Is a PAR Meter Worth it

[Hooz]

If you're setting up a new tank, a PAR meter rental is ABSOLUTELY worth it. Especially considering the power of some of today's LED fixtures. I feel like LEDs are much less forgiving than the T5s and halides of several years ago. I setup my first tank in 1992, and nobody had PAR meters then... But we also had wildly varied success growing coral. Set the lights up right from the beginning and rest easy knowing that lighting should never be an issue.

I have a local buddy who bought an MQ-510, so I have one I can borrow whenever I need it. I can't count the number of times I've used it at this point when setting up a tank, changing a light, or changing the focus of an existing tank (going from an anemone only tank to SPS or the like).

If you have the money to buy one, they are a very handy tool to have but, as has been said before, ask around in local groups and check with your LFS (we have an LFS that rents one for $25/day). In a pinch, the BRS rental works if you can't find anything local.

I will also echo what has been said about finding out as much about your lights as you can. Mounting height and light spacing (for multiple fixtures) can also make a pretty huge difference. If you can find a BRS video for your light, they do a lot of that legwork for you. Other people have done similar tests with other lights too, though. The info is out there. Find it and put it to use.

If you do get your hands on a meter and find that you have been "under lighting" your tank and you want to increase it, my general rule of thumb is to use an acclimation period (manual or in the light's app if it has the option). I never raise the intensity more than 5% per week. If you need to increase your intensity by 20%, do it over a 4 week period. I've never lost anything doing it that way.

 

[dangit]

Seems everyone has a different opinion. I’d say it really depends on your budget… if you have the money then it’s worth it. If not start at a low intensity and work up.

I bought one and have had great coral growth Which I do believe is in part to the correct par levels covering the coral. It also helps rule out lighting as an issue if you experience problems with your coral

if you plan to have a lot of expensive corals, I think it’s worth it

 

[BeanAnimal]

If you're setting up a new tank, a PAR meter rental is ABSOLUTELY worth it. Especially considering the power of some of today's LED fixtures. I feel like LEDs are much less forgiving than the T5s and halides of several years ago. I setup my first tank in 1992, and nobody had PAR meters then... But we also had wildly varied success growing coral. Set the lights up right from the beginning and rest easy knowing that lighting should never be an issue.

Not picking on your Hooz - but these posts keep pouring in.

I feel like a broken record and I think many of you are not seeing the forest for the trees.

1 - HE IS ON A TIGHT BUDGET

2 - ALMOST EVERY FIXTURE ON THE PLANET HAS BEEN MEASURED BY SOMEBODY ELSE ALREADY

3 - ANY REASONABLE PAR FROM 50 TO 500 IS LIKELY GOING TO GROW CORALS

4 - EVEN IF HE CAN'T FIND SOMEBODY ELSE WHO MEASURED THE SAME FIXTURE IN ANY REASONABLE DEPTH TANK WITH ANY REASONABLE FIXTURE PAR WILL PROVIDE A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF LIGHT.

5 - MOST MANUFACTURERS AND RESELLERS WILL GUIDE YOU IF YOU JUST ASK.

6 - HE IS NEW TO THE HOBBY. THE LAST RABBIT HOLE NE NEEDS TO GO DOWN IS CHASING PAR NUMBERS. THERE ARE SO MANY MORE IMPORTANT THINGS.

Park (2) XR30Ws over a 20 nano and you may have a problem.
Park a single kessil over a 100 and you may have a problem.

Folks - nobody needs a PAR meter to grow corals. In fact I would be willing to bet with reasonable accuracy that 99% of reef keepers do not own one or have ever used one. We get by (excel) without them now and have for 30 years. They are expensive to buy or rent.

New reef keeper on a budget... let's give him sane advice, not our wish list for high end tools that are arguably not needed.

 

[Reefer Matt]

Looking to "rent" the BRS PAR meter to get my lighting down before getting into SPS. Anyone who has used them, is it worth it? Or should I take the $80 and put it into, let's say, a new wave maker? I have 2 AI Prime's about 12 inches above the surface of the water, in a 15" tall aquarium. Thank you!

I loan mine out for free to Reefers in my area. (Sorry, I don’t ship it.) I’m sure you can find someone in your area also. They are not required, but take out a lot of guesswork. Each tank has different flow , mounting heights, reflections, etc. that can contribute to the par. I especially use mine for sps coral, because they will shift color in different lighting. I suggest trying it out, and judging for yourself.

 

[RichReef]

After using a PAR meter for the very first time after 13 years in the hobby I would never set up a new system again without using one. Best thing I've ever done for tank.

After playing with it for over 2 weeks the best way I found to set my lights was 150 PAR on the center of the sand bed in 21 inch deep water. Everything else is what it is.

That is exactly what I would aim for in a mixed reef.

 

[jda]

I loan mine out too. Our local club also loans one. I don't know if it is necessary to buy one, but if you want to REALLY understand light, then you might want to know your measurements. You can probably just get close by searching the web if you have a well-used light. Just know that PAR might be all of the light from your source (most LEDs) or only a subset (some mercury based lights). PAR is only visible light, which makes the name stupid since there are spectrums that humans cannot see that aid in photosynthesis.

Also, if you want to some some weird things, like using glass tops, angling lights, obscure light types, etc. then you might need a PAR meter since your situation could be unique. Most people don't consider fixture height, or just gloss over it, so that is always a wild card.

I feel that most folks that do end up getting a PAR meter are somewhat shocked at what it says.

Lastly, not all PAR meters are the same. Some need correction factors applied (that often are not), some are not very good, etc. If you want to use the web to estimate, then it will likely take research and maths.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I feel that most folks that do end up getting a PAR meter are somewhat shocked at what it says.

And even more shocked that they have been wildly successful at some par 3x lower than some youtuber told them they at needed

 

[jda]

And even more shocked that they have been wildly successful at some par 3x lower than some youtuber told them they at needed

Maybe. I hope that nobody reefs off of YouTube videos. Most of what we see is that some things are doing great, and others not so much. PAR comes back at 120. Makes sense. There are plenty of things that will not mind 120 at all... and others that will struggle. At least if they know, they can decide to just focus on what works, or to get more light. No guessing.

In this case, it would be good to know. They might be successful with 1/3 of the light that some recommend, but they see a Crocea clam at the LFS and their Xenia, Mushrooms, Duncans and Colt corals are thriving and they just don't know that the Crocea is going to slowly die.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Clams are a whole different ball of wax and are a good use case for a meter.

If only so many people didn’t look to content created for their feeding advice.

 

[chooofoojoo]

[snip...]

New reef keeper on a budget... let's give him sane advice, not our wish list for high end tools that are arguably not needed.

I agree - To a new or budget-conscious reefkeeper I would recommend the following:

- Seek out a local club/reefer that has one to borrow (like myself if you're in the SW Denver metro area). Get a baseline and verify your tank/lighting setup is "in the park", and make small lighting/placement adjustments from there given sufficient acclimation time at each step.
- This has secondary effect too, being that a local friendship/relationship is built on a mutual hobby. This can pay dividends in local advice, LFS experience, and even potential frag/fish swaps.

If this is not achievable, reference documented light settings for as close to one's own setup as possible, and go slow.

 

[Hooz]

Not picking on your Hooz - but these posts keep pouring in.

I feel like a broken record and I think many of you are not seeing the forest for the trees.

1 - HE IS ON A TIGHT BUDGET

2 - ALMOST EVERY FIXTURE ON THE PLANET HAS BEEN MEASURED BY SOMEBODY ELSE ALREADY

3 - ANY REASONABLE PAR FROM 50 TO 500 IS LIKELY GOING TO GROW CORALS

4 - EVEN IF HE CAN'T FIND SOMEBODY ELSE WHO MEASURED THE SAME FIXTURE IN ANY REASONABLE DEPTH TANK WITH ANY REASONABLE FIXTURE PAR WILL PROVIDE A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF LIGHT.

5 - MOST MANUFACTURERS AND RESELLERS WILL GUIDE YOU IF YOU JUST ASK.

6 - HE IS NEW TO THE HOBBY. THE LAST RABBIT HOLE NE NEEDS TO GO DOWN IS CHASING PAR NUMBERS. THERE ARE SO MANY MORE IMPORTANT THINGS.

Park (2) XR30Ws over a 20 nano and you may have a problem.
Park a single kessil over a 100 and you may have a problem.

Folks - nobody needs a PAR meter to grow corals. In fact I would be willing to bet with reasonable accuracy that 99% of reef keepers do not own one or have ever used one. We get by (excel) without them now and have for 30 years. They are expensive to buy or rent.

New reef keeper on a budget... let's give him sane advice, not our wish list for high end tools that are arguably not needed.

I completely disagree. If a new reefer can't afford (or isn't willing to spend on) a meter rental to setup his tank right from the outset, then they're in the wrong hobby. I'm not advocating that they spend $500+ to buy a meter, but I'd much rather a new reefer spent $80 (worst case BRS rental fee) to set their lights up than to kill $80+ worth of frags and wonder why. In the grand scheme of things, a one time rental fee is a drop in the bucket.

Other people's tests will only get you close, and sometimes not even. Even if they tested the same light on the same tank, other differences (aquascape, sand or bare bottom, mounting height, etc) come in to play, so you'll only ever be "close". You can run all the tests you want in open air, or in a plain glass box full of stagnant water, but "real world" is often times very different. Sometimes close is good enough, but if you can get a tool that will get YOUR light setup perfectly on YOUR tank from the jump, why wouldn't you?

There is no "rabbit hole" to go down, really. Decide what you plan to keep and spend 30 minutes with the meter to get your lights dialed in. It's easy, and I'd say much less complicated than blindly guessing and constantly tweaking based on what you see going on in your tank. Also remember, a "new reefer" may not know what to look for to even tell if things are happy or not but, based on 30 minutes with a PAR meter, they can be sure that lighting is not the issue.

The "we did without it for 30 years" argument is moot. We also used to do a lot of other things for decades before finding a better, safer way to do it. And the reef specific LED lighting and its targeted, narrow spectrum is much less forgiving than the T5s and halides of old. 600 PAR of halide lighting (of which only a fraction gets used by the coral) IS NOT the same as 600 PAR of modern reef LED lighting (where almost the entire output gets used by the coral).

 

[BeanAnimal]

I completely disagree. If a new reefer can't afford (or isn't willing to spend on) a meter rental to setup his tank right from the outset, then they're in the wrong hobby.

That is an insanely myopic and rather uninformed opinion that is simply not supported by facts when you consider that the vast majority of those who participate in this hobby do not have a PAR meter and/or have never used one and that PAR meters have just recently become "mainstream" even though we have been keeping reefs for decades before their existence.

I'm not advocating that they spend $500+ to buy a meter, but I'd much rather a new reefer spent $80 (worst case BRS rental fee) to set their lights up than to kill $80+ worth of frags and wonder why.

Again (sigh) most coral will live under most lighting conditions. They are going to $80 worth of coral for a myriad of other $80 reasons.

Other people's tests will only get you close, and sometimes not even. Even if they tested the same light on the same tank, other differences (aquascape, sand or bare bottom, mounting height, etc) come in to play, so you'll only ever be "close". You can run all the tests you want in open air, or in a plain glass box full of stagnant water, but "real world" is often times very different. Sometimes close is good enough, but if you can get a tool that will get YOUR light setup perfectly on YOUR tank from the jump, why wouldn't you?

What exactly is perfect? 123 PAR, 227 PAR, 329 PAR - at what exact point in the tank at what spectrum and what temperature and what water chemistry and are we measuring that perfect 227 PAR with a MQ-510, A 210. some other brand, and what firmware with what bug, what cosine correction, an iPhone, a Seneye, etc. and what is the margin of error for whatever device under whatever spectrum? Any of those variable easily contribute to 20% or larger differences in reading. You last paragrah (not quoted) regarding LED vs MH contradicts your very point here.


The numbers ARE AT BEST BALLPARK and there is no "perfect" to match them too if we could - you have consumed too much PAR cool-aid and are trusting a precision that is meaningless at numerous levels due to numerous variables.

Moreover, WHERE is the science that shows that PAR is actually the useful metric, as it is not weighted for coral. So again 300 "PAR" with 3 different spectrums - not all (3) will grow coral the same. (I don't care to or intend to go down the PAR, PUR or alternative metric path here, other than to say that you have a lot of research to do based on your perception of what we are measuring with PAR).

So again - most reasonable fixtures over most reasonable tanks are going to provide a reasonable amount of light that will grow coral. As one advances into the hobby and learns to fine tine certain aspects and/or takes on more challenging corals or wants clams, etc. Then sure the meter AND ITS BALLPARK numbers can help move things int the right direction.

 

[BeanAnimal]

- Seek out a local club/reefer

Absolutely - local clubs are a wealth of resources and knowledge.

 

[Hooz]

That is an insanely myopic and rather uninformed opinion that is simply not supported by facts when you consider that the vast majority of those who participate in this hobby do not have a PAR meter and/or have never used one and that PAR meters have just recently become "mainstream" even though we have been keeping reefs for decades before their existence.



Again (sigh) most coral will live under most lighting conditions. They are going to $80 worth of coral for a myriad of other $80 reasons.



What exactly is perfect? 123 PAR, 227 PAR, 329 PAR - at what exact point in the tank at what spectrum and what temperature and what water chemistry and are we measuring that perfect 227 PAR with a MQ-510, A 210. some other brand, and what firmware with what bug, what cosine correction, an iPhone, a Seneye, etc. and what is the margin of error for whatever device under whatever spectrum? Any of those variable easily contribute to 20% or larger differences in reading. You last paragrah (not quoted) regarding LED vs MH contradicts your very point here.


The numbers ARE AT BEST BALLPARK and there is no "perfect" to match them too if we could - you have consumed too much PAR cool-aid and are trusting a precision that is meaningless at numerous levels due to numerous variables.

Moreover, WHERE is the science that shows that PAR is actually the useful metric, as it is not weighted for coral. So again 300 "PAR" with 3 different spectrums - not all (3) will grow coral the same. (I don't care to or intend to go down the PAR, PUR or alternative metric path here, other than to say that you have a lot of research to do based on your perception of what we are measuring with PAR).

So again - most reasonable fixtures over most reasonable tanks are going to provide a reasonable amount of light that will grow coral. As one advances into the hobby and learns to fine tine certain aspects and/or takes on more challenging corals or wants clams, etc. Then sure the meter AND ITS BALLPARK numbers can help move things int the right direction.

I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

Yes, new reefers are going to kill coral. Maybe a few frags, maybe a lot of frags, but recommending a PAR meter is a lot like recommending a test kit. A lot of the same people who will complain about someone not knowing (or posting) their parameters when asking for help troubleshooting an issue won't bat at eye at someone not knowing what PAR their coral are in. "My parameters are all good" carries the same weight as "my lights are adjusted correctly". Without testing, it's all guessing.

There is no "magic PAR" for any particular coral, but there ARE well defined PAR ranges for different types of coral. You wouldn't throw an acan in 300 PAR and expect it to flourish any more than you'd expect an acro to grow well in 125 PAR. But how do you know without checking?

I have one nano tank that is adjusted to 85 PAR on the sandbed, and there is no point anywhere in the tank that is over 125 PAR. I know that I should be able to put most any LPS or softie anywhere in the tank and it shouldn't be over lit. I have another nano that hits 250 PAR on the sandbed and peaks at 450 PAR at the top of my rocks, so I know I can place SPS pretty much anywhere in the tank without being under lit. I couldn't find anyone else running a Hydra 26HD over a 10g tank, so the only way I'd know that is by testing with a meter.

Yes, there are some meters that are better than others, but most every hobby grade PAR meter on the market that is worth using measures output from 400nm to 700nm which is (generally) the accepted range of beneficial light (PUR). We can argue all day about which wavelengths are more beneficial for coral and which aren't (I have plenty of opinions on that based on the extensive research that I HAVE done on the subject), but measuring from 400-700nm and adjusting accordingly is more than just getting you in the ballpark... at least you'll be in the right bleacher section, and that's well worth a meter rental (IMO).

Arguing that people have been reefing for decades without PAR meters is, again, a moot point. Back in the 50's, people thought smoking was good for your health. In the 70's, we rode around in the back of open bed pickup trucks. Seatbelts? Pfffttt! Time passes, knowledge increases, and technology and tools evolve. I say we stop changing tires with tire irons and start using impact wrenches.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

If avoiding simple fact to maintain your opinion floats your boat, it does mine to

There is no "magic PAR" for any particular coral, but there ARE well defined PAR ranges for different types of coral. You wouldn't throw an acan in 300 PAR and expect it to flourish any more than you'd expect an acro to grow well in 125 PAR. But how do you know without checking?

Common sense and observation, and again which measurement device under what spectrum is "125 PAR" or so correct? You are putting far too much faith in a number that is a ballpark number and we can ballpark by observation and common sense.

Arguing that people have been reefing for decades without PAR meters is, again, a moot point. Back in the 50's, people thought smoking was good for your health. In the 70's, we rode around in the back of open bed pickup trucks. Seatbelts? Pfffttt! Time passes, knowledge increases, and technology and tools evolve. I say we stop changing tires with tire irons and start using impact wrenches.

And here comes fallacy of false equivalents (Ignored it the first time, but you insist), and that my friend is an indicator that you are in over your head with this conversation. There is no logical connection between any of that and a PAR meter and why it is or is not useful to a new aquarist (which is what is being talked about here).

Have fun with your PAR meter, and I hope it makes you a better reef keeper than me.

 

[Hooz]

If avoiding simple fact to maintain your opinion floats your boat, it does mine to


Common sense and observation, and again which measurement device under what spectrum is "125 PAR" or so correct? You are putting far too much faith in a number that is a ballpark number and we can ballpark by observation and common sense.


And here comes fallacy of false equivalents (Ignored it the first time, but you insist), and that my friend is an indicator that you are in over your head with this conversation. There is no logical connection between any of that and a PAR meter and why it is or is not useful to a new aquarist (which is what is being talked about here).

Have fun with your PAR meter, and I hope it makes you a better reef keeper than me.

Again, you put all of this in the context of "new reefer on a budget", but then you expect that same "new reefer" to rely on "common sense and observation" to tell if lighting is an issue? If they're a "new reefer", what experience would they be basing their "common sense and observation" on? Would you recommend the same course of action for water parameters, or would you recommend a test kit (or three)?

Corals brown and bleach for multiple reasons, only one of which is light related. Wouldn't eliminating as many variables as possible right out of the gate be the smart move for a "new reefer" who hasn't honed their "common sense and observation" over 30 years in the hobby?

Again, as I stated previously, most any of the meters available today are "accurate enough", and we have an understanding of how spectrum affects coral (PUR) to get you better than just in the ballpark. I would argue that at this point, pretty much any decent reef LED fixture will have a spectrum (PUR) that will grow coral, regardless of how you set the sliders. Some are "better" than others, but even the cheap Chinese black boxes have a spectrum that works (PUR). If the quality (PUR) of light is dialed in, the only thing left to do is dial in the quantity (PAR) of it. But we've already been through that as well.

As for my analogies, they fit perfectly into any argument where someone would posit that "we did it for years without X, so we have no use for X". It's the same argument made by people in every field whenever technology suggests there might be a better way to do something. I have several hobbies, and I've seen the same thing come up from time-to-time in each of them.

I setup my first tank and bought my first coral in the early 90's. I'm not interested in being a "better reefer" than anyone except for the reefer that I was yesterday. I do my research and I embrace technology (PAR and PUR research isn't "new" by any stretch at this point) that helps make that happen. That's my "reefing mantra".

In any event... The OP asked if a ($25-80) PAR meter rental was worth it. I think it absolutely is, and you don't think it is, and I don't think either one of us is changing our minds, so I'll leave it at that.

 

[jda]

I do real estate, see a few thousand homes a year and see some tanks. I agree that most reefers don't know or care, but the ones that find this board likely do. The average reefer has a coral beauty, some xenia or GSP, a few clownfish and has not done a water change in a long time - their tank has been cruising for a long time. They have PC lights or maybe some PetCo LEDs and have not changed their setup in years. These folks don't know what PAR is so why would they care?

Chances are that if somebody is asking on this board then they are going to care some day, if not now.

A better false equivalency are the people who take their cars to the dyno to get a horsepower reading. Nobody needs it and their sled won't be any faster, but they just want to know. There is also a small subset of folks on an online message board that need to know the reading if they want to fine tune other things. The normal public is mostly oblivious. To each their own.

 

[mizimmer90]

Without making any comment on if a PAR meter is worth the cost to a new reefer, I want to make another plug for the VABIRA par meter lol

Its only $180 to *buy*, gives readings within 5-10% of the apogee (I compared it at my LFS), and even splits the PAR out across RBG so you can have a rough idea of the spectrum. Helped me determine that my gen 6 xr15s are underpowered (doesn't match the online maps).

Again, clarifying that I'm making no claim to the comparative benefit of how $80 can be spent lol

 

[Kzang]

100% worth it. I finally bought one, and I've used it like 10 times these past two months. I've set up many tanks with different lights, and I rented one each time, and could of bought one 2x over by now from rental fees.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Again, you put all of this in the context of "new reefer on a budget",

Yes, because that literally is the entire context of this thread.

but then you expect that same "new reefer" to rely on "common sense and observation" to tell if lighting is an issue?

Your myopia is leading you down a path.

Repeating. as context is everything.
For a new reefer on a budget, choosing a fixture, spectrum and mounting distance based on a bit of research in public forums, BRS videos and/or by consulting the reseller or manufacturer will almost certainly result in a suitable PAR. It is that simple, no matter how you want conflate that with with seatbelts and smoking.

Yours position is:

I completely disagree. If a new reefer can't afford (or isn't willing to spend on) a meter rental to setup his tank right from the outset, then they're in the wrong hobby.

That is patently silly. You're reasoning is based on both your missapplciation of the accuracy of the technology and the fact that we don't have a precise target to aim for even if the technology could point us there. Close enough is close enough to for anybody to get started, and even then for the vast majority of people who participate in the hobby long term.

Would you recommend the same course of action for water parameters, or would you recommend a test kit (or three)?

Again, obtuse logical equivalence fallacy - not to mention no logical price connection. If you want to go down this rabbit hole, start a thread and we can debate what test kits you can get away with not EVER having and still have a thriving reef.

If you want to use analogy, then it has to fit logically.
"I completely disagree. If a new reefer can't afford (or isn't willing to spend on) a meter rental to setup his tank right from the outset, then they're in the wrong hobby."

I completely disagree. If a new WOODORKER can't afford (or isn't willing to spend on) a DIAL INDICATOR AND PRECISION TRUEING PLATE rental to setup his TABLESAW right from the outset, then they're in the wrong hobby.

Expensive tool - can be of benefit to some who have advanced to that level. Could also benefit a novice, but is NOT by any means needed to participate in woodworking and have great success. It is a nice tool to have if you can afford it.

As for my analogies, they fit perfectly into any argument where someone would posit that "we did it for years without X, so we have no use for X". It's the same argument made by people in every field whenever technology suggests there might be a better way to do something. I have several hobbies, and I've seen the same thing come up from time-to-time in each of them.

No they don't perfectly fit or fit at all, and worse, you have actually used textbook examples (smoking and seatbelts). See above, try again.

List of fallacies - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org