I'll break this up into chunks. Consider that I'm generally a direct person. I'll offer the disclaimer that I'm not trying to be an a-hole. It comes quite naturally to me.
I've personally run a Gen 4 XR30 over a 45g cube at 100% AB+. Not knowing people who do what you don't do doesn't mean they don't do it.
This is absolutely true, but I do wonder how many people run them at the recommended 9 inch height off the water at 100% in a standard (say 24 inch deep tank) and why. Assuming you're getting enough PAR at the correct spectrum then anything beyond that doesn't really benefit the corals. The only reason I can see why someone would run a radion at 100% is if its so far above the tank that you need that much power to get a good PAR value or if the tank is substantially beyond-typical depths. From what I recall this is why Kessil made those A500x lights. You wouldn't mount them at 9 inches above the tank, but at 6 feet it makes sense. Is this the target demographic for the Uno 2 pros? If so then awesome, but I've never heard or see anyone, even Reefi, claim that.
That's an odd argument, as a single Uno 2 can scale from low XR15 energy to above that of the XR30. It's a light that can be purchased for less than an XR15 but can serve the reefer beyond today's needs without needing to upgrade.
The limitation with an XR30, or the Reefi for that matter, most often isn't power but spread. How is the spread on these things? Can I mount it 6 feet above the tank, turn it up and then illuminate my entire tank? Or will it just spotlight a small area, or be so diffuse that it makes it hard to even look at the tank with all of the excess light bleed? (I'm looking at you, Radion G6!)
Don't get me wrong, I'm not targetting the Reefi here, I think it looks like a fine light, but unless it either had better spread than an XR15 or a narrower spread that's intended to be mounted higher up, I'm just not seeing how its much different other decent lighting option than being a bit cheaper than the higher end ones (and yes, I agree that alone is a great thing and I'm all for competitors driving down the cost of overpriced LED fixtures).
This is the point, and the point above. Challenging the Straton might be difficult (that's a damn good light), but the Uno 2 can directly compete with the much more expensive units you mentioned. I own a Sky, two Mitras, eight XR30s, and several other lower-powered/priced lights. I've been sent others from a vendor or hobbyists for testing. I'm very aware of their pros and cons. At the Uno 2's price point and features, it is alone. There are no other lights for which I'm aware that can compete with the Uno 2 at its price. $450 for that much light is a great deal.
But it's not the amount of light that's crucial in most cases, it's the ability to deliver that light at the right spectrum to the corals. If all we cared about was just high PAR values then people would still be recommending metal halides over all tanks (yay, 1100 PAR from a 400watt MH fixture over a 120g! Surely that's better, right?!) Your initial post claims that it 'destroys a radion' but all I see is 'its a bit cheaper and can produce a ton more power than typical tanks actually need'. Not a bad thing, but not exactly a game changer.
Far from silly. If running a 40 breeder or above, buy two lights for $450, run them dimmed, and when the inevitable tank upgrade occurs, you already have a light that will support your needs. Imagine a world where the XR30 was $500 and there was no XR15. That's what the Uno 2.0 provides.
I'd bet money that when most people upgrade, then get wider and longer tanks, not taller. Unless this can be mounted really high up to illuminate a larger tank without too much excess light bleed, and assuming people would want to mount it that high rather than in a canopy, then it just seems like a slightly cheaper radion... not a bad thing, but not something that 'publically shames a radion'.
Regarding silly, car analogies are silly, especially that one. I'm kinda that guy, but I will occasionally run at speed.
Really? To each their own. If you offered me a Bugatti for free I would turn around and sell it ASAP and buy some form of hybrid or electric car. I'd never use its top speed and I'd hate its maintenance costs... which is also why this light presumably isn't for me. I'd never use its max power and were I to do so, all I would gain is a higher power bill, not likely better coral growth. That's why I used the analogy. It's not perfect by any means, but I still think it fits in a way.
Conjecture. If that's your concern, spend twice the money for no guarantee that Ecotech will support your old light.
I'm not advocating for Ecotech or any other light. A 3 year warrantee is great, but so is a history of getting parts easily. Ideally we'd have both, or longer. Ecotech could discontinue all parts tomorrow and I accept that. Neptune could start charging for access to Fusion and I'd be furious. Reefi could declare bankruptcy tomorrow and your 3 year warrantee would mean nothing. Them's the risks we take.
I agree!
Conjecture. This is the difference between me having the competition and then testing the Uno/Duo Extreme. Because I tested those two, I bought the Uno 2.0 Pro. This is my personal experience, and not that of a talking head on YouTube. Personal experience cannot be replaced by others' experience. It's the main reason why I do what I do...to satisfy my curiosity. Nobody should base their decisions on what I think, but some do, that's how the world works, so I take my sharing of information very seriously. I know what I say about this light will be used by someone to decide to spend their $450 on the Uno 2.0 Pro. I have zero interest in them being disappointed. I've been disappointed in the past by what the talking heads have convinced me to buy, especially when I took that stuff apart. I remember that feeling and don't want to do the same to others.
Sure its conjecture but is it wrong? The only advantage I can see to a light that matches its competitors at 25% power is that you could mount it higher. I honestly don't know what else you can do with that additional power. Is that a bad thing, no? But its something that bears mentioning I think. To be honest, I'd vastly prefer it could do the same at say 50% power, but had 5 - 10 years guaranteed non-spectrum shifting lifespan, or was another 50 bucks cheaper. I think more people would gain more benefit from that... but again, thats just my option. Conjecture, as it were.
Btw, I have absolutely zero issue with you posting this sort of thing. I love it when you test lights and the data you provide, and I don't consider you a talking head at all. But saying it destroys other lights, without qualifying the destruction is that's a bit cheaper and has more power than your corals will be able to use at typical mounting heights seems... hyperbolic.
I agree here, too. More are coming. I hear things, and I'm excited to see what shows up!
The Uno 2.0 Pro is a great example of a light that can directly compete with the big boys and still be half the price. Half is a lot of money. Don't move from the XR30 to the Uno 2.0 Pro, as that's not why the Uno 2 exists. But for those who were talked into buying an underpowered light, or for those who haven't yet purchased a light, this is a legitimate option. A very compelling, well-supported, accessible light for many for a very reasonable price. That, and it's a small business option in a landscape full of greedy high f-stop lights.
Agreed and I never meant to imply otherwise. If I were buying new lights, it would be on my list for high consideration. I feel like lighting has reached a plateau where a lot of companies are able to make affordable lights that get our corals the spectrum and PAR they need. I feel like the next evolution is larger panels or more spread so you don't need as many fixutres over a given tank, passive cooling, and greater longevity. Perhaps the Reefi has that, but the data you've presented thus far doesn't show that. I'd love to see you do some more tests on its spread and PAR values when hung at different heights over a typical 24 inch deep tank to see how few of them you could get away with mounting when running it at say 80 - 100% and how bad the light spread into the room would be. That could make this light a real game changer...
I appreciate you spending time on your comment. That matters to me.
I appreciate the effort you put into your testing. Since BRS... well, became what they now are... its VERY hard to find any sort of reliable comparative testing in this hobby! (And that's assuming you could ever fully trust BRS's comparisions when they sold what they were testing!)
You are such a breath of fresh air that this hobby so desperately needed.
