna go with a UFO LED 120w set up supplemented with a low wattage CFL (blue for veg and red for flower). I am a fairly low user and huge yeilds arent an issue.....I was thinking about picking up one of the low priced chinese LED units although am slighlty worried about the bad press they seem to be recieving although their specs seem fairly similar to much more expensive american / european units......I have a suspicion its just hype. I am not sure how important a 630nm red vs a 660nm is?
(check this youtube video YouTube - Cops use helicopter and heat to detect marijuana grow operations in UK. )
I think i'm gonna go with a UFO LED 120w set up supplemented with a low wattage CFL (blue for veg and red for flower). I am a fairly low user and huge yeilds arent an issue.....I was thinking about picking up one of the low priced chinese LED units although am slighlty worried about the bad press they seem to be recieving although their specs seem fairly similar to much more expensive american / european units......I have a suspicion its just hype. I am not sure how important a 630nm red vs a 660nm is?
Man that's straight up trolling.
Seems like the government has tons of extra money to just fly around all day and see if they can find someone growing a harmless plant. This isn't legal in the US, though it used to be
Must be budget surpluses galore
Seems like the government has tons of extra money to just fly around all day and see if they can find someone growing a harmless plant. This isn't legal in the US, though it used to be
Must be budget surpluses galore
People in the UK are used to having their privacy violated. For the longest time, you had to pay for watching broadcast TV in Britain. The authorities drove up and down streets with sensors that looked for unauthorized TV watching.
https://www.turnoffyourtv.com/international/bbc.html
https://www.turnoffyourtv.com/international/bbc.html
InronStone
New Member
I'll have to say that I have not grown in over 30 years. I tried again using LED lights and found that they grew quite well, but tended to be shorter SOG style plants. Just in case any of you were wondering what a plant grown under LED looks like. Here's a pic of a plant that was only a foot tall at the time I took this pic. It was grown entirely under LED's and I managed to get a couple of oz's off this one plant when it was finally harvested. No photoshop involved.
I think a lot of the reviews given by people are more opinions backed up with very little facts. I'm still looking into the facts, but this plant along with 3 others was grown under a 28w set up of LED's with a 6:1 red/blue ratio. Total yield was a little over a half pound.
IronStone
Not a smoker, but grows it for his wife.
I think a lot of the reviews given by people are more opinions backed up with very little facts. I'm still looking into the facts, but this plant along with 3 others was grown under a 28w set up of LED's with a 6:1 red/blue ratio. Total yield was a little over a half pound.
IronStone
Not a smoker, but grows it for his wife.
lbezphil2005
New Member
actually not exactly true. The LED wavelength is exactly that of what the plants need. So, since HID lights waste a huge amount of energy on wavelength, it should be pretty easy to say the LED's can outperform efficiency wise HID.
Heat factor is a bit of a misinformed state. From my knowledge, a 600W led light will burn the exact same heat as a 600HID, or a 600W toaster, or a 600W
computer.
I've seen 2 main brands people give credit to, ------------, and GrowLedHydro. GLH recently gave away a 760W LED panel to Irishboy, and he did a fairly amazing grow. However, I believe people in the grow were comparing this 760W LED grow, with his previous grow using 150W LED model from HGL, and thus declaring that the better company is GLH based on those results? Seems weird to me.
Anyways, I noticed both companies have their 300W LED light products on this websites for $1000-$1200 dollars. Ouch! Thats a bit high, I noticed suppliers for ~ $750 for 600W models
edit: after fact, found that this company on ebay is actually USA based and does repairs and shipping in USA
thats nearly double the wattage for much lower price. So, it seems this light is made in China, but aren't the LED's the same and all come from China anyways? So, possibly the construction is cheaper and more likely to break or go bad compared to American made?
Anyways, I noticed some companies use 3W led's, 2W led's or 1W led's, I heard some "bro-knowledge" that 3 x 1W LED will be stronger that 1 x 3W LED. Are 1 W led's the most efficient and powerful ? Can anyone back this up?
Anyways, I don't own an LED light, but was just researching as they could possibly have some benefits for me. Thanks for reading an opinions.
Okay. A 3 watt light made up of 3 1 watt lights vs. 1 3 watt light all depends on how many watts are being fed the light. Just because it says 1, 2, or 3 doesn't mean it is USING that much. Most led manufacturers use just a fraction of the viable wattage to keep heat down. I have a BD700 light that uses 1 bulb 3 watt lights powered at a little over 2 watts a piece. The heat AT THE FIXTURE, and i mean right on the light, is 101 degrees farenheight. Just 2 to 3 inches away and it fades to under 98. So it depends, greatly, on how much ACTUAL wattage is used, not just the size of the lights. Also gets 8000 lumens at 40 feet away. I would like a 600watt hps grower to go and take a reading from 40 feet away and 10 feet and let us know how many lumens they get. Just to know. I love when they say 85000 lumens! If you could put the bulb resting on the plant it would be. Thats the other difference they (hps/mh fanatics) all fail to take into account - distances the light is away from the plant.
When referring to watts, what is being referred is power dissipation. It does not refer to how that energy or what kind of energy is dissipated. Theoretically, the electrical energy could be completely converted to electromagnetic visible light energy and there would be no heat at all. Now, that does not happen, but any heat you get from the conversion of the electricity to light can be considered waste of inefficiency (at least with LED). In the case of HIDs such as HPS, heat is necessary since the solid sodium metal needs to be vaporized in the chamber before its atoms can be put into their excited state. The electrons that fall back into their ground state then emit the light that you see and use. So, heat is needed to operate the technology. LED would not necessarily need heat to operate, but does give some off from the materials employed in the circuitry.
So, a 600 watt toaster, HID, or LED unit will not give off the same amount of heat as they all operate on different principles. They merely dissipate 600 watts of electrical energy from the source circuit.
So, a 600 watt toaster, HID, or LED unit will not give off the same amount of heat as they all operate on different principles. They merely dissipate 600 watts of electrical energy from the source circuit.
[EDIT: Hey Munki, sorry for puking in your fine journal, lol. I started off typing a paragraph and ended up typing a novel. Blame it on the insomnia (said after witnessing yet another sunrise from the wrong way around, lol).]
There aren't as many LED fanatics as there are HID ones - but the few make up for their lack of numbers with their... dedication.
Irrelevant. Unless you park your grow lights 40' up (or even 10' up)? My neighbors would get highly annoyed if I tried it. But the city would certainly save on street lights.
Naw, you're misunderstanding a basic point: Those ratings are not at the bulb, they are taken at a nominal distance. A moderate-quality 400-watt HPS bulb, for example, that outputs "50K lumen" will, when placed 4" away from the top of a plant, will be striking that top with 143,239 lumen. Which is why growers occasionally see their tops bleach even though their fixture is adequately air-cooled when they come back from a weekend trip - the tops weren't burned, they were light-poisoned.
Never say "all" when referring to a group of people unless you personally know each and every one of them (and usually, not even then)
.
<SHRUGS> There probably are a number of people out there - who don't have Internet access - that haven't learned about the inverse square law. And there are undoubtedly a few who DO have 'net access that are in the same boat for different reasons (basic reading skills simply aren't as universal as I once thought).
But there's a bit more to that law that most of us don't discuss enough and that half of us probably don't spend much time thinking about: The inverse square law is in regards to an unreflected light. Stick your eyeball on both a bare bulb and one in a reflector and - were you not blinded - you'd notice that both situations are equally bright. But step back a distance and you'd see (lol) that the bulb in even a poorly-designed reflector will appear brighter. It appears brighter because more light reaches you. The reflector is a variable to that equation that cannot be easily factored in because there are many different reflector designs and they all have differing characteristics. The vast majority of reflector manufacturers do not test - or at least publish - specifications on how much light actually reaches a given set of distances. Possibly because there are so many different bulb & ballast combinations and they have yet to agree on an "industry standard benchmark ballast/bulb combination." More likely, it's because they don't have to, lol - we buy them anyway. I admit that I have long been curious, but have never managed to purchase the winning lottery ticket that I'd need to get in order to start buying reflectors by the truckload. Not to mention the cost of a proper measuring device. Most cheap light meters will tell you lumen, candlepower, lux, or some combination - and all of those measurements are subjective, heavily-weighted towards the wavelengths that the human eye perceives as being brightest. PAR would be better. Best would be a meter that measured radiant flux (total power of EMR from IR through visible light to UV). I did go window shopping once and found a nice one that had a (corded) remote probe, gave measurements in the traditional human-eye subjective units, two different versions of PAR (I cannot remember the difference), and the actual gross radiant flux - and it gave it for different wavelengths which you could set the size of the "frequency steps" to any of about 20 settings. I think it was on sale for $6500, lol.
Something else that you didn't take into account is that with a halfway-decent reflector, one can attain a useful balance between penetration and footprint size. The average LED seems to be lacking somewhat in both categories.
I'm willing to concede that some LEDs are better than average (just as some HID setups are better than average). Word is that they produce less heat, although obviously they produce some - not just obviously because the 100%-efficient LED panel made with room-temperature superconducting materials hasn't been invented yet, but also because they build them with fans on their relatively small heatsinks to keep the individual LEDs from cooking off within minutes of powering them up. (I've prowled around an LED homebuilt site and have seen setups built with passive heatsinks. It's definately doable - but there's a large amount of surface area involved.)
I'm not ragging on LEDs. They seem to have improved in the past few years and (I hope!) will continue to do so. If/when they start moving the numbers that would allow them to drop the prices by a factor of 2.5x or so (and if/when they then actually do drop them), if/when they figure out how to provide decent penetration over a decent footprint, and if/when they nail down the perfect mix of lens "angles" and size/power of the different wavelengths so that however much light they produce and however much penetrative ability they have, they are even across the board instead of having one portion of the spectrum peter out before another... Well, at that point I'll sit down and rethink how much I spend on cooling in the summer - and heating in the winter, for that matter - and how much I'd expect to yield per watt in order to make it a really viable option for ME. (Last time I thought about it, I decided that I'd want to see around 2.33 grams per watt, repeatable.) That'll be different for everyone, I'm sure and will depend on many variables.
One thing I don't get: Lumen is still the most-used and most-quoted measurement with grow lights in general (although, as mentioned, a severely flawed one), so I can understand when this or that LED marketer mentions the term. But I always end up scratching my head when brand X advertises an LED of similar wattage as brand y and states that it produces more lumen. That's kind of saying that out of the finite amount of illumination produced by the panel, more of it is in wavelengths that appear brighter to our eyes - therefore (more often than not) less of it is in wavelengths that are important to the growth/flowering of plants.
lbezphil2005 said:
There aren't as many LED fanatics as there are HID ones - but the few make up for their lack of numbers with their... dedication
.Irrelevant. Unless you park your grow lights 40' up (or even 10' up)? My neighbors would get highly annoyed if I tried it. But the city would certainly save on street lights.
Naw, you're misunderstanding a basic point: Those ratings are not at the bulb, they are taken at a nominal distance. A moderate-quality 400-watt HPS bulb, for example, that outputs "50K lumen" will, when placed 4" away from the top of a plant, will be striking that top with 143,239 lumen. Which is why growers occasionally see their tops bleach even though their fixture is adequately air-cooled when they come back from a weekend trip - the tops weren't burned, they were light-poisoned.
Never say "all" when referring to a group of people unless you personally know each and every one of them (and usually, not even then)
.<SHRUGS> There probably are a number of people out there - who don't have Internet access - that haven't learned about the inverse square law. And there are undoubtedly a few who DO have 'net access that are in the same boat for different reasons (basic reading skills simply aren't as universal as I once thought).
But there's a bit more to that law that most of us don't discuss enough and that half of us probably don't spend much time thinking about: The inverse square law is in regards to an unreflected light. Stick your eyeball on both a bare bulb and one in a reflector and - were you not blinded - you'd notice that both situations are equally bright. But step back a distance and you'd see (lol) that the bulb in even a poorly-designed reflector will appear brighter. It appears brighter because more light reaches you. The reflector is a variable to that equation that cannot be easily factored in because there are many different reflector designs and they all have differing characteristics. The vast majority of reflector manufacturers do not test - or at least publish - specifications on how much light actually reaches a given set of distances. Possibly because there are so many different bulb & ballast combinations and they have yet to agree on an "industry standard benchmark ballast/bulb combination." More likely, it's because they don't have to, lol - we buy them anyway. I admit that I have long been curious, but have never managed to purchase the winning lottery ticket that I'd need to get in order to start buying reflectors by the truckload. Not to mention the cost of a proper measuring device. Most cheap light meters will tell you lumen, candlepower, lux, or some combination - and all of those measurements are subjective, heavily-weighted towards the wavelengths that the human eye perceives as being brightest. PAR would be better. Best would be a meter that measured radiant flux (total power of EMR from IR through visible light to UV). I did go window shopping once and found a nice one that had a (corded) remote probe, gave measurements in the traditional human-eye subjective units, two different versions of PAR (I cannot remember the difference), and the actual gross radiant flux - and it gave it for different wavelengths which you could set the size of the "frequency steps" to any of about 20 settings. I think it was on sale for $6500, lol.
Something else that you didn't take into account is that with a halfway-decent reflector, one can attain a useful balance between penetration and footprint size. The average LED seems to be lacking somewhat in both categories.
I'm willing to concede that some LEDs are better than average (just as some HID setups are better than average). Word is that they produce less heat, although obviously they produce some - not just obviously because the 100%-efficient LED panel made with room-temperature superconducting materials hasn't been invented yet, but also because they build them with fans on their relatively small heatsinks to keep the individual LEDs from cooking off within minutes of powering them up. (I've prowled around an LED homebuilt site and have seen setups built with passive heatsinks. It's definately doable - but there's a large amount of surface area involved.)
I'm not ragging on LEDs. They seem to have improved in the past few years and (I hope!) will continue to do so. If/when they start moving the numbers that would allow them to drop the prices by a factor of 2.5x or so (and if/when they then actually do drop them), if/when they figure out how to provide decent penetration over a decent footprint, and if/when they nail down the perfect mix of lens "angles" and size/power of the different wavelengths so that however much light they produce and however much penetrative ability they have, they are even across the board instead of having one portion of the spectrum peter out before another... Well, at that point I'll sit down and rethink how much I spend on cooling in the summer - and heating in the winter, for that matter - and how much I'd expect to yield per watt in order to make it a really viable option for ME. (Last time I thought about it, I decided that I'd want to see around 2.33 grams per watt, repeatable.) That'll be different for everyone, I'm sure and will depend on many variables.
One thing I don't get: Lumen is still the most-used and most-quoted measurement with grow lights in general (although, as mentioned, a severely flawed one), so I can understand when this or that LED marketer mentions the term. But I always end up scratching my head when brand X advertises an LED of similar wattage as brand y and states that it produces more lumen. That's kind of saying that out of the finite amount of illumination produced by the panel, more of it is in wavelengths that appear brighter to our eyes - therefore (more often than not) less of it is in wavelengths that are important to the growth/flowering of plants.
Any LED company mentioning lumens without it being in the context of discussing how they're irrelevant isn't one I'd go with.
LED definitely produces heat, at least once you get to the bigger, and high wattage LED's.
It's a different type of heat than produced by HID. An all LED grow can actually withstand higher temperatures then most plants grown under HID, it's pretty trippy.
LED definitely produces heat, at least once you get to the bigger, and high wattage LED's.
It's a different type of heat than produced by HID. An all LED grow can actually withstand higher temperatures then most plants grown under HID, it's pretty trippy.
Waiting on my 600W Pro-Bloom LED Grow Light | Grow Stealth LED | 3W LED Grow Lights due to arrive next week. I'll be making a journal when I start germinating and will be using only 1 strain, 8-10 femmed seeds in DWC. Hopefully it will end up being pretty a comprehensive journal with no variables from different strains or plants getting different feeding mixes.
I'll add a link to this journal when I get started.
I'll add a link to this journal when I get started.
I didn't even start this thread, TS. No worries; we are all contributing members to the collective thought project known as 420 Magazine.
to all who take the time to sign up to this community and contribute their thoughts, time, money, and effort. This goes doubly for the unpaid staff that tirelessly make this such a wonderful place to be.
Magic beans
New Member
Please send me a link i wanna see how this gsl performs!
Done.
I'm currently using a GrowStealthLED 600w Pro-Bloom light. I'm a 1st time grower. My journal is in my sig.
Milly C
New Member
How's it going;
Just thought I'd add my 2 bobs worth. I have used metal halide and high pressure sodium lights in the past. Unfortunately my situation does not allow for them at present. I have read quite a bit about LED's and was quite skeptical about the varied claims. But I've been bored and decided to purchase a 90 watt UFO type Led light and experiment. The first thing I must say is I was quite impressed with the intensity of the light this thing puts out.
So I've recently started a wardrobe grow of G13/Haze. Two weeks since germination and the plants are looking real good, almost doubling in size every 2-3 days now @ an 18/6 cycle. Another week/10 days I'll be able to sex them and start the scrogging process. I am now officially impressed with this LED, admittedly I am only in the early stages of veg, but the growth I'm seeing is nothing short of amazing. The heat emitted is barely lukewarm on the hand, way cooler than my halide.
If it works as well during flowering I'll be more than pleased. At this point I am definitely a convert from halide.
Just thought I'd add my 2 bobs worth. I have used metal halide and high pressure sodium lights in the past. Unfortunately my situation does not allow for them at present. I have read quite a bit about LED's and was quite skeptical about the varied claims. But I've been bored and decided to purchase a 90 watt UFO type Led light and experiment. The first thing I must say is I was quite impressed with the intensity of the light this thing puts out.
So I've recently started a wardrobe grow of G13/Haze. Two weeks since germination and the plants are looking real good, almost doubling in size every 2-3 days now @ an 18/6 cycle. Another week/10 days I'll be able to sex them and start the scrogging process. I am now officially impressed with this LED, admittedly I am only in the early stages of veg, but the growth I'm seeing is nothing short of amazing. The heat emitted is barely lukewarm on the hand, way cooler than my halide.
If it works as well during flowering I'll be more than pleased. At this point I am definitely a convert from halide.
hey bassman95
can u send me a link to your journals/reviews. I'm in the same position stuck at a crossroads. I don't what to buy thinking of 900w blackstar but a magnum plus also looks good. I don't know theyre great or marginal and if its worth 1200 or 900 bucks. Thats alot of dough to throw around.
thanks again
can u send me a link to your journals/reviews. I'm in the same position stuck at a crossroads. I don't what to buy thinking of 900w blackstar but a magnum plus also looks good. I don't know theyre great or marginal and if its worth 1200 or 900 bucks. Thats alot of dough to throw around.
thanks again
Similar threads
