thamadfarmer31
Member
Hey guys just trying to obtain some feedback, experiences etc.now I have not had any experience with led's, however I have had experience with the others, what do you guys think. .led's, cfl's or hid's like hps & mh.thanks. .
led vs cfl vs hps/mh??
- Thread starter thamadfarmer31
- Start date
ballist
Well-Known Member
My next light will probably be a cmh bulb. Seen some impressive results from growrrs using yhem. I run both led and hps currently. HPS is a good start, led will cost more but you should save something from running costs. Cfls are ok for supplemental lights but are too inefficient for main lights. Led a19 bulbs are better than cfls.
Good luck grower.
Good luck grower.
thamadfarmer31
Member
Thanks, ballist,ballistost: 10895522 said:
thamadfarmer31
Member
Yea but what about the end product? Correct me If I'm wrong doesn't hps makes the flower a lot more dense, vs fluffy with led's & cfl's?
mc130p
Well-Known Member
I agree with Yodaweed...also the fluffiness comes from low intensity light.
thamadfarmer31
Member
Ok nice to know.peace
ballist
Well-Known Member
600 real watts of Led or hps will both have similar cooling requirements. Led grows can be cooler as you can get away with less watts. The bud with Led tends to be smaller but is more dense in my experience. Yields should be similar if your putting the same amount of photons into the plant. I do find plants under hps get bigger but I think that is due to lower levels of blue from hps.
Bad Karma
Well-Known Member
Agreed, cooling hoods, extra ducting, and separate a/c units, just aren't necessary to achieve quality results indoors anymore.
You get what you pay for, here's some Anesthesia I grew, under an Area 51 LED light.
Chronikool
Well-Known Member
Just what i suspected....fluffy...
thamadfarmer31
Member
thank you" chronikool" I said the same thing earlier!
Greengenes707
Well-Known Member
I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.
Where/what type of lamp the light comes from isn't important really...the light amount(photons) that is coming out of the panel is what matters. If you can match or beat hps's foot print with intensity...then you will match or out yield and get better buds...denser, bigger, more potent.
Apache AT600 LED on left...1000w hortilux super hps on right
I'm not missing a thing by not running hps anymore...actually gaining terpenes and potency(lab tested)...yield is the same...density is even denser...and coverage is the same too. Anything hps can do...my led's do better. And I have it all documented and lab tested...not just opinion.
It takes the best LED to replace HPS...specially 1K hps...but it can be done and the rewards are there.
thamadfarmer31
Member
To each his own, If it works for u stick with it, I veg under 600 mh & flower under 600 hps, works awesome for me.
Greengenes707
Well-Known Member
Not knocking anyone or any light specifically...just sharing facts and experience like you asked for, while explaining how things actually work. My hps yielded great and hit over 25% thc...but at the same time my led grows as much bud and more potent(27%) with higher levels and more present terpene types. All facts...not opinions. What is your goal/reason for this thread?
Yodaweed
Well-Known Member
Another big factor to take into consideration are electric costs / usage. LEDs use less electric, require less cooling(less fans) and less air conditioning as where a 1000W HPS here in Colorado in the summer can be unbearable to deal with heat wise and a lot of HID growers hang it up during the summer instead of blasting expensive A/C units.
bicit
Well-Known Member
They're all good for different situations. Though honestly CFL tech isn't even worth considering IMHO unless one was just going to run a quick micro cab experiment and then be done. The bulbs can be recycled into the home when done.
For those who are planning on gardening for a year or two, or looking at running a vertical setup, HID's are hard to beat for cost effectiveness, simplicity and reliability. Then it's really easy to sell left over equipment on craigslist or ebay.
If one has a permanent location and plans on gardening for years to come, LED tech is the way to go. They're more efficient at directing usable photons to the canopy, easier to position for even distribution, and when driven soft basically don't wear out. LED's also have a lot of automation value as well. The obvious disadvantage is their high initial investment and low-to-no resale value.
For those who are planning on gardening for a year or two, or looking at running a vertical setup, HID's are hard to beat for cost effectiveness, simplicity and reliability. Then it's really easy to sell left over equipment on craigslist or ebay.
If one has a permanent location and plans on gardening for years to come, LED tech is the way to go. They're more efficient at directing usable photons to the canopy, easier to position for even distribution, and when driven soft basically don't wear out. LED's also have a lot of automation value as well. The obvious disadvantage is their high initial investment and low-to-no resale value.