t8 to t5 conversion

howst guys .

im considering converting my current t8 setup to t5 .
I have one of those moulded all in one tanks like zoom except its some chinese make (4ft) . its over 5 years old and when I bought it it was one of the nicest in the shop .

it has 3 switches on the hood that control my lights would I run into problems getting these to work on t5 ? the tank has built in ballasts 3 x 30W .

alternatively could I use my current t8 setup in conjunction with 2 54 w t5 ?

if anyone has converted a tank like this or has useful pointers please help im not to good with electricity !

where is bob the builder ?

cheers

 

Zoom is bob the builder!

And just because I'm a builder-- it don't mean I'm an electrician... and but the sounds of things... that tank you have is the same make of tank I started out with. Can I make a very serious suggestion...

Go buy yourself a level, and make 100% sure that the tank is level. And NEVER, NEVER EVER MOVE that tank with ANYTHING in it.

This is the tank I had that spontaneuosly burst on me. (I'm assuming it's a rounded edge on the front?)

As for changing to T5's.... the ballasts as far as I know are not interchangable, and the fittings are different. So you would need to open up the hood, (which is a mission if it's siliconed and pop-riveted like mine was) and change everything inside.

 

ill post pics but I doubt its the same remember some guy was selling his tank and you said you had the same one ? mine looks differant to that .

my stuff on the hood is screwed and siliconed in etc , doubt it will be to hard , my main concern will be to get the switches to work , the ballasts ill remove except one , replace with t5 ballast and globes and bobs your Auncle ?

ill be waiting for dolphin to get back to me with prices for t5 , if I can afford it im going to give it ago !

what's your view on leaving my current setup as is , running the t5 ballast in the bottom cabinet then running the wires along the side through the hood then silicone some t5 tube holders in between my current lights ? that way I don't mess with anything and have access to a extra 90W from my t8 , maybe use the t8 to provide differant spectrum lights for viewing and leaving the t5 spectrum for plant growth ?

cheers

 

Brad's... how heavy planted are you wanting to go? If you got 90W from the current hood, I then assume you have 3 tubes in there? To be completely honest with you... I wouldn't go through all the expense of changing anything. I would rather see you get 1 x 10,000k globe (against the professor's advice I might tell you... but it gives a great white light), and then change the other to for 6,500k globes. Chuck out the watt's per litre rule. It's not accurate anymore. Lighting technology has overtaken this rule. A 5Watt globe of the correct kelvin and PAR rating will be 100x better than a 50W globe of the wrong kelvin and PAR rating.

 

that was my original plan .

but considering that ill want to keep less common plants in the future I would need beter lighting so I rather do it now instead of sticking with t8 buying new globes then realising I need more light .

want something that's flexible for the future

I am still considering will see how's the cost of t5 .

 

Brad's, Send a PM to Vis.

He has a lighting article... well the link to it rather... it will explain to you why I disagree with going the T5. The cost doesn't justify then end result. You can get just as good growth out of T8 with the right spectrum and the correct fertz

 

I have read that article bud I plan on using it to the T .

spectrum is important but im also looking for lumens per watt as well as par as you mentioned .
I want the lighting not just for plants but for my own viewing pleasure I just feel that t8 in my tank is not bright enough for me and its clear as t5 has higher lumens per watt .
if I go t5 that means ill have 108 watts wich will also provide the higher lumens im looking for , coupled to this 2 6500k t5 tubes I think it will be great .

then for viewing I already have a 10000k t8 to switch on every now and then .

I appreciate your help bud !

tomorrow ill read that article again after my exam , I don't want to be thinking of par and lumens in my marketing exam so ill skip reading it now .

im not going to do anything yet with lights im contemplating at the moment and doing research on the plants I want from dolphin .

slagter is the one who put t5 in my head!

cheers

 

Ok Great. Then you know about the lumens per watt and the junk that watss per litre offers now. I'm not dissing the T5's... it's just my opinion that the T5 technology (based on that article), that altho far superior than T8, doesn't justify the difference. By all accounts, I would highly recommend anyone to chang to T5's if they can afford it, and do it easily. I was just trying to help you through that painful process of having to rewire the system in that hood.

Shoot slagter. CFL's are actually are proving time and time again to be a better route. I was dead set against CFL's. I thought that a cheap globe can never compare to a R250.00 T5 globe, + R300 fitting and ballast. Then when I read that article... I realized that the CFL is by far the best option available to the normal aquarist. (Not all of us can go the MH route.... and I cannot justify using 300W of lighting just to get good light when 100W of CFL will give the same.)

Keep us updated how the alteration on that hood goes.

 

yeah cfl is close to mh on lumens per watt I was contemplating it but cfl just won't look good in my tank .

im going to shop around ill get a good price on the t5 , there is now t2 that is the in thing but I can't seem to source them , im making a stop at the lighting wharehouse this weekend im sure t5 will be reasonable there but my money is waiting for dolphin to give me prices tomorrow.

ill definately keep posted if it doesn't happen this month ill definately have the cash and more importantly time next month .

cheers

 

If I remember correctly the T2's are also closer to a MH as well? But yes, you are correct, they are not common in SA. When I asked my lighting contractor about them he didn't even know they were available in SA at all yet! He knew about them... as he had worked in the UK for a few years, but had never seen them in S.

I'm actually curious to find out it a normal downlight globe will work in a tank at all?

 

Brad, where did you come up with this? CFL's are definitely not on the same level as MH. They aren't even on the same level as T5's and thats with a reflective surface behind the CFL's as well.

http://www.mge.com/home/appliances/lighting/comparison.htm

And if you don't believe that, I have a real world application. Initially had 4 30W CFL's over a 60 deep tank. Light penetration was not more than 1cm into the substrate. Change over to 4 39W T5's and penetration is far greater at about 6cm.

Also lumens per watt is not the be all of measuring lighting output. PAR at required depth is also worth looking at if you want to start getting technical....

If you do go the T5 route, Animal Kingdom sell ready wired kits. All thats needed are your 2 tubes and some reflectors...

 

I disagree with you all. Carl Strohmeyer has conducted intensive tests on T12's, T8's T5's, T2's, LED, MH, CFL, SHO and even incandescent lighting using the same size tanks, same water perameters, same substrate, and same plants, and his result we conclusive that the CFL was in between the T8 and T5 technology. BUT he stresses in his article that the CFL globe needs to be placed in the correct direction. I can guarantee that EVERYONE who has used a CFL has placed it in their tank horizontal thinking that they are getting the optimum light out of the CFL. Dolphin placed a chart somewhere here on TASA with regards to the way the light spectrum differs when placing the CFL vertical as apposed to horizontal. Here is his exerpt on CFLs

The aquarium industry has flooded the aquarists mind that the T5 of MH route is the only way to go for a planted tank, because they offec you higher watter per litres. Carl explains in his article (http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/Aquarium_Lighting.html) that the watt per litre rule is only 1/3 of the equation you need to be looking at, but the industry still maintains you need to be more concerned with the watts than anything else.

Recently it is coming to the SA market's mind that Kelvin rating is also important. So before anyone chucks out the CFL method... go and check yourself first... because I will put my head on a block and almost guarantee you that you (1) didn't have the correct rating, and (2) not install them correctly.

Plants growth is optimized at 6,400K. 99.9% of CFL's available in the market are either cool white, or warm white... which is 4,000k and 3,000 k respectively! These are NOT suitable for growth... and coupled with being installed incorrectly... you will most certainly have failure of growth.

Only recently is the CFL 6,500k become available in the SA market, and usually via a special order at a lighting specialist.

I am by no means throwing out the T5 technology. And by all means I do agree with brads that with him wanting to go for a better planted tank that he should either optimize his T8 system (low cost) or go the full T5 route (high cost).

Until about a month ago when I decided to read that long article... I was also of the belief that the T5 is "the king" in aquariums... besides the MH. What we need to realise is that the technology on the T12 fitting stopped then the industry moved towards T8. Recently the T8 technology has stopped advancing, and the T5 became the in thing. I am of the opinion that the T5 technology is going to stop advancing now, and the advancements are actually happening on the T2, CFL and more so on the LED's. Don't become like your grandfather who still to this day swears by the old fashioned T12, because that's what he did in his day! I am convinced that within time, there will be a huge step up in the market for CFL's, and I beleive they will eventually manufacture something more suitable for the aquarium with regards to placement.

(watch this space!)

 

+1. I've seen it on my own tank as well as slagter's 800 deep tank.

You cannot compare CFL to MH/T5 in terms of penetration, even with proper reflective surface (Mylar) on CFL's like so:

You do know that a CFL is basically a T5 tube right? Its just been bent and shaped to fit in a single unit that can fit most household fittings.

And no T5's aren't old technology. Look around at some of the top reef systems overseas. A large majority use T5 over MH on SPS systems (SPS coral needs far more light than what plants do). Some T5 tubes exceed PAR levels that MH can deliver at the same depth, Iwasaki tubes spring to mind.

And future technology? Definitely not flourescents/CFL's. Plasma is where its at

 

Agree with neil, plasma lights is going to be awesome! there is a nice clip of this somewhere on youtube.

Found it YouTube- MVI 2649

 

plasma lights sound interesting!

I was at a lighting shop today and saw t4 tubes ! I had to double check , they looked quite cool .

when I posted about cfl and mh I was not saying that they are close I was saying that for money spent cfl offers quite the bang for your buck , I would only use cfl on max 2ft tank where one cfl will work . on larger tanks like 4 and 6ft i would go for t5 or the like as having to light those tanks with cfl would not look as good as a simple tube . imagine having 6 cfl over your tank ? I would rather use a couple t5 just for the way the tubes sit flush and neat over the tank !

ill be googling plasma though , I wonder if plasma launches in sa whether mh prices will come down ?

lighting . . .

cheers

 

@ Neilh: Yes I know CFL is basically a T5 bent. Oh, and just by the way... your CFL system failed because your globes are facing the wrong way. Slagters were also facing the wrong way!
Don't you guys read the posts I put up... or do you just skimp through, make assumptions of what I said... and then open your mouth and disagree again? Not ONCE did I say T5's was rubbish! Not once did I say Brad's should go the CFL route. I actually told him to stay with the old T8 and get the correct globes in... BUT I then agreed with him on the T5 route as he says he has more difficult globes. I was just posting my comments on CFL's. I would NEVER tell brads to change his hood to CFL's... that would just be k@k.

@brads: I tend to agree with you on the size of the tank being the main contributing factor. I'm running a 1.2m on 3 x T8's. I couldn't ask for better growth! I'm pruning every second week! And pruning about half a 5litre bucket every time. I wouldn't want to go a chuck in 5 CFL's into that tank, as the T8's are working perfectly. On my 1ft however I am using 2 x CFL's. On a 2 foot I would use 4. The nice thing about a CFL is that because they are compact, you can actually get a huge amount of light under the hood.

And I still believe that the advancements on T5's is going to come to an end in the next 3-5 years. Already CFL's are starting to overtake T5's with regards to PAR, and lumens per watt. And why pump so much money into the T5 technology when the T2 technology is already starting to take over overseas?

 

A) It didn't "fail", it worked fine for over a year growing Valis and Giant Valis.
B) You are forgetting one thing, and that's reflection. Mounted horizontally with a good reflective surface like Mylar or Alanod will outperform mounted vertically without any reflection.

I read your posts multiple times. So get off your high horse. I posted a difference in opinion to yours, not a personal attack on you

Really? Want to change your mind on that?

Thats what I disagree on. You can't use a blanket statement like that..

 

Actually I can make a blanket statement like that... and I will stick to making that blanket statement when people ask!!!!!!!!!

I did the research. I literally spent DAYS reading up on the lighting. And NO... using the bestest best best best reflector you can use will NOT, I repeat NOT be the same as putting the globe in as per the research. Did you study science? There's a this called reflective action when light hits water at an angle. The only reason we actually put reflectors into our tank is not for the benefit of the plants... but actually to give US, the humans, a better look! But now you all going to get on YOUR high horse and tell me that I'm being stupid and idiotic because the reflectors shine back light.. so therefor they must be beneficial.... "BUZZ--- you're wrong"... yes the reflectors reflect, but in that reflection, PAR is lost, and the spectrum is broken. (Science grade 8)

Oh, and Nimsy, as I requested via PM, I still didn't see your introductory thread... so the comments you make bare no weight on this forum, as there is no fruit!

 

It is quite sad when people dont listen to the advice & comments given by someone (Zoom) who has taken the time & effort to research this subject.

Instead of turning this into an uneccessary argument/debate, rather take the time yourself to do the research & then post here...you'll be quite shocked at how wrong you are...

the bottom line is, CFL's provide maximum lighting when installed vertically - no reflector will make that happen in a bulb installed horizontally. The par readings confirm this unequivocally - readings taken by experts in their field using high grade testing equipment, not opinions.

I have spent many many hours researching this subject, not just for planted tank applications but for more complicated coral reef systems. CFL's are the way to go, vertically mounted that it is...

 

Thank you Dolphin,

You posted a pic the other day with the results of the readings on another thread recently. Without derailing this thread any further (my sincere appologies to Brads), could you provide the link to where it was if you recall?