Growing with LED

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Freeman8804

New Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Greetings, all. I'm a newbie here, and to growing. Has anyone heard about using LED's for growing? A friend seems pretty convinced it is the best thing, giving off a good light spectrum and little if any heat.

Thanks for the replies.
 
Hey there
This is a topic brought up many times, if not daily.
Its really something you have to try for yourself.
Most people believe LEDs are the way of the future for growing
but right now i think HID (high intensity discharge) lighting is the way to go.
Yes HIDs give off alot of heat but you can cool them. And heat is reduced when your grow room is being vented the way it should be. I myself know nothing about LEDs but can say this, ive seen hundreds of different peoples grows, and a handful or two of LED grows and have seen much better results from HID lighting when its used properly. In my honest opinion if you know how to place the light(s), vent your room properly and use the light to its full power, HID lighting dominates. And its simple too, MH for veg. HPS for flower. done deal. Im sure one day things will change but right now thats the way it is. again this is just my opinion, take care
 
IMO, at this time, LEDs are too expensive and not really ready to compete with the HIDs, regardless of the sales hype you get from those selling LEDs. I would pick T5s over LEDs. The only scenario that I could imagine me running LEDs would be if I had a very small space that I could micro-manage.

There is plenty of info here--do a search on "LEDS" (plural).
 
There's a new member starting a new Grow Journal using Leds all through his grow veg and flower, I'm sure peeps will be watching this one to see the results! At least I will be!


Phatpharmer
 
Hey, I'm thinking of starting a modest sized grow room. Haven't bought lights yet but I'm drawn to LED's for 2 reason, both concerning keeping my grow a secret from the authorities. They use energy more efficiently so I won't get busted cause I'm using too much power. I've heard high utility bills are a way people get themselves in trouble. Second, since they don't give off so much heat, cops using a FLIR can't see them.
One major drawback I read about in these forums is that LED's give spotty light coverage, leading to deformed leaf growth and probably other problems. Apparently, since the LED setups use two different light colors, those areas of the plant that receive only one light color and not both at the same time won't grow well. Back when I used to grow I considered using a motorized light stand that would rotate the light, letting you cover a little more area with any one light and so allowing you to spread the output of a big, powerful light around the grow room and let you use every last lumen more efficiently.
If you rotated the LED I would think that the color dispersion problem would be solved. Any thoughts?
 
try a fan maybe, that way the air moves the leaves around so more even light hits lower canopies. idk, just a thought.
have you seen these, i found it on ebay...
i dont know anyone who has used one.
i sent the info to a buddie who owns a hydro store, he said he was going to see if the guy wants to sell retail, and get a demo. :)

hXXp://cgi.ebay.com/Industrial-Strength-grow-light-LED-bar-Ultra-bright_W0QQitemZ180385051076QQ
 
I have never grown with LED's, but I am researching them now as I am considering using them in a future project. The reason most people say L.E.D. grows suck is because most L.E.D. grows do not use nearly enough light. For that mattrer most grows in general do not use enough light. L.E.D. lights do not put out very many lumens, though they create a lot more usable light per watt than HID lights. They also create a LOT more usable light than HID lights and generate a lot less heat. LED's also last a lot longer, most growers change their HPS bulbs after 2 or 3 grows but an LED can go for 50,000-80,000 hours and degrade much less over time than an HPS...that is about 10 years.
The light spectrum the plant can use and the light LED lights generate literally blows HID lighting away. Plants use mostly blue spectrum light for veg, and red spectrum light for flowering. If you look at the two light spectrum charts below you can see what I mean.
The chart for the 600HPS bulb shows that a CLEAR majority of the light being given off falls in the green to yellow spectrum, not very much blue at all, and not very much red at all. This means the lamp is giving off a LOT of light the plant can not use.
If you do a search on Ebay for LED lights, then sort by price high to low, you will some 600watt LED lights for anywhere from $1,500-$2,500.
The other chart is one for a $2,500 600 watt LED called the "Illuminator Superpro".
If you decide to go with an LED, make sure it has TRI-BAND technology. This will deliver a light spectrum similar to the one in the chart below, as you can see, almost all of the light is falling in the blue and red spectrum, where the plants use it. This is why LED's appear blue and red, but HPS lights appear orange. This series LED claims that over 95% of the light emitted is usable by the plant.
--
" the 600W Pro Series emits the same amount of absorbable light as a (2) 1,000W HID's, and it is this ability to only emit key absorbable light that your plants are able to use that makes it possible to achieve the parity results with an HID at just a fraction of the wattage. Lumens output is not a key factor in determining plant growth, it is the ability of the plants to absorb and tranform the light energy into photosynthesis and which wavelengths are to be used to achieve those key abosrption points. Lumens are a common measure of output that is used to measure the intensity of HID Lighting, but really has no direct bearing on determining plant growth. Remember that over 85% of the light emitted from an HID Light is wasited in the form of non-absorbable light waves as well as heat energy."
--
Most of the ads I read for 600 watt LED lights say they put out as much usable light as TWO TO TWO AND A HALF 1,000 watt HPS lights and can cover a 100 square foot area, with 48 square feet getting what they call "core saturation" which can be translated to "enough light to grow good MJ". A 1,000 watt HPS putting out 145000 lumens can cover about 25 square feet with 5,000 lumens per square foot, so I would understand where they get off saying this 600 watt LED covers as much growing space as two 1,000 HPS lights. LED lights also use no ballast, and you can simply hang the entire unit. There is no light to vent, reflector to adjust, etc.
If you have the money to invest, LED's are the lights of the future. If these lights were $700 instead of $1,500-$2,500, many more people would already be using them. In 5-10 years when the mass production costs have lowered the cost to produce the bulbs and the technology has had more time to come along, everyone will be using LED's. That is just what happens with technology as it develops. Plasma TV's 5 years ago were 500% the cost of now.
Anyway, hope this all helps.

600HPS.JPG


LED600.JPG
 
Mr Greenjeans said:
since the LED setups use two different light colors, those areas of the plant that receive only one light color and not both at the same time won't grow well. Any thoughts?

If you look at the tri-band technology I don't think there is this issue. Even if the light did provide slightly spotty coverage, I would assume this would be a non issue with an oscillating fan in place blowing the leaves back and forth, which you would have anyway in order to circulate air.
 
Mr Greenjeans said:
Hey, I'm thinking of starting a modest sized grow room. Haven't bought lights yet but I'm drawn to LED's for 2 reason, both concerning keeping my grow a secret from the authorities. They use energy more efficiently so I won't get busted cause I'm using too much power. I've heard high utility bills are a way people get themselves in trouble. Second, since they don't give off so much heat, cops using a FLIR can't see them.
One major drawback I read about in these forums is that LED's give spotty light coverage, leading to deformed leaf growth and probably other problems. Apparently, since the LED setups use two different light colors, those areas of the plant that receive only one light color and not both at the same time won't grow well. Back when I used to grow I considered using a motorized light stand that would rotate the light, letting you cover a little more area with any one light and so allowing you to spread the output of a big, powerful light around the grow room and let you use every last lumen more efficiently.
If you rotated the LED I would think that the color dispersion problem would be solved. Any thoughts?

You are operating under some misconceptions. Your power consumption for a modest grow should raise absolutely no concerns. Ditto the "heat signature" issue. Virtually everyone that is busted gets busted because they told others about their grow.

I would encourage you to do LOTS more reading before you decide on the lights you want to use. LEDs do not necessarily have to use 2 different light colors--in fact, most of them don't. The problem with LEDs is that they have very little penetration (I know, bad word), they are incredibly expensive (if you buy what you really need), and they are not really cheaper to run when you look at grams per watt--i.e. 400 watts of LEDs will not produce nearly the quantity of bud that 400W of HPS will. While LEDs may get to where they can compete with HIDs, they are not there yet. If you do not want to run HIDs, IMO, T5s are a far better decision than LEDs.
 
NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer said:
I have never grown with LED's, but I am researching them now as I am considering using them in a future project. The reason most people say L.E.D. grows suck is because most L.E.D. grows do not use nearly enough light. For that mattrer most grows in general do not use enough light. L.E.D. lights do not put out very many lumens, though they create a lot more usable light per watt than HID lights. They also create a LOT more usable light than HID lights and generate a lot less heat. LED's also last a lot longer, most growers change their HPS bulbs after 2 or 3 grows but an LED can go for 50,000-80,000 hours and degrade much less over time than an HPS...that is about 10 years.
The light spectrum the plant can use and the light LED lights generate literally blows HID lighting away. Plants use mostly blue spectrum light for veg, and red spectrum light for flowering. If you look at the two light spectrum charts below you can see what I mean.
The chart for the 600HPS bulb shows that a CLEAR majority of the light being given off falls in the green to yellow spectrum, not very much blue at all, and not very much red at all. This means the lamp is giving off a LOT of light the plant can not use.
If you do a search on Ebay for LED lights, then sort by price high to low, you will some 600watt LED lights for anywhere from $1,500-$2,500.
The other chart is one for a $2,500 600 watt LED called the "Illuminator Superpro".
If you decide to go with an LED, make sure it has TRI-BAND technology. This will deliver a light spectrum similar to the one in the chart below, as you can see, almost all of the light is falling in the blue and red spectrum, where the plants use it. This is why LED's appear blue and red, but HPS lights appear orange. This series LED claims that over 95% of the light emitted is usable by the plant.
--
" the 600W Pro Series emits the same amount of absorbable light as a (2) 1,000W HID's, and it is this ability to only emit key absorbable light that your plants are able to use that makes it possible to achieve the parity results with an HID at just a fraction of the wattage. Lumens output is not a key factor in determining plant growth, it is the ability of the plants to absorb and tranform the light energy into photosynthesis and which wavelengths are to be used to achieve those key abosrption points. Lumens are a common measure of output that is used to measure the intensity of HID Lighting, but really has no direct bearing on determining plant growth. Remember that over 85% of the light emitted from an HID Light is wasited in the form of non-absorbable light waves as well as heat energy."
--
Most of the ads I read for 600 watt LED lights say they put out as much usable light as TWO TO TWO AND A HALF 1,000 watt HPS lights and can cover a 100 square foot area, with 48 square feet getting what they call "core saturation" which can be translated to "enough light to grow good MJ". A 1,000 watt HPS putting out 145000 lumens can cover about 25 square feet with 5,000 lumens per square foot, so I would understand where they get off saying this 600 watt LED covers as much growing space as two 1,000 HPS lights. LED lights also use no ballast, and you can simply hang the entire unit. There is no light to vent, reflector to adjust, etc.
If you have the money to invest, LED's are the lights of the future. If these lights were $700 instead of $1,500-$2,500, many more people would already be using them. In 5-10 years when the mass production costs have lowered the cost to produce the bulbs and the technology has had more time to come along, everyone will be using LED's. That is just what happens with technology as it develops. Plasma TV's 5 years ago were 500% the cost of now.
Anyway, hope this all helps.

But will all this they still dont produce bud like a good ole HPS.
ive never seen a led grow come even close.
 
No offense, but I doubt you have seen an LED grow with a $2,500 600 watt tri-band, I can almost guarantee it. Otherwise, you would not be saying that. If companies like HTG are getting behind these and making the same claim on their site (a trusted source that would not sell crap), than you can bet they are good. If you look at large greenhouse operations acroos the world that utilize indoor grow lights, they are ALL slowly moving towards LED's.
Sure, people are using 12 watt LED's now, but they are nothing. They are like using a single UFO. If you really look at these lights and what they can do, you will seriously consider LED's. Check out "greenpinelane.com", it is a site where they test LED grow lights indoors.
The science is there when you look at these lights. They aren't lying to you when they say that over 85% of the light produced with these LED's can be used by the plants versus less than 20% with an HPS. The fact that they last 10 years and use so much less electricity over time makes them more cost-effective, but who has the $2,500 to spend on a single light?
10 years from now when that 600 watt LED is $500 or less, people on MarP using HPS lights for flowering will be talked about as relics.
 
The Hemp Goddess said:
400 watts of LEDs will not produce nearly the quantity of bud that 400W of HPS will.

As much as I respect THG, I can not agree with this statement. The science is there. If a 400 watt LED did not perform as well or better than a 400 watt HPS, then there would be no market for a 400 watt LED grow light at 3 to 4 times the price of a 400HPS, and you would not see more and more companies beginning to carry and market the technology.
 
NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer said:
No offense, but I doubt you have seen an LED grow with a $2,500 600 watt tri-band,

10 years from now when that 600 watt LED is $500 or less, people on MarP using HPS lights for flowering will be talked about as relics.

Your right I doubt any of the LED grows ive seen are using $2500.00 LED's
And I also doubt the OP has 10 years to wait.

So I stand by my original statement, current Led grows ive seen don't compare with HPS
 
NYC_Diesel x Jack_Herer said:
As much as I respect THG, I can not agree with this statement. The science is there. If a 400 watt LED did not perform as well or better than a 400 watt HPS, then there would be no market for a 400 watt LED grow light at 3 to 4 times the price of a 400HPS, and you would not see more and more companies beginning to carry and market the technology.

If this is true are there any grows here or any site that can show me the buds produced from such lights?
 
Sure, you just have to look for them. I saw one today that showed pics of a 120 watt tri band LED outperforming a 400watt HPS hortilux. The technology is still so new it is taking time for results to pop up. Let me see if I can find it again and I will post a link. But you can't deny the science, the economics, and the growth of LED's as a replacement to HID lighting. They don't do MJ, but a site I know of that tests out different LED's under different conditions is the one I mentioned above, greenpinelane.com. It is one of the few I have checked out.
I disagree with THG's statement because if you got more fruiting and flowering per watt lighting with HPS/HID or fluro over LED then NASA wouldn't be using LED's to grow plants in space. Greenhouses across the country wouldn't be moving to LED's. You wouldn't see us with literally dozens of different companies getting into manufacturing LED grow lights compared to less than a handful 5 years ago.
If there was one company out there selling these and saying a 600 watt tri-band LED can produce the same as 1.5-2 1,000 watt HPS lamps, then I would be more than skeptical. But there are dozens, including some of the most respected companies in lighting.
Even if a 600 watt tri-band LED only performed AS WELL AS a 600HPS, then the savings in electricity and bulb replacement make up the investment cost.
In my mind the growing community has come to view lumens and watts about the same way an insecure small-in-the-pants middle-aged guy views the length of his member, it's the only thing that matters in getting the job done. :) But science and reality tell us that watts and lumens have little to no effect if the wavelengths of light being emitted do not fall in the key absorption ranges of the plants.

-If there is one concept that is mentioned over and over on this site when people discuss seeds, lights, ballasts, nutrients, etc...it is the idea that you GET what you PAY for. In the free market world we live in, a 600watt LED priced at $1,500-$2,500 would simply have no market against a 600HPS at less than $300 if the LED could not outperform the HPS in both production and cost savings.
 
yea. the guy at walmart just told me they can't keep those $2500 LEDs on the shelf.. they're selling like hotcakes..:rofl:...;)
 
Hey guys.... SO this post just seems sooooo outta whack to me....?

How does someone that grows with an HPS know so much about yields with LEDs???? :confused: By reading from others?????

Some more factual info about LEDs showing that they outperform HPS:
From: High Times 2009 Master Growers Guide

A trial was contucted using a 90watt UFO against 3 different lights: 400watt MH, 400watt HPS, 600watt HPS.

Pics of entire article will be posted below for anyone to read the entire thing...

I will summarize to get the point out there... All variables were kept exactly the same only difference in conditions was the light being used. Also all cuttings were taken from the same mother.

Trial A: UFO vs 400watt MH winner: UFO yield was 12% more

Trial B: UFO vs 400watt HPS winner: HPS yield was 5% more*
* The plants "were markedly different potencies, with the LED plants producing much more resin." :holysheep:

Trial C: UFO vs 600watt HPS winner: HPS yield was 20% more*
* Resin production was again higher on the LED side. Also the grower noted that the money saved on power with the LED out weighs the high cost of the HPS even with the lower yield!! Also the plants on the LED side needed much less water.

Pics below

DSC_0001.JPG


DSC_0002.JPG


DSC_0003.JPG


DSC_0004.JPG
 
was that one of them there $2500 LED's?
I don't doubt, that in the not so distant future, LED's will become waaay more popular, as the initial purchase price drops and their proficiency in 'growing' increases. Lets face it, the technology is growing in leaps and bounds.
But until they ca get the "investment" down to within the same neighborhood as a HID, I don't see a lot of ppl running out to dump 3-5 K into a personal grow room "just" in lights.
 
Hick you can get a 6th generation 90watt UFO for $170 US. And they are NAME BRAND LEDs(Bridgelux / High Power Opto) not cheap imports... thats only a few dollars more then a 400watt HPS and its less then 1/4 of the power.... Plus your gonna use less water bc the surface temps will stay lower...
 

Latest posts

Back
Top