LED opinions

[scar3face]

Hi Guys,

 

I"m in the process of getting my feet wet so to speak and was toying with idea of using an LED light for the grow.

 

I'm just going to be using a grow tent and thought that this light would be ok: http://www.prosourceworldwide.com/Illuminator-180W-UFO-LED-Grow-Lights-p/illuminator%20jumbo%20ufo%20180w.htm

 

Whilst it's a bit pricey compared to the other types of lights, I don't mind shelling out a bit extra for the longevity of the LED

 

Excuse the noob however please I'm just looking for some opinions.

 

 

Thx

Edited May 4, 2011 by scar3face

[resinate]

Firstly welcome to OS scar3face.

 

This is a debate thats been had here many a time and rather than going through it all again Ive found a couple of the threads that relate to the exact same topic. Have a read and form your own opinions

 

r8

 

https://cannabis.community.forums.ozstoners.com/topic/32084-leds-an-explanation-that-seems-reasonable/

 

https://cannabis.community.forums.ozstoners.com/topic/32119-led-is-dead/

[jimbojones5678]

I've seen a couple of reasonable results from LEDs, but not many.

 

I personally think that a HID will get the best results. Costs a bit more to run but the buds will be much better.

 

Jimbo

[pisspotgrower]

Jimbos spot on...while led can grow a decent plant....like cfls the light intensity isnt there for any decent big ass buds.....not to say the technology wont improve in the future

[The Hash Nibbler]

Awwww Come on Mods , can't just come onto OS and drop the 3 letter word without penalty...... sheesh! I don't know what this site is coming to...................................... Lmao

 

Heya Scar3face , few people use them to get seedlings going , maybe a bit of Veg growth but besides that, they should be kicked back under the bed into the pile of "hydro gear ya bought while not thinking straight".

Don't have the power to give good big buds and a lot of the products out there make all sorts of hokey promises that in reality can't be delivered.

$599 for a Jumbo UFO is a blooody rip off, you could buy yourself a good 600w HPS set up for that. Do the job properly too.

 

Real lights ....... Real Buds. Fairy lights......... Fairy Buds........... Simple . Peace. gh72

Edited May 5, 2011 by Grasshopper72

[headhigh]

LEDs do not compare with HIDs for lumen output which is what the plant needs. Sure the spectrum is great but without the lumen output you will have a rather sickly looking plant.

 

400W HPS HID (approx $300 with ballast and shade) will out-perform a $800 LED light.

Edited May 5, 2011 by headhigh

[Frazz]

yea i agree with the above^

 

i reckon it boils down to ..

 

do you want to grow piss-ant fairy-floss buds and prove that LED's can grow ? .. then go LED

 

OR

 

are you fair dinkum about growing big solid buds that could smash a window? ... then go hps lights

 

[nitram]

Hi LED's are ok for veging and seedlings but if you want "buds" and preimum ones for the $500 for that UFO may bee crap .

You have to look at the "speectrum" of light mix. In my research, through viewing peoples attempts at full grows using UF's amd using one in my current grow it's the right mix of Orange/Blue/Red (or Tri-color) that are best suited

 

I got my Tri-color UFO on e-bay for $120 - the good thing about the 'disk shaped' ones is the fit well in a veg/cloneing tent

plan to grow & grow well ................. welcome to OS

Nitty.

[Wylee_coyote]

Hmmm

Cast my memory back 20+ years or so before airborne remote sensing etc...

 

"Why the F%$^k would I grow a plant in an old wardrobe with lights ? That hydro stuff is crap, weedy sick looking plants, runty little heads, runs the power bill up, costs a fortune to set it up and all those chemicals make smoking it taste like accidentally hitting yourself in the face with aerogard. Real weed is heaps better "

 

Replace LED with hydro/growlight and you would have heard almost the same opinions back then ( even from me ) which were mostly true at the time. But thanks to necessity the technology and techniques evolved.

There seems to be a lot of nay-saying without a lot of data or hands on. Its kind of ironic that if the hydro/growlight guys back then had listened to the "real weed" argument then the guys who seem to be one eyed anti-LED wouldn't have half the tech or know how they do now.

 

So I guess the take home is

Necessity is the mother of all invention

(Blind) assumption is the mother of all f#$k ups

Edited May 6, 2011 by Wylee_coyote

[Wylee_coyote]

Of course plasma could make the whole argument redundant. Kind of the reverse of LED, LCD and plasma TV's