Please help recommend a suitable LED

[dallas1305]

Hmm i could get any of the following:
1 mars 2 400w and 2 reflector 48s
This option seems awkward in terms of coverage? However as i get into the hobby allows me to add more.
Which would produce more heat, the above combination or a mars2 1200w?

I could get a mars2 1200 or a 192 reflector....

So far what seems like the best combination? Baring in mind i want to keep heat down and its first grow so i can always add lights after?

I sold do maybe one mars2 700w and then get 4 small reflector series maybe I only used the old reflector 96x3 and Mar2 400w.

Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using 420

 

[Mars Hydro]

Hi dallas1305,LED grow light is much cooler than HPS.Mars II 1200 BTU: 1883

Hi sara

This may seem like a silly question but i really want that 1200 unit but the heat issue makes me think its risky. How much heat can i expect the unit to give out? Similar to a hps?

Thanks

 

[Sirrollalot]

Hey Dave I highly recommend solar storm 440 for your size tent. I have a 4x4x8 space and I use the solar storm 440. Great light and no heat issues. I do run a hurricane 435cfm fan that is hooked up to a temperature control. I had to adjust my hold temps just to ensure I was getting enough air replacement throughout the day. The solar storm 440 is good for a 4x4 foot print during Veg if hung at 24 inches. I have mine 32 inches away just to introduce my plants to the LED. I will lower a inch a week as I get ready to flower. Foot print for flowering is 3x3 at 18 inches. The other nice thing is the solar storm is a veg and flower light, just flip a switch. It also has a UVB option for the last two weeks of flower. My plants are short and bushy with just one FMing. California Light Works is the manufacturer. Check them out online.
Sincerely,
Sirrollalot

 

[OttawaGreen]

4x4 tent is big. For 16 square feet I would say get a Mars 2 1600 it is just over 700w real draw for $689. That is less than a dollar a watt. That is much better than any of their competitors. Don't fall for the hype of $1000 wimpy 400w lights using fancier diodes or whatever. So what if the $1000 light is 2% more efficient if it's only 400w...
The 1200 in a 4x4 gives you over 40w per square foot and that is pretty good (I like 65wpsf in mine)

Remember yield is primarily driven by light power. 700w of cheap Mars led will grow way more than 3-400w of overpriced fancy brand lights will, and 700w of fancy lights is going to cost you 2-3 times as much.

 

[OttawaGreen]

Oh I didn't realize your budget is extremely low then just get the biggest Mars you can afford then get more of them when you have more budget. They are the best bang for the buck in watts per dollar all the rest will be 2-3 times the price in watts per dollar.

 

[jaymu86]

4x4 tent is big. For 16 square feet I would say get a Mars 2 1600 it is just over 700w real draw for $689. That is less than a dollar a watt. That is much better than any of their competitors. Don't fall for the hype of $1000 wimpy 400w lights using fancier diodes or whatever. So what if the $1000 light is 2% more efficient if it's only 400w...
The 1200 in a 4x4 gives you over 40w per square foot and that is pretty good (I like 65wpsf in mine)

Remember yield is primarily driven by light power. 700w of cheap Mars led will grow way more than 3-400w of overpriced fancy brand lights will, and 700w of fancy lights is going to cost you 2-3 times as much.

Sorry but this is where u are so wrong. Some of those 400w wimpy lights you speak of Mar can't come close to matching. That 700w u speak of dosent get close to the ppfd my lite gets inside a 4x4 even on the edges my little 450w lite kills that thing so let's be fair here mars are great low budget lights and they work but plz let's really educate ppl bout the real. Most of these company's are using low bin diodes or cobs and charging you hell of money for em. Ones had 2 mars2 400w and both are burned out the reflector series is the better build to me but mine is also burning out diodes too.

I have Amare technologies se450uvb and love it for my 4x4 and love their bumper to bumper warranty plus I now will only buy leds from ppl who grow cannabis not ppl who test there lights on lettuce, really couldn't even test on tomatoes which is a lot closer. So all in op plz just ask lots of ?'s and if they don't wanna give it up don't buy it and always find out how hard diodes or cobs are driven and what drivers they use and spend your money wisely

Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using 420

 

[Icemud]

Sorry but this is where u are so wrong. Some of those 400w wimpy lights you speak of Mar can't come close to matching. That 700w u speak of dosent get close to the ppfd my lite gets inside a 4x4 even on the edges my little 450w lite kills that thing so let's be fair here mars are great low budget lights and they work but plz let's really educate ppl bout the real. Most of these company's are using low bin diodes or cobs and charging you hell of money for em. Ones had 2 mars2 400w and both are burned out the reflector series is the better build to me but mine is also burning out diodes too.

I have Amare technologies se450uvb and love it for my 4x4 and love their bumper to bumper warranty plus I now will only buy leds from ppl who grow cannabis not ppl who test there lights on lettuce, really couldn't even test on tomatoes which is a lot closer. So all in op plz just ask lots of ?'s and if they don't wanna give it up don't buy it and always find out how hard diodes or cobs are driven and what drivers they use and spend your money wisely

Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using 420

I agree with this...very well said.

A cree or osram LED chip, driven at the same wattage as a epistar chip (or other economy chip) will produce 2x-3x as much light, at exactly the same draw. (Even using top BINS of each chip to compare) This can be verified directly from the LED mfg datasheets.

Not only that but a premium Cree or Osram chip will last 2-3x as long as a epistar chip or other "off brand" or generic brand chip. (this is called lumen maintenance) A typical "5w" epistar is rated to last around 39,000 hours losing 20% of its light by that point, most Cree "5w" chips are rated for around 69,000hours losing 20% of their light, Osram SSL chips are rated at 100,000 hours losing only 5% of their light output.




Well said Jaymu! +rep

 

[OttawaGreen]

You guys are really saying 2-3 times light output for same wattage? Really? If that is true then fair enough great lights. Still way out of his budget though.
Could you point me to any journals with 2-3 grams per watt grows? I want to check it out, if led tech has really come this far then I want to see it. Thanks for the info.

 

[OttawaGreen]

And if my info was wrong and outdated I apologize. I have just seen to many recommend things like the platinum as being super great and worth so much more. They are decent lights but you can get the exact same lights from eshine for 1/3 the price. I was comparing to those type of things. I look forward to learning more about your next gen lights

 

[jaymu86]

You guys are really saying 2-3 times light output for same wattage? Really? If that is true then fair enough great lights. Still way out of his budget though.
Could you point me to any journals with 2-3 grams per watt grows? I want to check it out, if led tech has really come this far then I want to see it. Thanks for the info.

2-3x the light doesn't translate to yield of bud exactly but my 4x4 get average 3oz per plant n got 9 with one 450w panel that is 420-430w led rest drivers not actual but close.

And if my info was wrong and outdated I apologize. I have just seen to many recommend things like the platinum as being super great and worth so much more. They are decent lights but you can get the exact same lights from eshine for 1/3 the price. I was comparing to those type of things. I look forward to learning more about your next gen lights

If it was me on budget go with the mars just get smaller panels so u get more coverage to the edges and fight the square inverse law

Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using 420

 

[jaymu86]

Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using 420

 

[Mars Hydro]

 

[OttawaGreen]

If you only get 9 oz from 400w then what makes you think the light is so great? Can easily get 9oz with 400w of Mars lights too at 1/4 to 1/3 the price. Just asking as I don't understand. Everyone always quotes numbers from manufacturers websites, but all I care about is results and cost/benefit personally.

 

[OttawaGreen]

I just asked what the light output difference is for the Mars pro vs a Mars 2 on the Mars light discussion thread. Interested to see what the manufacturer says the difference is.

 

[jaymu86]

I just asked what the light output difference is for the Mars pro vs a Mars 2 on the Mars light discussion thread. Interested to see what the manufacturer says the difference is.

I'm only getting that as my plants weren't that big but to give u idea I pulled over 170g off of 150w light without cobs but if I was to get my stuff right trust I could pull a lot more but if at 3oz a plant and 9 plants that's 27oz u show me a Mars2 400w that can cover a 4x4 with 4-5" plants mars can't penetrate that deep

Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using 420

 

[Icemud]

If you only get 9 oz from 400w then what makes you think the light is so great? Can easily get 9oz with 400w of Mars lights too at 1/4 to 1/3 the price. Just asking as I don't understand. Everyone always quotes numbers from manufacturers websites, but all I care about is results and cost/benefit personally.

Here are some real world examples from my garden:


3x mars II, 540w total draw, 310g or .57grams/watt.

2x (other sponsor with cree and osram chips) 494w total draw, 391g or .79 grams per watt.

Now I harvest about 4x per year with my perpetual grow. So just in harvest weight lost by using "economy" panels, I have lost 81g per harvest, 81x4 or 324g which is 11oz roughly lost per year with economy panels vs premium panels

... so just in loss of harvest weight, 11oz at approx $200 per oz, the LED's using premium chips gained me an extra $2200 worth of final product over the "economy option per year"

Now to add to it, the difference in power useage was about 46w, which for 1 year costs an extra $48 per year to run the "economy panels" over the premium cree/osram panels. Basically saying the "economy panels cost more to run, and produce 3oz less per harvest as well"

So in total using better panels gained me approx $2250 over using economy panels.

Now lets look at initial cost:

3x mars II at current price approx $600

2x (other sponsor with cree/osram chips) @895 each cost $1800

Difference $1200 in initial cost.


So total lost using economy panels, $2250.
Total difference in purchase price $1200

Benefit of buying better panels annually $1000...for first year due to subtracting purchase cost, following year gain with premium panels would be approx $2250 per year.

For me I would rather pay more for premium LED panels with good quality chips then lose $2200 per year using the economy option. And that doesn't even take into account lumen loss on cheap LED chips per year, which actually will drive the yield down even lower.

 

[OttawaGreen]

Lots of us are getting better than .79 gpw with our cheap lights, so by that logic our lights must be better than your expensive ones , but that does not really show much as those numbers are so low and it wasn't a side by side comparison. You can't say for sure if it was the light that made the difference from the really poor earlier results to the average current results. Plus there are zero savings if we can do more than .79 with cheap lights and low yield strains.

I wish someone would do a legitimate shared reservoir side by side with clones and see the real difference. I suspect it is much less than the manufacturers who are in business to sell lights are telling you it is... And .79 is not backin up any claims really.

Anyway, Just my opinion, never even seen your light, was hoping to see someone with some results that match the manufacturers hype, oh well. At least the guy who started the thread got what he needs so that's great.

 

[Icemud]

Lots of us are getting better than .79 gpw with our cheap lights, so by that logic our lights must be better than your expensive ones , but that does not really show much as those numbers are so low and it wasn't a side by side comparison. You can't say for sure if it was the light that made the difference from the really poor earlier results to the average current results. Plus there are zero savings if we can do more than .79 with cheap lights and low yield strains.

I wish someone would do a legitimate shared reservoir side by side with clones and see the real difference. I suspect it is much less than the manufacturers who are in business to sell lights are telling you it is... And .79 is not backin up any claims really.

Anyway, Just my opinion, never even seen your light, was hoping to see someone with some results that match the manufacturers hype, oh well. At least the guy who started the thread got what he needs so that's great.

Gram per watt is a measurement that is practically worthless in comparing one grower to another. Too many variables effect gram/watt for it to mean anything. For instance, a guy growing hydro is going to yield typically about 2x more than a grower using organic soil (as I do). Synthetic nutrients typically will also yield higher than organic nutrients in smaller pots because the sythetics are available for the plant, organics have to be broken down by microbes.

Or another example... a grower could be growing a high yielding strain like a blue dream and another grower growing a low yielding strain like a GSC or bubba kush... which also will drastically effect the gram/watt. So they can't be compared...

Another example is one grower could be using supplemental co2, in a perfectly automated environment with ideal humidity and temp, and another grower could be using a grow tent with no environmental controls (such as my grow) other than extraction fans where ideal temps are mostly reliant on the outside environment. this will cause a large difference in yield as well.

in other words, gram per watt is nothing more than a pretty much meaningless "bragging" measurement that has no real world relation, unless it was a absolute controlled labratory grade side by side, where all environmental, genetic and nutrient factors were identical, and only the lights were different.

For my grow, I keep record of gram per watt and total harvest weight because the environment from grow to grow doesn't change much, nutrients are pretty much the same, strains pretty much stay the same, so the light is the sole factor that changes yield so the measurement of gram/watt is a helpful indicator of my success per grow, but still is not 100% accurate. It can be used to track trends as I have seen from HID being low gram/watt, moving to "economy" LED which also was a low gram per watt, and then moved to "premium LED panels" which raised my gram/watt about 20% or more... so after tracking data for over 12 grows, There is an upward trend of better gram/watt and total yield with better quality LED chips... but my results, can't be compared to other growers for the reasons above.


Another thing with gram/watt... typically with lower wattages you will see a higher gram per watt, but this also doesn't related to the quality of the overall product, as when using less wattage in comparison to higher wattage, low wattage will generally produce sub par quality, airy buds and less trichomes than higher wattage grows which result in denser buds, higher trichome counts and a lower gram per watt.

I supplied "real world" data to break down the price comparison of investing in cheap economy LED's vs Premium LED's in my garden, and the numbers make sense, I mean if you could spend more up front, but make $2000 more a year, why wouldn't you?

Manufacture claims, especially in the horticulture LED sector are just that, claims, and very very few show proof. Even more so many of these companies don't understand their products fully let alone understanding horticulture lighting or plant light reactions. This is why I indulged in testing different brands and extensively researching plant lighting, because I wanted the truth and very few manufactures are going to tell the truth when it means reducing their sales. And most of them are actually clueless about plant lighting and plant reaction in general... Its sad that this is the reality we deal with as growers, and its fortunate that we have many experienced growers and testers here at 420 so that we can all collaboratively learn.


So with all that being said, .79 grams/watt may not be good in other growers eyes but for my personal garden, .79 grams per watt is actually very good and one of the best G/watts I have gotten. Again, this number can't be compared to anything else but my garden. Also there is another forum that tracks growers gram/watt and there are very few growers out of hundreds of results recorded that have even achieved 1.5G/watt. Most are less than 1g/watt.

Cheers though, I hope I can help you learn as my goal here is to educate people as I have learned from other growers here. Plant lighting is my specialty so I'm very confident on the info I share, as its been researched extensively for many years now.


This is why I suggest the OP for going with HPS, because for the cost of a HPS system, and the results, it would be his best option within his budget. LED is much more expensive, mainly because the way the light is projected from the LED chips. Generally most horticulture professionals choose their lighting based on PPFD or the PAR readings across the entire canopy, LED's have a common problem with projecting very bright in the center under the panel, but the intensity drops significantly outside the area directly under the light. This is why LED typically to cover a 4x4 tent properly, requires smaller wattage LED lights, but more quantity of them. for LED its all about the actual surface area of the light fixtures themselves, because the chips project like mini spotlights. HPS however is more like a flood light and projects a much more even canopy illumination, where a grower can get away with just 1 light in a 4x4 and still get even coverage. This is why I suggested HPS to the OP. For $500 he could get a HPS system that would not only meet the PPFD requirements of cannabis, but also for very cheaply. LED also could do well for the OP, but it would be much more costly up front.

The OP mentioned heat is the main reason that he wants to look at LED but really, HPS and LED at the same wattage will produce the same heat. LED's aren't magically cooler, even though most manufactures claim they are. LED's are more efficient at producing PAR light, than HPS, however heat load is dependant on wattage draw, so a 400w LED, 400w HPS, or 400w worth of CFL's will produce the same heat in the environment. The misconception comes to play because with LED, being that they produce light more efficenly, less wattage can be used for similar results, so generally you can save about 20% energy with LED vs HID, and then you would also have 20% less heat. The issue however with LED is there is no way to evacuate the heat out of the grow area like a HPS with an air cooled hood and remote mounted ballast, therefore LED actually can be hotter depending on your environment when compared to HPS with air cooled hoods at the same wattage due to the HID having a way to evacuate the heat.

anyhow, hope you may have picked up a few new things from my post and sorry for the OP for getting off topic. I just want to help correct misconceptions as they are quite common due to misleading claims in the lighting industry.


Also, as far as yield, my 1000w HID setup I used to run still to this day after a good 12 or more grows still has produced the highest yield for me, over LED. The LED has come close in yield, but HPS still has produced more. The quality of LED bud is much much better that HPS. Now I haven't run 1000w of LED in the same grow area, the most i have used is 750w of LED which produced about 475g where 1000w of HPS produced 574g... gram per watt of hid was .57g/w where led was .63g/watt in my garden and grow environment. Best Gram per watt I got was .81grams/watt using only 340w of LED but only yielded 327grams. MarsII produced the same gram/watt as HID at .57 grams per watt, however was only 308g of final product. The LED's I used with premium chips all produced higher Grams per watt between .65 to .81/gram/watt, and at the same time produced higher total yield than the Mars II.

 

[OttawaGreen]

Good answer, I agree. I look forward to seeing what you bleeding edge guys do with your new tech.
I am pleasantly surprised what my cheap Mars and eshine lights do though. Some day when they need replacing I will learn what with based on guys like you doing the real research. Thanks. I am also curios what Mars has to say about the difference
Between thier normal lights and _fairly_expensive pro lights, I asked in the Mars discussion thread. Also I have had zero problems with my Mars led or my almost as cheap eshine led so far.

 

[dallas1305]

Wow..Really interesting convo... Learnt alot from your discussion!
I had to stick to a budget.. If i could i would definitely go with higher quality light and Hopefully in the future i will. But as im just getting into the hobby im not going to invest sov much so early. Once im comfortable that I know how to grow i will up led game if necessary and who knows... Maybe by then v ill be content with mars or not.

I went for 2 reflector 96s and am currently awaiting delivery.

Seriously want to thank you guys as you have taught me alot and also informed my decisions.

Cheers
Dave