Why all the arguments over LED vs HPS ?

Yodaweed

Yodaweed

Well-Known Member
mauricem00 said:
everyone seems to have their own preference but the truth is that all lights grow plants.LED's produce about the same spectrum as HPS with less heat and higher cost. others prefer florescent or CMH bulbs for the higher UV and BLUE/VIOLET content which has been shown to increase THC and CBD content.we should all use what works best for us and ignore the critics who seem to have an almost religious affection for their lights.a cheap and easy DIY LED would be to use a couple of bridgelux EB strip lights bolted to a wooden frame and connected to a driver. no metal work involved just simple carpentry and soldering and as efficient as the best COB's. https://www.digikey.com/en/product-highlight/b/bridgelux/eb-series-modules?WT.srch=1&gclid=CjwKEAjwj6PKBRCAy9-07PeTtGgSJAC1P9xGkt8Johc-Ek5WSZhCIjcsnDAxqJidJd7eI0mxnCjCEhoCERjw_wcB in all honesty I'm a PU MMJ T5 closet growers but I have been doing small test grows with LED's for 3 years now starting with a mars hydro. then vero 18 and cree 3050 and currently with bridgelux EB strips. I have not seen the higher YPW that some claim and quality is higher if I supplement with a little UVA/UVB during flowering but LED's and HPS work fine for "street quality" products
Click to expand...
That's simply not true, HPS has a huge bump in IR, LEDs do not have ANY IR, and very little red light past 730nm (far red)

HPS spectrum is vastly different from LED spectrum. They also produce light in two different ways. One is more similar to the way the sun makes light (the sun is a burning ball of gas) the other is it's own thing , passing a current through a semi conductor.
 
Last edited:
jonsnow399

jonsnow399

Well-Known Member
Yodaweed said:
That's simply not true, HPS has a huge bump in IR, LEDs do not have ANY IR, and very little red light past 730nm (far red)

HPS spectrum is vastly different from LED spectrum. They also produce light in two different ways. One is more similar to the way the sun makes light (the sun is a burning ball of gas) the other is it's own thing , passing a current through a semi conductor.

Both HID lights and LEDs have their own place.
Click to expand...
HPS use nuclear fusion? Wow! Gotta get one
 
Yodaweed

Yodaweed

Well-Known Member
jonsnow399 said:
HPS use nuclear fusion? Wow! Gotta get one
Click to expand...
The Sun is a huge, glowing sphere of hot gas. Most of this gas is hydrogen (about 70%) and helium (about 28%). Carbon, nitrogen and oxygen make up 1.5% and the other 0.5% is made up of small amounts of many other elements such as neon, iron, silicon,magnesium and sulfur.

I understand it uses nuclear fusion, but in essence it's a burning ball of gas.

And i said similar not exactly the same, i know you come to troll and argue but both a HID light and the sun are a burning gas . Also both produce good amounts of IR light, when you put your hand in sunlight it feels warm, when you put your hand under a HPS it feels warm, if you stick your hand under a LED it doesn't feel warm.
 
jonsnow399

jonsnow399

Well-Known Member
Yodaweed said:
The Sun is a huge, glowing sphere of hot gas. Most of this gas is hydrogen (about 70%) and helium (about 28%). Carbon, nitrogen and oxygen make up 1.5% and the other 0.5% is made up of small amounts of many other elements such as neon, iron, silicon,magnesium and sulfur.

I understand it uses nuclear fusion, but in essence it's a burning ball of gas.

And i said similar not exactly the same, i know you come to troll and argue but both a HID light and the sun are a burning gas . Also both produce good amounts of IR light, when you put your hand in sunlight it feels warm, when you put your hand under a HPS it feels warm, if you stick your hand under a LED it doesn't feel warm.
Click to expand...
I understand the sun is huge, a ball, and glowing, but it is not burning. Burning is a chemical reaction, the sun as aforementioned is an atomic reaction. If the Sun was actually burning it wouldn't be nearly as bright and would have burned out long ago.
 
Yodaweed

Yodaweed

Well-Known Member
jonsnow399 said:
I understand the sun is huge, a ball, and glowing, but it is not burning. Burning is a chemical reaction, the sun as aforementioned is an atomic reaction. If the Sun was actually burning it wouldn't be nearly as bright and would have burned out long ago.
Click to expand...
dude stop trying to troll everything i say, the sun is a burning sphere of gases that uses nuclear fusion to transform hydrogen to helium ...

read this article for some education


https://www.space.com/14732-sun-burns-star-death.html


Yes, the sun will eventually burn out. But not for a long, long time. ... The sun burns using a nuclear fusion process, combining hydrogen into helium. When the sun runs out of hydrogen, it will fuse helium and other heavier elements until it runs out of fuel.Feb 29, 2012
 
jonsnow399

jonsnow399

Well-Known Member
Yodaweed said:
dude stop trying to troll everything i say, the sun is a burning sphere of gases that uses nuclear fusion to transform hydrogen to helium ...

read this article for some education


https://www.space.com/14732-sun-burns-star-death.html


Yes, the sun will eventually burn out. But not for a long, long time. ... The sun burns using a nuclear fusion process, combining hydrogen into helium. When the sun runs out of hydrogen, it will fuse helium and other heavier elements until it runs out of fuel.Feb 29, 2012
Click to expand...
Commenting isn't trolling, the article says nothing but that the sun will eventually use all its hydrogen, we all knew that. Have it your way, but the sun and hid are not alike.
 
TacoMac

TacoMac

Well-Known Member
Yodaweed said:
dude stop trying to troll everything i say,
Click to expand...
He's an LED nerd. It's all they know how to do.

Ask 10 LED guys which one is the best and you'll get 10 different answers.

Ask any MH/HPS guy which one is the best and they'll tell you they're pretty much all the same and have very similar results.

I've said it 1000 times and I'll say it again: The biggest problems with LED are:
  • Idiots that spread a shitload of misinformation about them.
  • VERY cheap LED lights that aren't worth a shit flooding the market.
  • Relatively FEW lighting companies producing very good products with proper documentation.
That leads to pretty much 80% of everything you hear about LED's being complete bullshit.

Are there good ones? Yes. And they're damn good. VERY good. But they're also VERY expensive to the point that the additional cost simply can not be justified at this time.

Now, if heat is going to be an issue for you, then you should SERIOUSLY consider LED lighting, but only the very high end, quality stuff.

Yes, it's going to be pricey. But what you'll wind up with in the end is around a 25% reduction in heat for the same amount of light. (I've covered this in detail elsewhere on this forum and I'm sick of posting all the math for people that don't bother to read it.)

Other than heat issues, there really is no quantifiable difference between high end LED/COB and MH/HPS at all.

That's it in a nutshell.
 
jonsnow399

jonsnow399

Well-Known Member
TacoMac said:
He's an LED nerd. It's all they know how to do.

Ask 10 LED guys which one is the best and you'll get 10 different answers.

Ask any MH/HPS guy which one is the best and they'll tell you they're pretty much all the same and have very similar results.

I've said it 1000 times and I'll say it again: The biggest problems with LED are:
  • Idiots that spread a shitload of misinformation about them.
  • VERY cheap LED lights that aren't worth a shit flooding the market.
  • Relatively FEW lighting companies producing very good products with proper documentation.
That leads to pretty much 80% of everything you hear about LED's being complete bullshit.

Are there good ones? Yes. And they're damn good. VERY good. But they're also VERY expensive to the point that the additional cost simply can not be justified at this time.

Now, if heat is going to be an issue for you, then you should SERIOUSLY consider LED lighting, but only the very high end, quality stuff.

Yes, it's going to be pricey. But what you'll wind up with in the end is around a 25% reduction in heat for the same amount of light. (I've covered this in detail elsewhere on this forum and I'm sick of posting all the math for people that don't bother to read it.)

That's it in a nutshell.
Click to expand...
Show me a post of mine where i have said anything about led's being superior to hps or any light. I am buying cmh
 
Flowki

Flowki

Well-Known Member
I don't think theirs enough talk about using the lights that cater to your country's climate while also taking into account the amount of lights your grow rooms out take can handle with no AC. It's crazy the amount of electric people willingly waste to heat/cool a room due to bad light choice/grow location or getting greedy with the amount of lights used. IMO supplement heating/AC should only be depended upon for the coldest and hottest days, not as a constant medium+ setting all year round.


Even if one light was better in ideal situations it's still subjective to your own grow rooms air intake while maintaining temp control. Purely moot, because to mimic those results in your setup may cost more energy than is worth.
 
chasingwaterfalls

chasingwaterfalls

Active Member
For the OP, just speaking from my experience..

I'm using the Advanced LED XTE 300. Max power draws 270w from the wall, but because I'm still a noob at growing, my current plants have been sitting under less than half power (125w).
20170615_221756.jpg
The XML lights look even nicer.

It was certainly overpriced (think like an Apple product), especially compared to diy, but if you're someone who can justify the upfront cost, pre-built has its perks, too - namely that it's plug and play.

I think there are many other folks who would first recommend a different company, so these are only my two cents.

My first led light was the Platinum p300 (made in China, from amazon). It def had the issues people mention with low quality blurple lights - veg was good, flower was lacking.

I then used an Area51 led, and that was a big improvement from my first light. Three years later and using this Advanced, I was blown away by how tightly the nodes are spaced.

Current grow, which has its own issues due to my lack of skill but not from the light.
20170619_201534.jpg
 
GroErr

GroErr

Well-Known Member
^^ this "discussion" is why I unsubscribe from many threads and avoid joining many others ^^

If you have nothing to contribute, just read. And if the only time you post is to trash someone else's post, you're just a troll and I pay no attention to what you have to say after I hit the ignore button. One of the two members arguing about how the sun works (as if it has anything to do with this thread) was already on ignore for the above reasons.

The other thing that irks me are people who have never actually grown with different techs having an opinion on how good or bad they are. If you haven't used it, shut the F up, I don't care what your opinion is if you have no hands-on experience. Just because you can google information on something doesn't mean you have any insight into what it takes to operate it, never mind being successful with it.

Unsubbed
 
haze010

haze010

Well-Known Member
TacoMac said:
He's an LED nerd. It's all they know how to do.

Ask 10 LED guys which one is the best and you'll get 10 different answers.

Ask any MH/HPS guy which one is the best and they'll tell you they're pretty much all the same and have very similar results.

I've said it 1000 times and I'll say it again: The biggest problems with LED are:
  • Idiots that spread a shitload of misinformation about them.
  • VERY cheap LED lights that aren't worth a shit flooding the market.
  • Relatively FEW lighting companies producing very good products with proper documentation.
That leads to pretty much 80% of everything you hear about LED's being complete bullshit.

Are there good ones? Yes. And they're damn good. VERY good. But they're also VERY expensive to the point that the additional cost simply can not be justified at this time.

Now, if heat is going to be an issue for you, then you should SERIOUSLY consider LED lighting, but only the very high end, quality stuff.

Yes, it's going to be pricey. But what you'll wind up with in the end is around a 25% reduction in heat for the same amount of light. (I've covered this in detail elsewhere on this forum and I'm sick of posting all the math for people that don't bother to read it.)

Other than heat issues, there really is no quantifiable difference between high end LED/COB and MH/HPS at all.

That's it in a nutshell.
Click to expand...
I'll strongly disagree that the very good ones are very expensive, it just takes time and research but there are many options that arent too expensive. I built two lights with samsung H strips for $330 cad total (just under $250 USD) and they are almost too much for 2x4. I found a bargin though as the same strips would cost about $70 more today. Building them was as complicated as mounting strips to a frame and plugging in wires, it took all of 15 minutes.

If you are unwilling to spend 15 minutes assembling it then an equal LED light will double or triple in cost.
 
OldMedUser

OldMedUser

Well-Known Member
I'm a diehard HID user because it's all I've used since '82 for getting big buds. I have magnetic ballasts that are probably older than a lot of growers here and they keep pumping out the lumens. I do use fluoros for early veg and seedlings/clones but they go under MH light before too long to get the best growth.

These newer COB LEDS show the best promise since LEDs started getting used to grow pot but the technology is still in it's infancy and I'm too poor to experiment with them. I might not live long enough to get back what they cost up front in energy savings so no rush to dive in.

CMH lights aren't new. They've been around for 15 years and Philips used to make a 400W that ran in a 400W HPS magnetic ballast of which I have three. Same kind of spectrum that the 315W have. They were dirt cheap as they were made for retrofitting warehouse/stadium lighting to get brighter light that is truer to natural colours and not for growing plants. Can run those from sprout to crop and get great results. I almost bought a case of 6 for $300 but couldn't come up with the coin. There are other companies that make them now but I'm all stocked up on bulbs.

Not to start a flame war or anything but with most of the grows I've seen using regular LEDS the buds aren't near as big or chunky as what you can get with HIDs unless you run as many real watts worth as you would with HIDs. COBs may alter that perception but I haven't looked into it that deeply.

And for fug sakes folks it was bad enough looking at orange plants but all these blurple/pink ones are even worse! :D
 
jonsnow399

jonsnow399

Well-Known Member
GroErr said:
^^ this "discussion" is why I unsubscribe from many threads and avoid joining many others ^^

If you have nothing to contribute, just read. And if the only time you post is to trash someone else's post, you're just a troll and I pay no attention to what you have to say after I hit the ignore button. One of the two members arguing about how the sun works (as if it has anything to do with this thread) was already on ignore for the above reasons.

The other thing that irks me are people who have never actually grown with different techs having an opinion on how good or bad they are. If you haven't used it, shut the F up, I don't care what your opinion is if you have no hands-on experience. Just because you can google information on something doesn't mean you have any insight into what it takes to operate it, never mind being successful with it.

Unsubbed
Click to expand...
You are absolutely right groerr, but I usually don't comment on people's posts, and I should have known better than reply to him especially. Apologies
 
jarvild

jarvild

Well-Known Member
OldMedUser said:
I'm a diehard HID user because it's all I've used since '82 for getting big buds. I have magnetic ballasts that are probably older than a lot of growers here and they keep pumping out the lumens. I do use fluoros for early veg and seedlings/clones but they go under MH light before too long to get the best growth.

These newer COB LEDS show the best promise since LEDs started getting used to grow pot but the technology is still in it's infancy and I'm too poor to experiment with them. I might not live long enough to get back what they cost up front in energy savings so no rush to dive in.

CMH lights aren't new. They've been around for 15 years and Philips used to make a 400W that ran in a 400W HPS magnetic ballast of which I have three. Same kind of spectrum that the 315W have. They were dirt cheap as they were made for retrofitting warehouse/stadium lighting to get brighter light that is truer to natural colours and not for growing plants. Can run those from sprout to crop and get great results. I almost bought a case of 6 for $300 but couldn't come up with the coin. There are other companies that make them now but I'm all stocked up on bulbs.

Not to start a flame war or anything but with most of the grows I've seen using regular LEDS the buds aren't near as big or chunky as what you can get with HIDs unless you run as many real watts worth as you would with HIDs. COBs may alter that perception but I haven't looked into it that deeply.

And for fug sakes folks it was bad enough looking at orange plants but all these blurple/pink ones are even worse! :D
Click to expand...
Just between us old folks here, the 330s' where made for 400 watt HPS ballast. the 400s' were for the 400 watt MH ballast. Still got 6 of the philips 400 CDM's left from 2 cases I picked up many years ago.
 
MichiganMedGrower

MichiganMedGrower

Well-Known Member
Flowki said:
I don't think theirs enough talk about using the lights that cater to your country's climate while also taking into account the amount of lights your grow rooms out take can handle with no AC. It's crazy the amount of electric people willingly waste to heat/cool a room due to bad light choice/grow location or getting greedy with the amount of lights used. IMO supplement heating/AC should only be depended upon for the coldest and hottest days, not as a constant medium+ setting all year round.


Even if one light was better in ideal situations it's still subjective to your own grow rooms air intake while maintaining temp control. Purely moot, because to mimic those results in your setup may cost more energy than is worth.
Click to expand...

I agree and have mentioned in a few threads I supplement my house heat with my growroom in winter by directing the filtered exhaust under my living room.
 
MichiganMedGrower

MichiganMedGrower

Well-Known Member
OldMedUser said:
I'm a diehard HID user because it's all I've used since '82 for getting big buds. I have magnetic ballasts that are probably older than a lot of growers here and they keep pumping out the lumens. I do use fluoros for early veg and seedlings/clones but they go under MH light before too long to get the best growth.

These newer COB LEDS show the best promise since LEDs started getting used to grow pot but the technology is still in it's infancy and I'm too poor to experiment with them. I might not live long enough to get back what they cost up front in energy savings so no rush to dive in.

CMH lights aren't new. They've been around for 15 years and Philips used to make a 400W that ran in a 400W HPS magnetic ballast of which I have three. Same kind of spectrum that the 315W have. They were dirt cheap as they were made for retrofitting warehouse/stadium lighting to get brighter light that is truer to natural colours and not for growing plants. Can run those from sprout to crop and get great results. I almost bought a case of 6 for $300 but couldn't come up with the coin. There are other companies that make them now but I'm all stocked up on bulbs.

Not to start a flame war or anything but with most of the grows I've seen using regular LEDS the buds aren't near as big or chunky as what you can get with HIDs unless you run as many real watts worth as you would with HIDs. COBs may alter that perception but I haven't looked into it that deeply.

And for fug sakes folks it was bad enough looking at orange plants but all these blurple/pink ones are even worse! :D
Click to expand...
I agree with some of this. It have to say the old cmh bulbs share virtually nothing with the new ones and it will happen to led too.

The new cmh run on a new kind of ballast that has a smooth flat wave of power (square wave) to increase output across the whole spectrum. They also use a new base and special gasses that run much hotter and high intensity than the old 400 or 860.

That is why they put out so much par for their watts.

The old ones were made to light store windows and such. The new ones are plant specific if we are talking Phillips.

Same with cobs. But they are high bay warehouse lights.

I think plant specific cobs will be around soon enough. Gonna make a lot of people upset.

Maybe they are now. Shit changes daily.
 
Flowki

Flowki

Well-Known Member
MichiganMedGrower said:
I agree and have mentioned in a few threads I supplement my house heat with my growroom in winter by directing the filtered exhaust under my living room.
Click to expand...
That's a great idea, although I must ask out of curiosity if it would increase or reduce damp/mold?. I'm one of those guys who always thinks a pro comes with a con, it is a curse o0. Well.. maybe if you look at it the other way around it's a blessing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top