Then I suggest returning the meter and buying a Uni-T BT for about $30.
Recommendation: Cheap PPFD meter?
Hookers and blow? I like the way you think. But does sound fun. Lmao
www.rollitup.org
I bought a cheapy PAR meter.
- Thread starter Blue_Focus
- Start date
Blue_Focus
Well-Known Member
No thanks, I'm keeping this one.
Hollatchaboy
Well-Known Member
The uni - t/ with Bluetooth, paired with the ppfd meter app, works great.
Hollatchaboy
Well-Known Member
Agreed.
Did you compare them? With different lights even?Secretmicrogrow420, PM me your address (or a PO box) and I'll send you one of these for free.
Would be really interested in some data!
bigboerboel
Well-Known Member
Yes I did! All three were the EXACT same reading across a 4x4 with two HLG 350 Diablos at 75%. I set both lights so they read 1,100 at the top center bud with the Apogee 500, then used the others. Believe it or not, the readings were nearly identical across the entire 4x4. No need to spend $400, when $150 will do it.
crimsonecho
Well-Known Member
why is photone getting so much hate now? last i heard it was the bees knees best thing that happened to home growing since sliced bread.
That meter is interesting. I don't believe for a second that it actually measures PAR but it's only $110 and it might be interesting to run it against my Apogee to see how accurate it is.
I use an MQ-500 and have called Apogee tech support a few times in the two/three years that I've had it. During one call, I asked why the Apogee was so much more expensive than, say, a PhotoBio. The person I spoke with told me that the big cost driver for their devices is the sensor. It actually reads the 400-700nm range whereas the cheap PAR meters use a sensor that cannot read light above 660nm. The biggest issue that he said that Apogee found during testing is that the cheap sensors start drifting pretty quickly.
And I'm with you 100% about using a Uni-T. The new Bluetooth model is only $32 and I'd much rather put a $32 meter in a grow tent than a $1k iPhone.
Don't know about "hate" but the reactions that I'm reading are completely unsurprising to me.
I've tested Photone twice and, after trading email with the programmer, would recommend Photone only under very specific circumstances. The first time I tested Photone was against a blurple running Photone (then called "Korona") on my iPhone XS Max. Even though I was using the required light setting, Photone failed to give a reading. I
I got in touch with programmer (I've been a software engineer for over 30 years, including three years for Apple, so I'm more than comfortable discussing programming), and we discussed the app and some of the issues that he's trying to work around. On an iPhone, Photone may be accurate, but, according to the person who wrote the application, there are significant obstacles to getting an accurate combination on Android. the issue is that there are so many different Android devices that it's very,very difficult to write software that compensates for the limitations of dozens and dozens and dozens of sensors that are used in android devices.
For people who insist on using Photone, it's probably accurate if you have one of the devices which growlightmeter.com has tested. If it's not one of those double "chosen few double ", calibrate it, using something like an apogee, or by using a third-party PFD map against your light. You can also use manufacturers PFD maps, but…it would not surprise me if those values did not accurately reflect real world conditions.
Rather than spend money on an inexpensive PAR meter, most of which are in capable of detecting light with a frequency higher than 660 nm, I would just go with the Uni-T Bluetooth, light meter, and use the document that I've attached to convert the luxe reading that the Uni-T is giving you for your light into a PPFD value.
In the past week or so, I've seen grow journals where the grower is using Photone and the readings that they're getting for PFD have been obviously out of line. When I tested Photone the second time, it was reading 16% high across all dimmer settings. All three of the growers who have reported their Photone readings have been getting PPFD values that are significantly high.
Again, Photone can be used successfully. The problem is that unless you compare it to a known good source or it's one of the specific devices that growlightmeter.com has tested, then you simply have no idea how much light is hitting your plant.
Blue_Focus
Well-Known Member
I bought my PAR meter because it has a remote wired sensor. I can stand up and take a reading without getting on my knees to do it with my phone.
My old back won't let me bend over anymore.
crimsonecho
Well-Known Member
i dont know man i have an iphone and ive seen some tests done by migro and its seems to be doing pretty ok for something which costs so little. not that i care so much about the exact ppfd levels of my grow just a ballpark with 5-10% deviation shouldnt be such a problem for my applications. anyway nice info thanks for sharing.Don't know about "hate" but the reactions that I'm reading are completely unsurprising to me.
I've tested Photone twice and, after trading email with the programmer, would recommend Photone only under very specific circumstances. The first time I tested Photone was against a blurple running Photone (then called "Korona") on my iPhone XS Max. Even though I was using the required light setting, Photone failed to give a reading. I
I got in touch with programmer (I've been a software engineer for over 30 years, including three years for Apple, so I'm more than comfortable discussing programming), and we discussed the app and some of the issues that he's trying to work around. On an iPhone, Photone may be accurate, but, according to the person who wrote the application, there are significant obstacles to getting an accurate combination on Android. the issue is that there are so many different Android devices that it's very,very difficult to write software that compensates for the limitations of dozens and dozens and dozens of sensors that are used in android devices.
For people who insist on using Photone, it's probably accurate if you have one of the devices which growlightmeter.com has tested. If it's not one of those double "chosen few double ", calibrate it, using something like an apogee, or by using a third-party PFD map against your light. You can also use manufacturers PFD maps, but…it would not surprise me if those values did not accurately reflect real world conditions.
Rather than spend money on an inexpensive PAR meter, most of which are in capable of detecting light with a frequency higher than 660 nm, I would just go with the Uni-T Bluetooth, light meter, and use the document that I've attached to convert the luxe reading that the Uni-T is giving you for your light into a PPFD value.
In the past week or so, I've seen grow journals where the grower is using Photone and the readings that they're getting for PFD have been obviously out of line. When I tested Photone the second time, it was reading 16% high across all dimmer settings. All three of the growers who have reported their Photone readings have been getting PPFD values that are significantly high.
Again, Photone can be used successfully. The problem is that unless you compare it to a known good source or it's one of the specific devices that growlightmeter.com has tested, then you simply have no idea how much light is hitting your plant.
you‘re lucky my smack dab in the middle of not a kid anymore back does the same and if my calculations are correct i have a lot more to go haha