?? pros and cons on new tech

[KillerGreenBud(K.G.B.)]

my question is on led mixed spectrum lights,ive heard there no good,but man that shure seems the way 2 go. little 2 no heat and 50 watts will put off some massive lums, htg has from what i can tell , a kickass 12x12 fixture. i really need input as heat and power consumption is and will be a major problem thanks

 

[GrowTech]

There are obvious pros, but production is not one of them. I consider flower production to be the most important part of a grow, and if the production sucks- why bother?

 

[mebesideme]

I thought I would be cool and try leds and t5's once, thank god the led fixture fell and broke the second day. I took it back and talked my way into a 400 hps with air cooling and digital ballast. My only regret is that I didn't go 600 or 1000, as even the 400 seems puny after visiting a room with a few 1000's. Never been happier. And the power consumption isn't bad at all, actually uses a little less than an 8 lamp t5. T5 is good for veg, but honestly, it was harder to keep cool in the room with the t5 because all of its heat stays in the room, and you can't air cool the light.

 

[thelastpirate]

There are obvious pros, but production is not one of them. I consider flower production to be the most important part of a grow, and if the production sucks- why bother?

Why would production suck? I am not questioning your knowledge, just trying to glean some of it for myself. More light intensity= More, larger bud. LEDs blow away anything currently available for light output. You can see from whats already available what an LED is capable of lumen wise. They are bright as fuck. I have a flashlight the size of my old mag-lite that will shoot a 3,000,000 candle power beam over a mile and light up it's target. If one had LEDs that emitted the right wavelengths for our purposes, I can't see how they WOULDN'T work.

I thought I would be cool and try leds and t5's once, thank god the led fixture fell and broke the second day. I took it back and talked my way into a 400 hps with air cooling and digital ballast. My only regret is that I didn't go 600 or 1000, as even the 400 seems puny after visiting a room with a few 1000's. Never been happier. And the power consumption isn't bad at all, actually uses a little less than an 8 lamp t5. T5 is good for veg, but honestly, it was harder to keep cool in the room with the t5 because all of its heat stays in the room, and you can't air cool the light.

+Rep for trying it. Thats a rare occurrence. Most people want OTHER people to try it first. Without experimentation, the evolution of this nefarious hobby would stagnate.
That being said, I don't see how they wouldn't work, god knows they have the lumens to watts ratio. What's the color temp of the light they emit? The problem with lighting systems is that they are designed around human comfort. Notice that HPS is almost invariably used for outdoor lighting, not where people habituate. The wavelengths of light emitted by HPS is not real conducive to extended exposure by people. It's hard to work under them. Now MH (and all of the LEDs that I have seen) are closer to 5600 degK. The white/blue quality are much easier on the eyes for people to be under.
I'm real sure that they'd (LEDs) be the shit for vegging, judging from the white light they emit. Who the fuck wouldn't want or use a bulb that would give the equivalent of 2000w with the power consumption of a CFL? IF they were to make an LED that had the same output frequency of an HPS (color Temp) it too would be the bomb. LEDs are for sure the wave of the future. Shit, I remember us in college laughing and scratching our heads, wondering WHY IN THE WORLD anyone would be throwing money away researching digital imaging. How good could it be? What would we EVER use it for? (I majored in Fine Art/Photographic science)

 

[NotMine]

I know they'll put out the lummens...but the color spectrum of most cheap ones aren't right had some guy trying to sell me one but he didn't know the spectrum of the leds his company was selling dumb ass, anyway find out what spectrum and cri is first all light makers (even leds) know what spectrum and CRI of their lights if they tell you they don't know they know you know what there selling isn't going to work just that question will send them running for the hills

 

[Tanuvan]

LEDs will eventually come around. The problem seems to be as NotMine stated.. appropriate wavelength. Red and Blue even at the absorption peak will work, but evidence is showing that other wavelengths may be needed. This is typically why LED+CFL tends to do better. Once the proper wavelengths are identified (i.e some far red...etc.) LEDs will be a decent alternative.

Powerwise, they already have 15 watt LEDs. They are HUGE. It certainly takes far less of those. Everyone knows that HPS does well, but the spectrum of useable light produced by HPS is pretty small. HPS compensates by throwing out an amazing amount of light.

 

[cassino420]

Ok ok ok .

 

[Jonus]

Theres quite a bit already written about in these forums concerning the pro's and con's of LED lighting.

Basically if you know what the lumens per square foot are for the LED light you are purchasing or making, then the formula for lumens per square foot is true for LEDs as it is for any other type of light.

If you want to veg successfully you're going to want more than 2500 lumens per square foot. To match the lumens per square foot of an HPS during the flowering phase you will need a setup that outputs at least 10,000 lumens per square foot at the canopy of your plants.

LED lamps easily make the 2500 lumens per square foot (mine output 4000), but come up short for flowering by themselves.