PDA

View Full Version : Hamilton 14k vs. XM 20k Pictures



adamRS80
Wed, 24th Nov 2004, 08:46 PM
Well I got the Hamilton 250w 14k in today to replace my 11 month old XM 20k. I like the look of the tank much more but as you can see from the attached picture the color as become a little less attractive on some corals, but that was expected. I'm not sure how the color will change after the 14k has been on 100 hours or so. Does anybody know if it gets more or less blue?

GaryP
Wed, 24th Nov 2004, 09:03 PM
Bulbs generally get less blue as they age, in other words they shift towards red.

Gary

Tim Marvin
Wed, 24th Nov 2004, 09:07 PM
I like the 14k much better.

Note to self, yet another reason to NOT use XM's

adamRS80
Wed, 24th Nov 2004, 09:09 PM
Yeah now that I have something to compare to the XM does not look natural. I think the 14k is exactly what I am looking for.

adamRS80
Wed, 24th Nov 2004, 09:10 PM
I think my corals are going to grow alot faster now.

MikeDeL
Wed, 24th Nov 2004, 09:31 PM
I like the 14k, looks good!

::pete::
Wed, 24th Nov 2004, 09:34 PM
I think my corals are going to grow alot faster now.

I cant say they wont grow faster, but its not a huge growth difference. At least in my case. There is good growth though, but thats due to many factors ... ya know.

adamRS80
Wed, 24th Nov 2004, 09:37 PM
Yeah I'm assuming that my water quality is good, movement is good, food is there for the corals, right calcium and alkalinity levels. I think my tank has been doing pretty well with the XM 20k so there should be a little improvement. We shall see.

::pete::
Wed, 24th Nov 2004, 10:10 PM
Assuming ... :D

I couldnt even get a decent picture showing the true look with the 20K. Now, with the 14K its perfect in my opinion.

scuba_steveo
Wed, 24th Nov 2004, 11:02 PM
I run hamilton 14K with VHO. I like it better than 20 but I still want more actinic support. I need to talk to greg about getting some T5 actinics.

captexas
Wed, 24th Nov 2004, 11:19 PM
Be cool if you had a 10k XM bulb to take pics with as well to compare them to the 14k bulbs. I currently run the 10k's and would like to see the difference in color.

jrhein
Thu, 25th Nov 2004, 12:16 AM
Would it be better to go with the 14K 250watt bulbs or put 10K and go with some VHOs to get your blue light? Just curious??? I run 10K now and like the look but, know I need to get some blue light in there.

::pete::
Thu, 25th Nov 2004, 12:28 AM
Be cool if you had a 10k XM bulb to take pics with as well to compare them to the 14k bulbs. I currently run the 10k's and would like to see the difference in color.

I might be able to help :D

captexas
Thu, 25th Nov 2004, 12:34 AM
JRHein - I am running two 400watt 10k XMs with two 110watt VHO actinics. My actinics aren't very noticeable. With 250watters it would probably have more of an impact though.

Pete - can't wait! :-)

::pete::
Thu, 25th Nov 2004, 12:46 PM
The 10K XM is on the left with the 14K Hamilton on the right.

With Actinic

http://www.maast.org/albums/prafferty/1014_with_actinic.jpg

Without

http://www.maast.org/albums/prafferty/1014_no_actinic.jpg

scuba_steveo
Fri, 26th Nov 2004, 12:38 AM
cool pic pete. you can really see the difference.

Ram_Puppy
Fri, 26th Nov 2004, 01:26 AM
nice pics, was going to post my hamilton 14k against the xm 10, but you can already see the difference. I MUCH PREFER my hamilton to the XM. Love it.

captexas
Sat, 27th Nov 2004, 07:30 PM
I just finished reading a thread on RC about the Hamilton vs. AC bulbs in the Equipment forum. Others that have tried the Hamiltons found that they lost some of there blue coloring after a short period of time. I'm curious if anyone here has seen or will soon see the change in the bulbs spectrum after they burn in.

GaryP
Sat, 27th Nov 2004, 08:13 PM
What you lose in purples and greens you will gain in reds and pinks.
My Lobophytum and pink Stylophora look great under the my new 10K's.

Gary

captexas
Sat, 27th Nov 2004, 09:13 PM
Gary - I was refering to the color of the light from the bulb. People buy bulbs expecting them to look the same the entire time. It seems some people have seen the Hamilton bulb lose it's original color that so many people are attracted to.

GaryP
Sat, 27th Nov 2004, 09:28 PM
Chris,

I think I said in a previous post here that all bulbs have a tendency to shift towards red as they get older. That, in addition to an decrease in output is why we replace them before they burn out like we do with household incandescent bulbs.

Gary

captexas
Sat, 27th Nov 2004, 09:32 PM
I understand all bulbs shift over time, but there are a few reports of these bulbs shifting after two weeks or so. Just thought people here should check it out before they rush into spending money on bulbs. Shouldn't have to replace halide lamps that soon! lol

::pete::
Sun, 28th Nov 2004, 10:34 AM
As you can see in the pictures mine have not shifted 4 - 4+ months old.

Ram_Puppy
Sun, 28th Nov 2004, 10:36 AM
well, so far, half a week in, no shift. :) I am very happy with it. NOw, I can say after a month my 10K XM started showing more yellow, that, I did not like, looked like someone peed in the water. I don't think it was a ballast issue either.

GaryP
Sun, 28th Nov 2004, 11:24 AM
Chris,

I don't know that anyone has ever done a scientific study of spectrum shifting. I think it would be great if someone does. The human eye is not a very accurate analytical instrument. It takes a spectrophotmeter to do a thorough analysis.

I wouldn't doubt that bulbs begin shifting shortly after use. Its probably a continuous process. The question is whether it would be significant enough to detect with the human eye. Its hard for me to notice it on old bulbs because I see a small shift on a continuous basis. The only time its really obvious is after a bulb change when there is a huge difference that is noticeable.

The other question is what role the ballast plays in this process. Its been shown that matching a ballast and bulb has an effect on PAR value. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a similar synergy when it comes to spectrum.

There is so little hard science when it comes to this hobby. Of course its a heck of a lot better than it was 10 years ago when I got started. The closest thing to hard data available then was what some 19 year old kid told you at an LFS or some book written by a "guru" that was entirely based on anecdotal info. Guys like Shimek and Randy Holmes Farley have contributed a heck of a lot to those of us trying to take a more scientific approach to the hobby. Before that it was more art than science. I don't know that the science in the hobby currently out weighs the art, but its getting there.

Gary