Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

designingwithleds.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 189 posts

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#131

Post by drivers99 »

nsxwolf wrote: post #96
drivers99 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Efficient lightbulbs come in various color temperatures. You don't need incandescents to get the same color temperature. I don't like the harsher blue ones so I buy the warmer ones for at home.

I still suspect it won't "look right", as there's more to it than just color. The geometric patterns it may cast on the wall, maybe some other "intangible" effects. I'll have to try one out. It may just be that I'm on the vinyl side in the lighting equivalent of the "vinyl vs CD" debate.

One disadvantage (with flourescents; I'm sure LEDs wouldn't have this issue) I've noticed is that there is a small delay between when you turn on the light switch and the bulb turns on. Also, it doesn't start at full brightness but has to gradually increase to full brightness. Not a huge issue but worth mentioning.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#132

Post by justin66 »

thrownaway2424 wrote: post #129
justin66 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that really the typical CFL number? I ask because I've got one of the new Cree bulbs and I find the quality of light really a lot better than that of the (admittedly cheap) CFLs I've bought at Costco. So I guess I'm struggling with the significance of CRI.

Even the top-of-the-line CREE bulbs are only suitable for people who are color blind or habitually not paying attention. I once did an ill-considered change from halogen to LED bulbs in my kitchen, and having done so could no longer see the colors on my dishware. That was ridiculous. I went back to the halogens. My house is in a year-round heating climate anyway so I don't really worry about the waste heat from them.

I wonder if you've actually used one of the newest Cree bulbs? I'm not color blind and I found the color of one of their 2700k bulbs to be better than the CFLs I use in a few places. Come to think of it, they're a fair bit better than the g7power LEDs as well.

This is why I'm wondering if the CRI is really a magical "light goodness" benchmark number or what. Some people certainly seem to be treating it that way.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#133

Post by ajross »

com2kid wrote: post #98
ajross wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only someone made a "fixture" for lighting with multiple bulb sockets in a convenient, attractive mounting that could be attached to the ceiling of a room. The 60W incandescent light bulb has been the "standard lightbulb" since before most of us were born. Honestly I don't understand this criticism at all. Certainly LED lighting is available in many form factors other than a 60W bulb...

> If only someone made a "fixture" for lighting with multiple bulb sockets in a convenient, attractive mounting that could be attached to the ceiling of a room. My condo's living room doesn't have a ceiling mounted light fixture, or a place to install one at. I'm sure the job could be done, but it'd be a major pain. > The 60W incandescent light bulb has been the "standard lightbulb" since before most of us were born.…

Without getting into the minutiae of lumens and efficiency metrics for different lighting technologies...

It never occurred to you just to buy a second lamp?

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#134

Post by nsxwolf »

drivers99 wrote: post #131
nsxwolf wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still suspect it won't "look right", as there's more to it than just color. The geometric patterns it may cast on the wall, maybe some other "intangible" effects. I'll have to try one out. It may just be that I'm on the vinyl side in the lighting equivalent of the "vinyl vs CD" debate.

One disadvantage (with flourescents; I'm sure LEDs wouldn't have this issue) I've noticed is that there is a small delay between when you turn on the light switch and the bulb turns on. Also, it doesn't start at full brightness but has to gradually increase to full brightness. Not a huge issue but worth mentioning.

And we haven't even talked about dimming. I have dimmers everywhere. CFLs don't dim at all (unless they're special, and I bet they suck). They have other wonderful quirks like blinking when off, if connected to an illuminated switch.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#135

Post by ZeroCoin »

I just bought a 5k and 2.7k versions from Home Depot here in Canada for $15.97 CAD each.

My only gripe is the ~22% markup over the US pricing when the Canadian Dollar is worth ~2% more than the American (and has been for some time now).

I found it funny the way they had their lights laid out in my local store. There has always only ever been one aisle dedicated to twist-in bulbs.

When I entered the store today, and walked straight to that aisle. All I could find were phillips LED bulbs. Rashes of them. Almost every shelf in the aisle featured a Phillips LED bulb of some sort, for twice the price of the Crees. There were even Phillips LED comparison kisosks where consumers could turn on and off all of Phillips' LED bulbs. It was really quite a spectacle.

I broke down and finally asked a sales rep, only to be told the Cree bulbs were in the "fancy/expensive" lighting section of the store. The one where they sell all of the chandeliers and lamps, and you have never been able to find twist-ins for sale.

My gut feeling is that Phillips is scared they're going to lose market share over this, and are using their massive Home Depot contracts to negotiate poor placement for the Crees (and possibly poor pricing?). FYI 90%+ of the bulbs sold in Home Depots are Phillips.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#136

Post by r00fus »

hosh wrote: post #119
jcampbell1 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dislike the consistent color across dimming. The whole point of dimming lights is to lower the color temperature. It is impossible to get a candle like ambiance with LEDs. If you want less total light, it is easy to just turn fewer lights on.

What an amazing insight! Turn on less lights! ;-)

My bedroom has exactly one lamp - aside from dimming (which I use) what do you recommend?

To "turn on less lights" I'd have to install "more (varied) lights".

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#137

Post by chaostheory »

giardini wrote: post #81
chaostheory wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please tell me you're using CFLs as the very least. Yes the upfront price is higher, but these bulbs actually pay for themselves in approximately two years and they start saving you money after that and not to mention time from not having to buy and install new bulbs.

Problem is, the CFLs don't last. They usually don't last even a single year. My story: I got the faith: I replaced every incandescent in our condominium association with CFL. After one year, most all the CFLs had failed, despite having 3- to 5-year warranties. Also noticed another peculiarity: CFLs are stolen more often! Apparently our condominium parking lot has become a CFL bank for individuals who want to lower th…

I get IKEA ones which are really cheap. They've lasted me 4-6 years. There's a warranty too as long as you keep the receipt.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#138

Post by [deleted] »

Cyranix wrote: post #127
ars wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We talked about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5329732 And the biggest problem with this bulb is the CRI of 80. That's much worse than CFL's which are typically around 90.

Is it correct to assume that CRI stands for color rendering index? New term to me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_rendering_index

[deleted]

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#139

Post by dirtyaura »

Cyranix wrote: post #127
ars wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We talked about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5329732 And the biggest problem with this bulb is the CRI of 80. That's much worse than CFL's which are typically around 90.

Is it correct to assume that CRI stands for color rendering index? New term to me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_rendering_index

Yes. And it is the measure that for example interior designers are passionate about. The problem with LEDs has been their poor CRI, but Philips has been able to produce LEDs with CRI above 90.

Re: 60W equivalent LED bulb uses 9.5W and costs $13

#140

Post by ars »

justin66 wrote: post #123
ars wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We talked about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5329732 And the biggest problem with this bulb is the CRI of 80. That's much worse than CFL's which are typically around 90.

Is that really the typical CFL number? I ask because I've got one of the new Cree bulbs and I find the quality of light really a lot better than that of the (admittedly cheap) CFLs I've bought at Costco. So I guess I'm struggling with the significance of CRI.

It depends on which CFL you buy of course. But 90 CRI CFLs are easy to find.

In general "warmer" CFLs have a better CRI.

You can trade off energy efficiency for CRI. This is true for LEDs as well. So if you don't need great color then go for a lower CRI since you'll save energy on the light output.

But because of that, when comparing energy efficiency of LEDs vs CFLs you MUST use a comparable CRI, otherwise it's not a fair comparison.

But I'll save you time: There are no commercially available LEDs that beat CFLs in energy efficiency for the equivalent CRI.

Post reply on HN