Haruspex is right of course. That's what makes light such a messy business.
Lux, lumen and candela all refer to the effect of light on an eye, which does not have a simple relation to its power.
"I didn't think you could convert lux to W/m2, ..." and it is indeed a dubious matter, because lights of equal lux might (probably would) have different W/m2 values.
But you can calculate corresponding values for a given light source. If the power in each frequency step is multiplied by "the" eye's sensitivity at that frequency, the sum of these divided by 683W will tell you the lux value of that light.
So two sources emitting the same power in the visible spectrum can have different luminance because their spectral distributions are different. For example a daylight and warm light source might emit the same power in visible light, but have different luminance.
What the validity is of any of these measurements, I wonder. I think a 5W, 395 lumen daylight LED looks brighter than a 5W, 370 lumen warm white LED, but they're different colours as well. So if I tried to compare them with a Bunsen or Joly photometer, I would never get a point where they were indistinguishable.
The ubiquitous electronic photometers used to measure luminance now depend on filters to correct the spectral response of silicon sensors or use CdS sensors, which can be similar to "the" eye's sensitivity (and can of course be further corrected by filters.) Their measurements should be impartial, though comments about filter optimisation for different light sources, makes me wonder just how well matched they are.