Comparing the Maxibright Daylight to the Lumatek Attis

Here at DIYLEDUK, we regularly get asked by customers: “What’s the difference between the Lumatek Attis and the Maxibright Daylight?” The short answer is…essentially nothing! These two LED ranges share the same features as one another, further cementing our belief that we’re all on to a winning formula with these fantastic fixtures. Let us take you through these lights in some detail and show you how we confirmed these things for ourselves.


General design and layout

Combining finned aluminium heatsinks for fan-less heat dissipation, with a concentric square design; we were really impressed by how these lights were able to provide an exceptionally uniform spread of intensity over the areas we measured. 



One of the most important features on any grow light. With 6 stages of dimming (OFF-20%-40%-60%-80%-100%), you’ll have a good amount of flexibility to adjust for intensity depending on your situation. Whether you’re intending to take your plants from seedlings to harvest under a single continuous fixture, experimenting with hanging-heights, or striving to improve your growing skills with increasing levels of intensity; the 200W and 300W offerings will be able to take care of all this.

Remember to keep these dimming functions in-mind when reading our recommendations, as we give them based on an assumption of full-power operation.

On to the Comparison...

While you could quite fairly make the assumption that these are the same fixtures by looks alone - we wanted to confirm for the customer once-and-for-all, whether this is in fact the case - so you’ll have one less question for whichever branded fixture you might be considering. We used some tools at our disposal to get the answer, measuring and comparing power consumption against performance under a quantum sensor.


So let’s take a look at the Maxibright Daylight 200W  PPFD numbers next to the Lumatek Attis 200W

Our recommendation is that both of these lights are best utilised in footprints of up to 80cm x 80cm. Experienced growers could get some impressive results within a 60cm x 60cm area.

We decided to hang them both (one after another) inside a 75cm x 75cm footprint and took some PAR (PPFD) measurements with our quantum sensor within a 64 square grid. This not only gave us a great visual representation of the spread from each fixture, but it also enabled us to take an average PPFD reading (by adding up all values and dividing by 64).

Bear-in-mind that, as with our Lumatek Zeus 600 overview (see link here), we’re making relative claims about performance for the purpose of comparing two fixtures under our own conditions. The equipment we use has it’s limitations and we must always allow for a small margin of error.

With all that being said, let’s take a look at the numbers. If you’re unfamiliar with PPFD: it refers to the Photosythetic Photon Flux Density. This in a nutshell, is the density of photons (within the PAR spectrum range) that are being picked up by the sensor over a specific area and time. The higher the number, the more intense the light is over the sensor.

Maxibright Daylight 200W - Average PPFD: 656 μMol/M2/s

Lumatek Attis 200W - Average PPFD: 666 μMol/M2/s

Taking into account the margin for error expected when a human is trying to position each light in exactly the same position (amongst other minute variables), what we saw from both the PPFD numbers we were getting under our conditions and their distribution confirmed to us that these lights are identical in output.


Lastly, we compared the Lumatek Attis 300W to the Maxibright Daylight 300W.

Our recommendation is that these lights are best utilised in footprints up to 1m x 1m. Again, experienced growers could get very impressive results within a smaller 80cm x 80cm area.

For the 300W fixtures, we decided to hang them both (one after another) inside a 1m x 1m footprint and once again took some PAR (PPFD) measurements with our quantum sensor within a 64 square grid.


Lumatek Attis 300W - Average PPFD: 604 μMol/M2/s

Maxibright Daylight 300W - Average PPFD: 611 μMol/M2/s

As with the 200W fixtures we measured before; when taking into account the margin for error we can see that these 300W lights are again - as you we’re probably expecting - identical in output.



So, as we’ve seen from the two comparisons we’ve done, it really doesn’t matter which brand you choose. Both of the 200W and 300W fixtures will provide the same exceptional spread. It’ll likely come down to which colour and company is your favourite!



Additional: Why are the average PPFD numbers lower for the 300W?

Remember that each fixture has a range of footprints that we would recommend. Whether we used a 60cm x 60cm or 1.2m x 1.2m area for either wattage fixture, it would be largely irrelevant for the purposes of our comparisons. We’ve taken great care to minimise the variables between each light that we’re comparing; but because we’ve taken our 200W measurements in a more intense area than the 300W (which is on the outer limit of that light’s recommended footprint), the PPFD numbers will be lower for the relatively larger space. After all, we’re not comparing the 200W to the 300W, only each wattage fixture against it's counterpart.