Introducing the very latest SAMSUNG LED Technology - LM301H EVO & LH351H V3

Rich Invisible Sun said:

hi guys,

Just to clear things up, we buy our LEDs from Samsung Europe using their UK agent, the Evo chipsets are not exclusive to us, but we are the first company to utilise them in Europe not sure about the rest of the world. Im sure others will follow.

We have the next 2-3 years worth of top bin lm301h evo full white 4000k and 3500k along with the latest lh351h v3 660nm ordered well in advance so we have guaranteed supply line.

Top bins are available to anyone who orders enough LED (millions) at a time, these are on 6 month plus lead times,

if companies don't order in advance and they only buy smaller quantities of led's out of agent/supplier held stock when needed (like a lot of companies do) then they get the chaff and lower bins. Coupled with the silicon shortage and lead times of 6 months plus for new orders its getting more difficult for companies to buy held stock of any bin let alone top bin, a lot of companies are switching to other LED brands to cope with this issue.

if you have any questions drop us an email through the site or call us in the office, we are always happy to go over stuff with people

Rich

Click to expand...

xtsho said:

I wasn't implying anything regarding your lights. The post I made earlier was just to clear up the misconception some seemed to have that HLG had some kind of exclusive agreement with Samsung. The supply chain doesn't work that way.

Click to expand...

Moflow said:

Nice to see you are still about @lukio
All well I hope mate?

Click to expand...

Rurumo said:

I saw that Mammoth is shipping a new light with these lm301H Evo mint chocolate chips in late Jan, but I also see a bunch of Chinese brands with them now too. Just wondering if anyone has tested them out yet?

Click to expand...

Porky1982 said:

Don't HLG have exclusive rights to the newest tech from Samsung??

Click to expand...

EmeraldØsiris said:

the lm301h evo's efficiency is much lower than 301b evo's. Does the spectrum of the H make up for it? I don't get the hype... The lm561c's are more efficient.

Click to expand...

Rocket Soul said:

Im not very familiar with the datasheet other than H-evos having a different photon pump at 435nm rather than 450nm. This might make them look less efficient in lums/w but afaik they are more efficient in ppf/w than anything around.

Click to expand...

HippieDudeRon said:

The standard 450nm pump is because that is/was the most efficient die to match with phosphor conversion to produce white light in the general lighting space.
Growers and builders use it because its available and efficient and conveniently aligned with Chlorophyll B peak at 455nm that was already being used by "burple" lights.
New Evos hit Chlorophyll A peaks at 428 a lot better and nail that ps2 peak. And between the two leds(regulars and evo's) can spread the load of blue across both chlorophyll responses.

Chlorophyll A peaks= 429nm and 659nm
Chlorophyll B peaks= 455nm and 642nm
View attachment 5251743
Upper curves: Diethylether solutions of chlorophyll a (Chl a, solid line) and chlorophyll b (Chl b, dotted line) show distinct absorption peaks in
blue and in red regions of the visible spectrum (redrawn from Zscheile and Comar’s (1941) original data). Fluorescence emission spectra (inset, redrawn from Lichtenthaler 1986) show peaks only in red, and at wavelengths characteristically longer than corresponding absorption peaks, namely 648 cf. 642 nm for Chl b, and 668 cf. 662 nm for Chl a.
Lower curves: In situ absorption spectra (eluted from gel slices) for pigment-protein complexes corresponding to photosystem II reaction centre (PSII RC) and light-harvesting chlorophyll (a,b)-protein complexes (LHC). A secondary peak at 472 nm and a shoulder at 653 nm indicate contributions from Chl b to these broadened absorption spectra which have been normalised to 10 µM Chl solutions in a 1 cm path length cuvette. (Based on J.R. Evans and J.M. Anderson, BBA 892: 75-82, 1987)

Also...lower nm=more energy=potential for more "uv like" responses in terms of secondary metabolites.

Lastly why you don't hear about them or see them in the current "race to the bottom" in the LED hort market is that they are over 30% more expensive than the already comparatively expensive 301b/h's. That's the biggest issue with them being used.

Click to expand...