Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
LED 60 Watt Equivalent Bulbs Now Affordable
#1
In my local Dollar General store I came upon some LED bulbs that were equivalent to 60 watt incadescent bulbs, for only $4.00 each. Since we needed to replace a couple of burned out fluorescent lightbulbs in our kitchen, I bought a couple. I was very pleased to find that unlike my LED flashlight (which emits a bluish white light), this bulb emitted a natural daylight yellowish color. I wound up going back and buying a couple more. These are supposed to be about 25% more efficient than fluorescent lights, which in turn are four times as energy efficient as incandescent bulbs. In other words, the LED bulbs are five times as efficient as incandescents.

   
Reply
#2
The 40 and 60 watt Led bulbs were only $3.98 at Aldis. I'm pretty sure it was that price. I'll have to double check when I go back either today or tomorrow.

They have to be "Daylight" bulbs with just the right frequency to get me going. I use them for growing plants, and not interested in the flowering.

Incidentally, if it has a more yellow effect, it is not a "Daylight" bulb, because the light frequency is too low. Daylight bulbs are higher in frequency and are bright white.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#3
Incidentally, they are now $3.97 at Home Depot too.

Note the high frequency of 5000K. Anything over 4500K is good for foliage growth. 1800K to 3000K, work best for flowering.

Soft White (2700K) is also $3.97.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#4
WARNING!: Anything higher than 4500K is very dangerous for the eyes. Cause irreversible damages. Never use them!
Reply
#5
(11-19-2015, 08:11 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: WARNING!: Anything higher than 4500K is very dangerous for the eyes. Cause irreversible damages. Never use them!

Never heard of that one before. At least half or more of the light bulbs sold here in the US are anywhere from 4500K to 6000K for daylight bulbs.

Do you have a link to any article warning that?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#6
I switched over more than 5 years ago, every light in my house is an LED and my furnace has a DC motor. My energy consumption has decrease significantly yet my electric bill is higher today because the utility companies simply raised rates to make up for the shortfall in income.
Reply
#7
(11-19-2015, 08:11 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: WARNING!: Anything higher than 4500K is very dangerous for the eyes. Cause irreversible damages. Never use them!

I think that's derived from 'actual' color temperature rather than the 'simulated' color temperature in LED bulbs.

LED bulbs make 'white' like this
[Image: fig-2-white-led-vs-rgb-led-spectrum.jpg]

Making 'white' the old fashioned way with a black body like the sun or a halogen bulb looks like this
[Image: solarflux.gif]

Unless you specially select a Uv LED (which is not the blue that is used in LED 'white' bulbs) you don't get much Uv from LED lighting (much light down below 400nm - UvA). A hotter LED color temperature may look harsher and 'bluer' but the Uv content is down in the dirt. This has screwed me at work because I got all excited LED over sources with nice color temperatures. Unfortunately, I need IR and the IR content of an LED bulb is as nill as the Uv ... the light is just that stupid little set of bumps in the visual range. That's what makes them efficient ... it provides only light your eyes can see (~400-750nm) and not the higher or lower wavelengths. If you scan it you can generally see three discrete bumps for the R, G and B LEDs rather than the filtered smearing above. CFLs have filters for the Uv. If they didn't you would go blind fairly quickly as they have some very nasty mercury emission lines in the Uv ... well into the UvB.

I've tried replacing all my lighting, but I'm screwed because we have track lighting with GU10 halogens. I need something in the mid-2000s to appear 'warm'. The closest I've gotten is 3K 'warm' LEDs in GU10 ... which is extremely harsh and my family would notice and bitch about it. So far I've done pretty much everything else and nobody has noticed. If anybody is aware of a 'warm' GU10 that actually looks warm ... and not like a surgical light ... I would be very, very appreciative.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#8
For some time now what are called "daylight" simulating fluorescent bulbs have been available. They have exactly the same warm, slightly yellowish-tinged color as the "softlight" LED bulbs. Viewed side-by side in the same dual-light ceiling fixture, they blend in perfectly. And the new LEDs really stand out when paired with the older white fluorescent lights, that look almost bluish by comparison--only my pocket LED penlight emits a light that is bluer.
Reply
#9
John, I don't know in the detail, if it's because of the UV or not, but the blue component is causing macula (if you know what it is). Either because of the blue spectrum or because it emits more UV that what your graph suggests. I know too blue is bad and I'm not going to risk it, in a there-is-no-global-warning type of denial.
Reply
#10
(11-27-2015, 06:35 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: John, I don't know in the detail, if it's because of the UV or not, but the blue component is causing macula (if you know what it is). Either because of the blue spectrum or because it emits more UV that what your graph suggests. I know too blue is bad and I'm not going to risk it, in a there-is-no-global-warning type of denial.

Fred, were it that bad, you can bet your "bippy"(LaughIn) the EPA and all the bureaucrats would be crawling over it like stink on "you know what". After all, that's what bureaurcats do best. S22
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#11
The best lighting: that which producing the must preferred and best illuminating vision has been about 3500° K or slightly higher. The best photographers use a light stage, which is basically a parachute draped over the objects to be photographed backlit with photographic light at that color temperature. It is hard to ruin a shot lit properly.
Reply
#12
Just as a quick reminder, I grow plants which automatically require a light frequency of 4500K to 6500K . The flowering part, which uses the lower frequency comes when the sun does it thing in spring and summer. I don't stare up into the lights as if to divine some special G-d like message. I just want to keep my plants safe and ready to reinsert into the ground come spring. That's it.

The Daylight bulbs are great for me. They do the job.

As or the LED bulb and their dropping in price, it is normal economics: supply and demand. Also they are getting ready to run against the new, and more expensive bulbs in the near future. Its how things work, unless the government gets involved.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#13
The government has already gotten involved, by forbidding U.S. manufacturers from making 60-watt incandescent bulbs. This has been a boon to Chinese manufacturers, who now supply all our 60-watt incandescent bulbs.

Bill, is "3500 K or slightly higher" the best color light for photographing dark-skinned people?
Reply
#14
(12-04-2015, 08:18 AM)Ron Lambert Wrote: ...is "3500 K or slightly higher" the best color light for photographing dark-skinned people?
It is the best color temperature for the human eye. Color film and digital settings are another issue.
Reply
#15
JL Wrote:Fred, were it that bad, you can bet your "bippy"(LaughIn) the EPA and all the bureaucrats would be crawling over it like stink on "you know what". After all, that's what bureaurcats do best.
Because now they are still busy banning incandescant bulbs. Banning eye soring ultra-white lights will come in a few years...

Ron Wrote:The government has already gotten involved, by forbidding U.S. manufacturers from making 60-watt incandescent bulbs. This has been a boon to Chinese manufacturers, who now supply all our 60-watt incandescent bulbs.
That's bureaucratic logic.

In Europe they ban the sale (and maybe the production too) of them. But it's not implemented everywhere, so my father asked me once to bring him a few packs of packs of bulbs the next time I come by car but now he uses led anyway.
Reply
#16
Fred, I have a bunch of 15W(100W equivalent) LED lights that I picked up from EBay(about 60) that are a combination of soft white and daylight.

[Image: 10-X-6W-GU10-White-font-b-LED-b-font-fon...saving.jpg]

I had planned on making a 4ft long grow light for my plants. But Duke Energy here in North Carolina has a subsidy plan that pushes certain fluorescent bulbs, and I couldn't resist the price. Several of the WalMart stores here are part of the program, and I can purchase 4 x 23w(100W equivalent) for $4.44 plus tax. I can get them in daylight or soft white. At that cost, its almost like getting the light base and a screw in splitter to double my bulbs. .

[Image: k2-_60504d41-2ba3-4eeb-be9b-7b700e4bd6e4...0x450.webp]
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#17
That's incredibly cheap. Normal it should be around $15 each.
Reply
#18
(12-07-2015, 07:21 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: That's incredibly cheap. Normal it should be around $15 each.

At less than half the regular price, I can't go wrong with them. S22
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply
#19
John,

Have you fired these up? I'm assuming you're using them in track or recessed fixtures as it looks like a GU10. Do they actually appear warm? ... or that harsh white that you get around 3000K? Bummer that they're not dimmable. If I can find a GU10 in warm AND dimmable ... with about 35W equivalent ... I would be a really happy camper. The closest I can find are Euro that run on 220 ... and I'm afraid that won't really work for me.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard."
-- Henry Mencken
Reply
#20
Jack, when I am using them for grow lights, the object is to get the maximum amount of light. So, I am not interested in dimming them.

Also, I am adding to my growing section, which is right next to where my currently unused computer section is located. I am going to add to the lighting, and set up two refurbished computer deals I have ordered on the internet. As an added bonus to growing plants, all that sunlight will help prevent any winter blues.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
"INSIDE EVERY PROGRESSIVE IS A TOTALITARIAN SCREAMING TO GET OUT" - David Horowitz

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)