Skip to content
Sprout & Spectrum

Spider Farmer SF1000

The fixture we point at when someone asks what good disclosure looks like: two published figures that agree with each other when you divide them.

By Scooter M. — An enthusiast who's genuinely into this. I read the manuals, compile the published specs, and do the math. No lab coat.

Published · How we pick

A square white LED grow panel hanging above leafy seedlings indoors

Photographs on this site are licensed stock and are illustrative of the fixture type. We do not own the units we write about.

How this page is funded: the buy links here are Amazon Associates links, and we earn a commission on qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you. We have not been paid to feature anything on this page, we accept no free product, and commission plays no part in the ranking. Full disclosure.

We have not tested these units. Everything below comes from the manufacturer’s own published specifications, or from arithmetic we have shown our working for. Where a figure is not published, we say so instead of estimating one. Read the method.

The reasoning

We have not tested this fixture and do not own one. What we can do is something we cannot do for most of this category: check Spider Farmer’s claims against each other.

The check

Does the published efficacy divide out of the published PPF?

Spider Farmer publishes 249.21 µmol/s and 100 W ±5%.

249.21 ÷ 100 = 2.4921 µmol/J.

Spider Farmer publishes 2.5 µmol/J. That is 2.4921 rounded to two significant figures.

The numbers agree. That is what we mean by a spec sheet you can check: the brand has published enough for the claim to be falsifiable, and it survives the test.

Compare that with VIVOSUN, which publishes a higher 2.75 µmol/J and no PPF at all. The higher number may well be accurate; there is simply no way to tell from what is published. We would rather have 2.5 confirmed than 2.75 asserted.

What it delivers

PPFD across the published 2 × 2 ft core footprint

2 × 2 ft = 4 sq ft = 0.372 m².

249.21 ÷ 0.372 = 670 µmol/m²/s at perfect uniformity; at 0.8, about 536 µmol/m²/s.

Over the stated 3 × 3 ft maximum footprint (0.836 m²): 249.21 ÷ 0.836 × 0.8 = 238 µmol/m²/s, which lands neatly at the top of Minnesota Extension’s medium band and is close to ideal for seedlings at 14 hours.

That second figure is the interesting one. The SF1000 at its maximum footprint is a near-perfect seedling light: 238 µmol/m²/s at 14 hours gives a DLI of 12.0 mol/m²/day, which is the University of New Hampshire Extension target essentially exactly.

DLI at the SF1000's maximum footprint, 14 hours a day
12.0 mol

Per square meter per day, computed from its published 249.21 µmol/s over 3 × 3 ft at 0.8 uniformity. The published seedling target is about 12.

Running cost and lifespan

100 W at 14 hours is 1.4 kWh a day, 42 kWh a month, about $7.70 at the US residential average. Spider Farmer publishes a 55,000-hour rated life, which at 14 hours a day is roughly 10.8 years of continuous seasonal use — long enough that lifespan is not a purchasing consideration.

Where it loses

To the Mars Hydro TS 1000 on raw output: 343 µmol/s against 249.21, 38% more photons for 50 W more draw. If your area is large enough to need them, the TS 1000 is the better tool.

To the AC Infinity IONBOARD on efficiency: 2.7 µmol/J against 2.5, which over a five-month winter at equivalent output is a difference of roughly $4. Small, but real, and it compounds.

What is not published

PPFD at a stated distance, same as almost everyone else in this class. The spectrum line — 650–665 nm, 730–740 nm, 2800–3000 K, 4800–5000 K — tells you which emitters are present but not their proportions, which would require a spectral distribution chart nobody in this segment publishes.

Who should buy it

Anyone lighting roughly 2 × 2 to 3 × 3 ft who wants to know what they are getting before it arrives. It is the fixture we would pick if the criterion were “the manufacturer told me enough to check its claims,” and that is a criterion we think should matter more than it does.

Size it for your own space in the coverage calculator, or see how it ranks against the rest in the best grow light panels.

The fixture in full

A square white LED grow panel hanging above leafy seedlings indoors

Spider Farmer SF1000

LED panel

Publishes PPF to two decimal places and an efficacy figure that actually divides out of it. That internal consistency is rarer in this category than it should be.

What Spider Farmer publishes

Power draw
100 W +/-5% at 100-277 V AC (source)
PPF (photon output)
249.21 umol/s (source)
Efficacy
2.5 umol/J (source)
Stated coverage
2 x 2 ft core, 3 x 3 ft maximum (source)
Spectrum
650-665 nm, 730-740 nm, 2800-3000 K, 4800-5000 K (source)
Diodes
Bridgelux (source)
Dimming
Yes, dimming knob (source)
Dimensions
32.5 x 29.0 x 5.9 cm (source)
Rated life
55,000 hours (source)

Our arithmetic

  • Does the published efficacy check out against the published PPF?: Yes — 2.49 umol/J computed against 2.5 umol/J published
    249.21 umol/s / 100 W = 2.4921 umol/J. The published 2.5 umol/J is that number rounded. Not every brand's two figures agree like this, which is exactly why we divide them.
  • Average PPFD across its 2 x 2 ft core footprint: about 536 umol/m2/s
    2 ft x 2 ft = 4 sq ft = 0.372 m2. 249.21 / 0.372 = 670 umol/m2/s at perfect uniformity; at a 0.8 uniformity factor, about 536 umol/m2/s.

Who should skip it

Skip it if raw output is what you are buying — the TS 1000 delivers 38% more photons per second, at the cost of 50 W more draw.

Questions people actually ask

+Is the Spider Farmer SF1000 good for seedlings?
Yes, and unusually precisely so. Over its published 3 × 3 ft maximum footprint its 249.21 µmol/s works out to about 238 µmol/m²/s at 0.8 uniformity, which at 14 hours a day gives a daily light integral of 12.0 mol/m²/day — the published seedling target almost exactly.
+How much does the SF1000 cost to run?
At 100 W and 14 hours a day, about 42 kWh a month, or $7.70 at the US residential average of 18.34 cents per kWh.
+Is the SF1000 better than the Mars Hydro TS 1000?
Not on output — the TS 1000 publishes 343 µmol/s against 249.21, which is 38% more light for 50 W more draw. The SF1000 wins on efficacy and on internal consistency of its published figures. Which matters more depends on how much area you need to cover.
+Have you tested the SF1000?
No. We have not owned or measured this fixture. Every number here is either published by Spider Farmer or divided out of their published figures with the working shown.

Sources

Read next

Where this sits

This page belongs to Fixture Reviews and Roundups. Every figure on it is either quoted from a named published source or derived in view — the full method is on our methodology page, and how the site is funded is on the affiliate disclosure.