• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

How decent is the Fluval LED light that comes with the 200L tank?

Muso1981

Member
Joined
29 Aug 2020
Messages
91
Location
Nottingham
Hi all,

I'm in the process of setting up a new tank, I bought the Fluval 200L LED as it is the largest tank I could get into the space I needed. I'm currently upgrading from an old Juwel Lido 120 with the old style bulbs and I was wondering if the LED which comes with it will be decent enough or is it total pants? I'm a bit noob with all of this stuff and have limited budget, ideally I would like to keep the LED and not have to buy a new lighting system I guess the light will limit the types of plants I'm going to grow?

Cheers,
 
Hi all,

I'm in the process of setting up a new tank, I bought the Fluval 200L LED as it is the largest tank I could get into the space I needed. I'm currently upgrading from an old Juwel Lido 120 with the old style bulbs and I was wondering if the LED which comes with it will be decent enough or is it total pants? I'm a bit noob with all of this stuff and have limited budget, ideally I would like to keep the LED and not have to buy a new lighting system I guess the light will limit the types of plants I'm going to grow?

Cheers,
Are you referring to this for your current light?
This is the old style.. ;)

T5 2 X 24w​


Never mind that's not the LED style..
Are you referring to Jewels LEDs or led that came with the Fluval?

Is this the size of the new tank?
Measurements: W100 x D40 x H55cm
From base to just under lid: approx. H50cm
Capacity: 200 Litres.

IF this is the light you are referring to then yes a replacement is recommended except for say fish only or really low light plants:
  • 53 US Gal / 200 L aquarium
  • Decorative accent strips in Black
  • Bluetooth LED lighting system with 12.5 W LED light which encourages plant growth and enhances fish colour
50W of lighting is probably the starting point.
 
Last edited:
Hi, the old tank is T5 bulbs, the new one is a fluval Roma 200l those measurements look correct. It's 12.5 watt according to the web site. 50 watt led?
 
Hi, the old tank is T5 bulbs, the new one is a fluval Roma 200l those measurements look correct. It's 12.5 watt according to the web site. 50 watt led?
Depends on your goals.. 50w in a new light that's dimmable is a beginning.
25W would be bare bottom w/ leds..
39.x inches (say 40) (100cm) is a difficult size to fit most standard lights.

Next comes cost considerations.
Some dulling on the ends will come w/ a lower cost.
22" depth is another sticking point if you want sufficient light at the bottom.

Fair price 32W.. would be better w/ 2
Amazon product ASIN B08BFQ7TS9
nicrew2.JPG


Raising it above "standard" would fix some things at the expense of others.
 

Attachments

  • nicrew2.JPG
    nicrew2.JPG
    38.3 KB · Views: 240
Last edited:
Thanks mate, so as far as I understand it's all about lumens rather than watts right? Ideally Id like something programmable, the fluval plant 3.0 looks good but it's crazy expensive. To be honest I'm annoyed as when the fish shop sold me the tank they said it would be good enough for plants!
 
Thanks mate, so as far as I understand it's all about lumens rather than watts right? Ideally Id like something programmable, the fluval plant 3.0 looks good but it's crazy expensive. To be honest I'm annoyed as when the fish shop sold me the tank they said it would be good enough for plants!
It all depends what plants you are looking to grow. The standard light will be ok for very easy plants. I find the fluval lights are very narrow so not so bright in the corners of the tank. I use the nicrew planted 24/7 on my roma 90 on 100% for 8 hours. This is a co2 injected tank and grows well I just struggle with carpet as depth of tank. I may add a second unit as 2 together still cost less than say a twinstar
 
The standard light will be ok for easy listed plants, but don't expect miracles, one of the problems with the light in a roma tank is the spread of light due to its close proximity to the water ~30 mm.
I ended up adding an extra aquasky 2 to the tank pictured below to get that spread.

Tank in this pic is a roma 240, but uses similar stock led. Low tech and about 2 months old at the time.
20210121_125419.jpg
 
@John q Thanks for posting that picture, beautiful tank you have there. I think I'm going to stick with the original light and go for beginner plants. If it all starts to go wrong I might upgrade the light.
 
THANKS! mate, so as far as I understand it's all about lumens rather than watts right? Ideally Id like something programmable, the fluval plant 3.0 looks good but it's crazy expensive. To be honest I'm annoyed as when the fish shop sold me the tank they said it would be good enough for plants!
Technically it's more about PAR or PUR but one needs to start somewhere or deal with all they are given.
Current guess would be 100 lumens per watt of leds for good leds.
1250 lumens.
Lumens are weighted in the green spectrum. That is its weakness.
Lux is lumens per area. Even better than lumens but is height dependent.
"PAR" (common useage it is really PPFD, not PAR) is photons per area per second of all photons in the 400 to 700nm range.
Lux to par conversions are possible (getting Lux is cheap by lux app or cheap lux meter) but one needs to remember that different spectrums have
different conversion factors.

1000 Lux of natural daylight is est at 23PPFD (PAR) where if you measure 1000 Lux under pure 450nm blue light that would convert to 115 "PAR"
For future reference.

Fluval aquasky splits the difference between the 2.
By the stock lighting pic does look better than one would assume but physics is physics.

Rule of thumb:
Generally a regular planted aquarium will require around 30-50 lumens per liter of water(1 gallon-3.785 liters). How much light is enough for plants? That all depends upon which plants you have chosen for your aquarium. If you have chosen nothing but “Easy” plants, 10-20 lumen (0.25 to 0.5 watts) per liter is adequate.

World advances...sometimes... the above estimates are probably conservative since they assume 40 Lumens/watt.. about 1/2 of current LED efficacy.
Going bare minimum 10L/Liter = 2000 Lumens or (current 100L/w) 20W
 
Last edited:
It's 12.5 watt according to the web site. 50 watt led?
Have you actually looked on top of the led and seen the wattage rating? I know its advertised at 12.5 watts but check what is stated on the fixture.

The only reason I ask is the 240 supposedly comes with a 14.5w light, the one that came with mine is 24w, just wondering if at some point they've upped the wattage? although there is no literature online to support this.
20210401_210126.jpg

I've two roma 240's and both tanks came with this light.
 
Thanks for clarifying that oreo.
Everyday is a school day as they say.
Was just trying to figure out why the light seems so bright yet only 14.5w.
 
Thanks for clarifying that oreo.
Everyday is a school day as they say.
Was just trying to figure out why the light seems so bright yet only 14.5w.
LED's are just that good.. ;)
incandescent lamps have efficiency ratings around 10 lumens/watt.
Good LEDs are like 100 Lumens /watt

Things like a kill a watt meter will tell you what it's pulling from the wall.
Actually w/ these constant voltage arrays not all the wattage is diode wattage. There are resistor losses in each parallel string (long-ish story)
With correct design (voltage and diode voltage and number of diodes) loss is minimal.
There are other losses i.e ac/dc conversion but also minimal w/ good switching power supplies..
 
Hi,

So I've had my new tank setup and plants/fish all moved over for a week now.
Some plants arn't doing too well (the leaves are getting holes in them) and there is some algae forming on the glass.
Water levels are good and I have the light on for 8 hours a day.
Do you guys think the plants arn't doing well due to lack of light?
I don't plan to use CO2 so have read I shouldn't have too much of a powerful light.
Also how does lighting work in terms of power and time? I.e. would a less powerful light being on longer be equivalent to a more powerful light being on a shorter time?
 
Do you guys think the plants arn't doing well due to lack of light?
I doubt the issues are being caused by lack of light. The fact you have algae on the glass actually points at to much light.

Giving a list of fertilisers dosed and a full tank shot would help. Also what percentage are you running the light at?
 
The lights running on the daylight setting, which says red 68, green 100, blue 100 and white 90%. I added the first dose of aquadip when I moved everything across on Saturday, it was the standard dose for the 200l tank.

The tank isn't in direct sunlight. So you think I have enough light then?
 
I don't have a crystal ball muso but suspect your light is a tad high. I can't remember my exact settings on the tank pictured above but was set at something like red 70, blue 70, green 60 and white 50%. I do know at some point I upped the settings to around 80% and ended up with bba and lower leaf melt.

Just try turning the light down a bit, with a lower light setting you could at some point, but not yet, start to extend your light period if thats what you want.
 
Last edited:
Have you actually looked on top of the led and seen the wattage rating? I know its advertised at 12.5 watts but check what is stated on the fixture.

The only reason I ask is the 240 supposedly comes with a 14.5w light, the one that came with mine is 24w, just wondering if at some point they've upped the wattage? although there is no literature online to support this.

I've two roma 240's and both tanks came with this light.
I've managed to track down that light. Info can be found if using Hagen a13294 not Fluval.
Lists it as 1950 Lumens..
24V at 0.96-ish Amps

46" model
 
Thanks oreo, so that would equate to about 8 lumens per litre, well below the 10-20 level that's often quoted for low level plants.

Edit:

Having slept on it @oreo57 it begs the questions that lumens in and of themselves are meaningless in relation to plant growth, which isn't really ground breaking news.

Or these modern led's put out far more par values than the wattage would once of a day suggest there capable of.

The light compensation point of aquatic plants is far below what was previously assumed.

Or I've somehow got lucky and managed to defy the laws of physics with my lights.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top