@@HIDLad001 Prior to 1995, they were among the second most popular F40 fluorescent tube option after F40CW. In addition F40D was less common than F40WW, and lastly, F40W was the least common of the standard halophosphate F40 tubes made before 1995.
The CRI on these is quite bad because it uses standard halophosphate phosphor, and not a triphosphor formulation. Not all fluorescent lights have bad CRI. Most modern day triphosphor fluorescent lamps have a CRI of over 80. I know Philips make the F32T8/TL950 which has a CRI of 98! NEC also make some fluorescent lamps for the Japanese market that have equally good CRI. But I would definitely recommend to pick up the TL950s because they are definitely a much better value than LEDs because of their better CRI.
Good T12 lamps are always very satisfying!
Nice find on these tubes!!!
Thanks! WW standard halophosphate tubes are quite uncommon.
@@HIDLad001 Prior to 1995, they were among the second most popular F40 fluorescent tube option after F40CW. In addition F40D was less common than F40WW, and lastly, F40W was the least common of the standard halophosphate F40 tubes made before 1995.
What's the CRI like on these? I thought all florescents have really peaky spectrums, and poor color rendering overall.
The CRI on these is quite bad because it uses standard halophosphate phosphor, and not a triphosphor formulation.
Not all fluorescent lights have bad CRI. Most modern day triphosphor fluorescent lamps have a CRI of over 80. I know Philips make the F32T8/TL950 which has a CRI of 98!
NEC also make some fluorescent lamps for the Japanese market that have equally good CRI.
But I would definitely recommend to pick up the TL950s because they are definitely a much better value than LEDs because of their better CRI.
52 (Im not kidding)