LED Light Thoughts?
- Thread starter czappme
- Start date
What brand and model is it?
Mountainman80
Well-Known Member
Looks like it should if u can afford check out vivasun.on eBay or.mars hydro u can get one under.100$ marsGeneral thoughts on this light, it's being sold as a "boutique spectrum", eliminates wasted energy/heat, they don't use orange/yellow which accounts for a low PPFD.
* 8' led light, 16 sq. ft. coverage
* 210 W
* 242.40 PPFD
What am I missing?
Delps8
Well-Known Member
When you showed this graphics on another site recently, I checked the SKU and it lead me to what looked l like what might be a decent light but what put me off what the lack of clear information re. power output. Is that the light you're referring to or is graphic actually the one of the light you're interested in?
Delps8
Well-Known Member
I'll added this for posterity.
Re. this being a good flower light?
No.
It's got a lot of blue in it and research shows us that as the percentage of blue light increases, yield decreases. Yes, blue is great for making plants short and compact but it also reduces yield. The red spikes look nice and it's got some far red so it's a newer design but the inescapable fact is that, with a light output of 242 µmols, this light is best suited for seedlings.
Many sources recommend that seedlings received 100 to 300µmols. Based on the information about this light, it would be suitable for seedlings where the grower wants to provide a modest amount of light. I have seedlings that are three days old. Their light levels by day - 200, 243, 300 so were I to have been given this light, in theory, I could use it for a few days then there's the fact that it burns 210 watts (no dimmer?) and only put out 242µmols. Hmm.
The most interesting thing to me is how the manufacturer managed to make a light that is so inefficient. My light is a 320 watt light and, at a 12" hang height, it averages 1081 µmols across a 2' x 4' tent. At 210 watts my light would be operating at 320/210 or 66% output so it would generate about 713 µmols. In contrast, this light is generating only 242µmols which is about ⅓ the light output of what my light generates.
All this boils down to - why would anyone design, build, and sell a light with those characteristics?
Things just don't add up.
Re. this being a good flower light?
No.
It's got a lot of blue in it and research shows us that as the percentage of blue light increases, yield decreases. Yes, blue is great for making plants short and compact but it also reduces yield. The red spikes look nice and it's got some far red so it's a newer design but the inescapable fact is that, with a light output of 242 µmols, this light is best suited for seedlings.
Many sources recommend that seedlings received 100 to 300µmols. Based on the information about this light, it would be suitable for seedlings where the grower wants to provide a modest amount of light. I have seedlings that are three days old. Their light levels by day - 200, 243, 300 so were I to have been given this light, in theory, I could use it for a few days then there's the fact that it burns 210 watts (no dimmer?) and only put out 242µmols. Hmm.
The most interesting thing to me is how the manufacturer managed to make a light that is so inefficient. My light is a 320 watt light and, at a 12" hang height, it averages 1081 µmols across a 2' x 4' tent. At 210 watts my light would be operating at 320/210 or 66% output so it would generate about 713 µmols. In contrast, this light is generating only 242µmols which is about ⅓ the light output of what my light generates.
All this boils down to - why would anyone design, build, and sell a light with those characteristics?
Things just don't add up.
- Thread starter
- #7
- Thread starter
- #8