What does everyone think? I know the best thing for flowering is HPS but give your opinion on this comparison! Thanks!
I don't have the link anymore but i remember reading MH is better for flowering because of the light spectrum it produces
its is for quality not yield, hps yields more, ALOT of old school growers i talk to tell me to only use 1000w MH's but i like my hps and im thinkin of adding in a cmh for the extra spectrum. forgot, im not a fan of cfl's except for vegging seedlings, bad penetration, u have to have the lights crazy close, still not gonna have fat nugs, and the amount of bulbs that it requires to get a decent yield you could get a good HID ballast for, if you look hard enough.
250w of cfl will not put out the lumens as a 250w mh... but with cfl you can control the light spectrum. The answer is: use the MH with some 3000k color temp 30w cfls.
dexorated, yeah man this is what I'm doing at the moment, 250 MH and a bunch of 2700k's, 200w total or so. Would have used an HPS if I had one obviously. Just seems weird that 250w of cfls, supposed to be an equivalent of 1000w more or less, puts out less lumens than a 250w metal halide.
That's because 250 watts of cfls is equal to the lumens of 1000 watts of incandescent lights, which still don't have as many lumens as a 250 watt metal halide (metal halide is a different type of bulb than an incandescent)