Fluorescents vs LED Tube Lights right now

[coursemyhorse]

If you were to install lights for an average sized (home) garage today in the UK, would you consider LEDs yet? I mention the UK because a lot of thoughts on this subject or online forum posts/videos are based in the US where LED lighting may be cheaper and more widely available. I also find that a lot of information is from too long ago to make an informed decision, when LEDs were considered to not be developed enough yet.

Do you feel that the time has come whereby LEDs have reached a good enough level?

From my brief research online (although I don't know many competitively priced places to buy such lights) I have concluded that T5 Fluorescents right now are still a good choice. The actual tubes are a few pounds each even for the long 5/6ft ones, and the Lumen output seems to be much higher than LED. They seem still very efficient.

A twin 58W T5 high frequency 5ft fitment including tubes comes in at around £30 on tlc. The lumen output can be around 5000 lumens per tube I think. So approx 1000 total.

The equivalent twin LED 5ft fitment comes with everything inside it required and is almost exactly double the price. It uses half the watts (50W for both tubes combined) and gives out about half the lumens total output. I'm also unsure if the LED tubes are replaceble in a lot of them.

I have noted that there are some options to purchase replacement LED tubes that have the standard battern fitment of T8 (not sure about T5) which plug straight in to your old/existing fittings. You just need to uninstall the ballast of old, and fit a new LED starter in some cases or just wire direct. I wonder if it would be cheaper to re-purpose older fittings or even buy some, with the intention of using these types of tubes. They have the benefit of also being replaceable in the future.

All things considered, unless I am missing something, I can't see an argument for LED at all? Twice as much cost and twice as many required to get the same output...? Is that right? Might not be replaceable.

The benefits of LED instant start are moot if one uses T5 high frequency ballasts as well.
It feels almost wrong to be buying from scratch something that isn't LED these days, but is it simply the case that Fluorescents are still the better choice? Maybe I am looking at some bad LEDs. Would appreciate if someone could link to good ones. I know there are other things to consider like beam angle and efficiency.

I realize that with business decisions it may be different if you needed the lights on A LOT as LEDs would provide cost savings. In this day and age, who wouldn't want to run low cost lights. But for a home garage even with regular use, are LEDs worth it yet? From the ones I can find online it does not seem so.

 

[big-all]

no brainer really fluro choices perhaps 4/5/6ft tubes
led endless choice with shapes sizes and configurations
leds about 1/2 to 1/3 the running cost
an led running for 10 hours a day at about 14p a kwh will cost you about 50p a year per watt
so a 20w led will give the equivillent off say a 56w tube and save perhaps £18 a year
converting tubes to led is a very inefficient and not very stylish way to use leds

 

[flameport]

In terms of light output (lumens/watt), LED and fluorescent are similar, so the savings in power used are minimal if comparing the same light output.

However LEDs are far more directional than a tube, so in some situations lower power LEDs can be used to give a similar level of illumination. This is why LED replacement tubes are typically much lower power with apparent lower light output, as it's assumed that all of the light is wanted in a single direction and traditional tubes waste a fair amount by light going in all directions. This may be true in some situations but not all.

Generally if buying LEDs, it is better to purchase fittings designed for LED from the outset, rather than adapting fixtures which were designed for other light sources.

 

[ericmark]

As said LED and fluorescent are very similar, best LED is around 100 lumen per watt, and best fluorescent is around 96 lumen per watt. However in both cases the common used is far less than best. So LED bulb around 75 lumen per watt and folded fluorescent around 60 lumen per watt and for decoration LED can go down to 25 lumen per watt.

For a kitchen for example you need a lot of light and also a large spread, with a 58W fluorescent tube it has a great spread and loads of light, it is 5 foot long so not much problem with spread, but you may feel you don't need 5200 lumen, you may feel 2800 lumen is enough, and with LED you can get a 5 foot tube which is 28W with just 2800 lumen output.

So often it is just personal selection, a 5 foot tube does not look maybe the best, you may feel better with say two or three 18W 2D lamps, or you may feel 6 x 10W LED surface mount, it's more down to personal selection than which is best.

 

[davelx]

In terms of light output (lumens/watt), LED and fluorescent are similar, so the savings in power used are minimal if comparing the same light output.

However LEDs are far more directional than a tube, so in some situations lower power LEDs can be used to give a similar level of illumination. This is why LED replacement tubes are typically much lower power with apparent lower light output, as it's assumed that all of the light is wanted in a single direction and traditional tubes waste a fair amount by light going in all directions. This may be true in some situations but not all.

Generally if buying LEDs, it is better to purchase fittings designed for LED from the outset, rather than adapting fixtures which were designed for other light sources.

These LEDlite tubes are very good:

https://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Main_Index/Lighting_Menu_Index/Lighting_Fluorescent_Index/LED_Tubes/index.html

They look exactly like a normal fluorescent tube, even light almost output all round (330°). Immediate full brightness even around freezing point, which makes them great in outbuildings. They come with a "starter" to replace the one in the fitting. No other mods needed.

 

[aptsys]

In terms of light output (lumens/watt), LED and fluorescent are similar, so the savings in power used are minimal if comparing the same light output.

However LEDs are far more directional than a tube, so in some situations lower power LEDs can be used to give a similar level of illumination. This is why LED replacement tubes are typically much lower power with apparent lower light output, as it's assumed that all of the light is wanted in a single direction and traditional tubes waste a fair amount by light going in all directions. This may be true in some situations but not all.

Generally if buying LEDs, it is better to purchase fittings designed for LED from the outset, rather than adapting fixtures which were designed for other light sources.

Agreed. LED retrofits are not really comparable or a good way to do things and linear tubes are poor for heat dissipation.

In workshops/garages, fluorescent tubes are great as you get a very diffused light due to the radiation pattern, but LED panels are decent alternatives.

There are minimal energy savings to be had unless we're comparing old tubes with magnetic ballasts and almost certainly, traditional fluorescent fittings will last significantly longer than any LED tube or LED fitting.

 

[JohnW2]

However LEDs are far more directional than a tube, so in some situations lower power LEDs can be used to give a similar level of illumination. This is why LED replacement tubes are typically much lower power with apparent lower light output, as it's assumed that all of the light is wanted in a single direction and traditional tubes waste a fair amount by light going in all directions. This may be true in some situations but not all.

That certainly corresponds with my personal experience, with the situations in which I have 'tube lighting'.

Most of those situations are ones in which the fluorescents were above desks or other work surfaces and, in that situation, replacing a fluorescent tube fitting with a 'same length' LED one (i.e. of about half the power) has always resulted in seemingly similar (sometimes greater) levels of illumination 'where it was wanted'. In contrast, in my garage etc. I have retained fluorescents, since the wider dispersal of light is then an advantage.

KiInd Regards, John

 

[333rocky333]

The environment is also a factor, leds are more robust, whereas Glass can shatter
T5 tubes come as HE or HO the Ho is the High Output version

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Ask yourself this - if you were designing a light from scratch, why would you make the emitters narrow tubes?

 

[John D v2.0]

I like the look of those office style 600x600 tile lights with LEDs. You can also get 1200x300 and other variations.
Has anyone tried those panels at home and do they look any good? I reckon they'd suit the OP garage but not sure about a hallway etc.

 

[JohnW2]

Ask yourself this - if you were designing a light from scratch, why would you make the emitters narrow tubes?

If I wanted to illuminate a long/narrow work surface and wanted to reduce shadows?

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

I like the look of those office style 600x600 tile lights with LEDs. You can also get 1200x300 and other variations. Has anyone tried those panels at home and do they look any good?

To my eyes, they generally look better than the equivalent 'tube fittings'. I have tried (and do have) some 1200 x 300 ones, and they seem similar to a 4' 2-tube fitting for illuminating a 'long/narrow' surface directly below, but the 600 x 600 ones are, in my experience (and not really surprisingly) less good/efficient at providing relatively shadow-free illumination of (just) a long/narrow surface. They are probably fine for general illumination of a whole room.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ericmark]

It you leave the ballast in place when fitting a LED tube there must be power lost going through the ballast with a corridor where the old fluorescent tubes were fitted in a line it is very likely there is far more light than required, so removing 58W fluorescent tubes and replacing with 28W LED works well, simply as originally there was more light than required.

However move to a room or warehouse where the fluorescent light was originally selected correctly, then with only around 5 to 10 lumen per watt advantage wasting power heating up a redundant ballast is not an option. Even swapping whole fitting a LED 50W 5ft fitting gives out 4500 lumen where a 58W fluorescent with an electronic ballast giving out 5220 lumen is exactly the same lumen per watt, often the fluorescent is rated at 5400 lumen so are in fact better.

I found this picture.

It does not take much to see the problem with the top picture, yes it will work, but with the tube I got the other end of the tube has the two contacts short circuit, so put the tube in wrong way around and you have a direct short. It needs to be wired this way

So it does not matter which way around the tube is inserted where the second diagram comes from I don't know as wire wound ballast normally only have two connections, and HF ballast would not have a starter this was the advert and it worries me that they put up diagrams like this which to be fair may be correct for their special tubes, but there seems to be no universal method of fitting LED tubes in fluorescent fittings.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

If I wanted to illuminate a long/narrow work surface and wanted to reduce shadows?

I wouldn't.

 

[JohnW2]

It you leave the ballast in place when fitting a LED tube there must be power lost going through the ballast ....

Indeed - so remove the ballast or get a fitting designed for LED tubes.

....with a corridor where the old fluorescent tubes were fitted in a line it is very likely there is far more light than required, so removing 58W fluorescent tubes and replacing with 28W LED works well, simply as originally there was more light than required.

Indeed, and the same over my desks and work surfaces. However, it's not necessarily that there was previously 'more light than required' falling on the desk/work surface - it could be at least partially because, previously, some of the light output of the tube was being 'wasted' (turned to heat, which one might not want) by going sideways and being absorbed by dark walls.

Kind Regards, John