LED Grow Light Review

[TorturedSoul]

I guess if they ever do (or when, I suppose), the most efficient devices will always win. But I don't know if even at a watt to watt if the LEDs would finish a crop at the same rate as MH or HPS. I'm just too poor to experiment so I have to depend on others to do all the fun stuff. (It's true what they say, getting married is cheap - but getting divorced will cost ya.)

[Seraph]

Just so that everyone knows,
(I design LED's for a living)
An LED that is 400 watts, may not necessarily be 400 watts. That could be the output as it relates to a normal 400 watt HPS, or it could be that that actual LED unit is running at 400 watts, and the output would actually be much more then 400 watts, it would equate to something over 1000.

If you want to match a 400 watt HPS it is not as simple as just getting a 400 watt UFO LED,

The UFO brand stuff I dont really like, the Procyon grow lights are more balanced and use a higher quality LED diode.

Everyone is totally right about the color output. in order to get an LED that is going to grow with the same punch as a proper HPS in the right spectrum of color, then the mix needs to be right.

My advice, is with LED lights, don't skimp on price. Cheap LED's are cheap LED's bottom line.

[Seraph]

Color spectrum is the most important thing in using LED's.

If there is interest in it, I could find the actual spectrum and then translate it to an LED output for people, shouldnt be too hard.

[TorturedSoul]

Originally Posted by Seraph

An LED that is 400 watts, may not necessarily be 400 watts. That could be the output as it relates to a normal 400 watt HPS, or it could be that that actual LED unit is running at 400 watts, and the output would actually be much more then 400 watts, it would equate to something over 1000.

Huh? A 400 watt LED would output more than 400 watts?

Does it use Brownian Motion?

I'd think it would either output 400 watts or slightly less depending on power supply losses.

Or... You're not one of those people that markets their lights as being "equivalent to (actual light wattage) x (some factor) = equivalent to a different type of light" are you? If so... There's enough people that have bought 65-watt CFLs thinking that they were "equivalent" to high-wattage lights like their friends have.

Why not just market an n-wattage light as an n-wattage light?

Or am I completely misunderstanding?

[WheeloFortune]

Originally Posted by hazyatbest

Here’s an analogy: The Sun isn't a heater. If I hold my hand up to the Sun, it isn't really any hotter. The higher in altitude you go, the colder it actually gets. It's not like Icarus would really melt his wings by flying higher. We actually put light sources in our rooms that produce light, and behave like heaters. We have to compensate for those inefficiencies of energy and the diminishing returns. If I have to run a ton of LEDs to produce the same incident energy to the plants, it’s going to be hotter, much less efficient and you'll have no real light distribution and delivery.

sorry i don't go with this.

first the analogy:
the sun is too certainly a heater. lol, its thousands of degrees on its surface. its the reason we have water and not ice. when you are comparing the temperature as you rise in altitude you are measuring the ambient temp. that is, the temp of the air. this does get colder as you rise. how ever the sun is putting out a different type of heat, radiant heat. as you get heigher in the atmosphere, there is less atmosphere to absorb the radient heat, and once your outside the ozone layer its all over. the space station is well over 100 degrees in the suns light, and well under freezing, two feet away, on the same piece of material, if its in the shade.

all light is radiant heat. (electro-magnetic radiation)

if you have to run a lot of leds to produce more light for photosythesis, it will not necessarily be hotter, less efficient, etc. why do you say that? if each individual led is significantly more efficient, its more efficient, if its not, its not. end of story.


TOR,
they sell 600W led panels now. still haven't seen a journal yet. I want to build my own, but i think I'll wait untill they get more powerfull (10w or more) and hopefully less expensive.

to date, i dont think any led has proven it can put out flowers like HID.



123ABC,
there has been a lot of technical data collected on LED growing since its inception, NASA has conducted lot of experiments, and so have some universities. These were all custom builds, and the problem is most of it isn't accessible to you or me. or at least really hard to find, and not specifically for weed.

regardless of that, i know what your asking for, i wouldn't hold your breath. even if a good review comes out, there are so many variables. . . one review wont be able to give you a good enough model to know what is maximal. when a new technology comes out it usually takes a long time and a lot of tweaking to get it just right.

[WheeloFortune]

Originally Posted by Seraph

Color spectrum is the most important thing in using LED's.

If there is interest in it, I could find the actual spectrum and then translate it to an LED output for people, shouldnt be too hard.

here's where i'm not sold.

over eons of evolution, plants have grown highly efficient at utilizing the parts of the sun's spectrum that are the weakest.

this is like a highly trained athelete whose body is more efficient at using oxygen in the blood than a normal person.

also, plants use the strongest part of the suns spectrum a lot less efficiently for photosyntesis. and doesn't use any green.

this is like a person who goes on oxygen therapy, and because of long term over availability of highly concentrated o2, the lungs get less efficient at proccessing the o2, because there is so much, it gets lazy. (this really happens)

this doesnt neccessarily mean that you should just blast the hell out of them at their most efficient wavelength that they can proccess. they might need other wavelengths for other things.

i personally would try to mix my spectrum, placing emphasis on the best parts of the spectrum, and eliminating green all together. but then again, im not a botanist or an electrical engineer. . . oh wait i'm one of those. . .

[CountBrass]

Ok, I am new on the forums .. so bear with me, but I keep seeing something that I wanted to point out .... Namely that all the LED grow lights are manufactured and touted how cool and great and how they are targetting the correct wavelength to stimulate MAX plant growth ... well I am calling BULLS**T!!

If you read the tech specs on the "Procyon 100" (supposed best LED grow light) "All Procyon 100 lights ship with ~635nm peak and ~450nm peak wavelength LEDs. "

635nm Peak for the RED... UMMMM you want a 640-660 or you WONT see ANY RESULTS ... you might as well unplug it and use it to block open the door with for ventilation....

wikipedia has a nice chart on cholorophyll light waves and absorption



I have been doing extensive research into the LED lights every since I came across the first reading articles referencing them ... and every study all references PAR and the responsive wavelengths .. but when you research the CREE LED's .. I havent seen one of the red ones that covers the correct wavelength .... (superbrite LEDs has a good selection of the CREE's and the red is the wrong light wave and every site that carries cree has the same issue! Cree DOESNT seem to make a RED in the correct wave!!) So where is Procyon is just using the normal RED Cree in the wrong light frequency ...


Blue will get good veg growth but without the correct red frequency you will not see good flowering as the plants are really starved for light that is correct at that point ... the small bit of red that is bleeding into the proper range is the bottom of the peak... and since RED is going to be what controls flowering and things of that nature ... you would think .. get RED correct since thats the light that controls the end result of why we are doing this ...

Look at the other grow lights on the web.. they all seem to have the same problem... hidden in the tech specs of the light either the red or the blue is the wrong wavelength ... the range for the correct blue led is actually closer to purple than it is blue .. so its almost twice as expensive as the normal blue leds... reds in the right frequency are easy to find and cheap .. BUT you have to sort through alot of them to get the right ones .. there is something like 7 different red hues for LED's that are just a little off from each ranging from a deep ruby red to an orange/red color ...

so as a wrap .. look at wikipedia on cholorophyll for the right waves (430,453 642, 662 are the peaks for those that dont want to check :-) then look at the tech specs of the grow lights .. they ALL state in the fine print what the LED's in use are and what light band they use .... (or dont use as the case usually is!!)

[JonnyHempSeed]

Dear Countbrass-

The Procyon was the first heavy-duty high-powered grow light produced in this country, and that was years ago...its no surprise that its spectrum is insufficient.

Check out OSRAM Opto Semiconductors' Dragon family of LED's...this is probably the best quality+strength commercially available LED manufacturer, that provides a decent range of wavelength spectrum for both red and blue, and is available up to 10W individual diode size. Check out the golden dragon, platinum, and argus lines, because they're all sweet, and building your own light is still the way to go for this technology.
OSRAM Opto Semiconductors|Products|Light Emitting Diodes (LED)|index

Also, there is a new plasma bulb made by the Luxim Corp, it is a bulb the size of a gelcap that puts out more lumens than a 400W HPS at 1/3 of the electric draw and heat generation...in addition, it's a plasma spectrum bulb so the color range is much closer to the sun's. I don't know if anyone has tried growing with these yet, but they have been used extremely successfully in home-made projectors and as replacements for standard street-side HPS systems. If these jerk-offs ever return phone/email product requests, I'll keep updated on if they're effective or not.

[Hydroguy]

Hi all,

Firstly very interesting thread, and yes there is a lot of conflicting info for not so tech minded.
I'm starting off my scond grow first went pretty well, just used Mh for veg and HPs for flower, 4 plants, 3 flowered ahead of the last one, then enjoyed the fruits of my sucess and dropped the ball on the last one (proby mistake.

anyhows i have decided to seperate my grow area into 2 tents, veg and flower, in veg i am going to use 90W UFO FULL SPECTRUM TRIBAND HYDROPONIC LED GROW LIGHT, bought this of ebay hoping it works (from China)
in flower tent i intend to use HPs as primary light and supplemnet with stem led's, hoping this will help with light penetration probs through canopy.
should have said veg will be used for 2 mothers and 4 clones at a time and flowering tent will have 4 plants at all times.

Does anybody have any feedback on the above led light and has anybody used the stem leds yet, they seem like a really good idea, as on the last grow you could see the dimishing return the lowet you got.

Cheers
Hydroguy

[Slowpuffer]

Hydroguy,
I bought 2 90 watt leds off ebay. They both grow nice plants in veg. stage. I think they grow a tighter bush than mh, a little slower, but they do work. I don't know why ebay allows the sellers to blantly lie about what these lights will do, but i can tell you flat out that even 3 of the 90 watters will not flower like one 400 watt hid will. Now that's the truth !! There's no truth in advertising anymore !! Good luck !!

[Hydroguy]

Thanks for the reply slowpuffer. its difficult to choose with all the claims being made, I have done some research but conflicting reports seem the norm.

The 90w led arrived yesterday and what did the send me a 7.1.1 ratio light (7 Red 1 blue 1 orange ratio, i wanted the blue veg light. may end using it simply as a extra light if i can position so its gets under the canopy,,

I think leds maybe the way forward for vegging, but flowering still requires hps

It might be an idea to start a thread on recommended LEDs, what works what doesn't, what is obviuosly crapo being sold on ebay.

[TorturedSoul]

Is anyone trying to flower with 400 watts of LEDs? That would be an interesting (and proper) comparison to a 400-watt HPS.

I'm not against LEDs - I don't have the knowledge required to really take a stance one way or the other. I am, however, strongly against those who advertise them as "being equivalent to..." just like I'm against those who do the same for CFLs. Only it's worse for the LED people because they aren't comparing them to a reading light, lol.

[Tead]

^^^^ Yea... what he said.

I'm just disgusted by the "equiv wattage" numbers on LED and CFL's. It's useless info and bloated marketing spluge.

IMHO, any comparison of any lighting technology shoud be with equiv consumed wattages.

Cheers!

[MSTRRYAN2]

alright, just got back from my growing class at CT's here in Colo Springs. They brought in a grower who uses LED's for seeds, clones and veg cycle. He says he gets great results with tighter internode spacing thru the veg cycle. when flowering he still uses HPS.

gonna give it a shot.

[Tead]

I get great results in vegging and germ with LED's, but it sure goes WAY downhill for flowering.
LED's and household CF's fill my veg cabinet and flower outside. Works quite well for me.
I've tried flowering on my LED's, but it's just not a good idea. Craptastic buds.

Cheers