Interested, hopefully will be cheaper than most uvc lamps currently, this could change rock hunting, if it’s under about $80 the would be one of the cheapest uvc light, especially if they make it in a single or quad/triple light
No we are going to see more things that claim to be UV-C. They won’t actually be UV-C.
UV-C lights can’t use traditional silica glass. They need to use quartz. Optical quartz is very expensive.
The MF01S has a 72mm bezel. Looking through a catalog (and scaling up because I didn’t find any that large for sale) the price of the glass alone might be $150.
If there is anything other than quartz then the light isn’t producing UV-C. Bare emitters are also an option that would work.
Bare UV-C emitters are more dangerous than you can imagine. If an emitter is powerful enough to project sterilizing death rays several inches to a surface then touching that emitter for a few seconds will give a bad sunburn and after a few minutes guarantee skin cancer. According to the models anyway. They might not be accurate when dealing with levels that are 1000x more intense than what we see on a sunny day. (I will check my math again and cite sources in a later edit to this post.)
So what are all of these “UVC” emitters using? Anything but UVC! A quick search on ebay shows “365nm-380nm UVC” lights for example. It is likely that the lights are using something like this. Those LEDs are 310nm. UVC is defined as the area between 100nm and 280nm. Common germicidal lamps are 254nm. 310nm is UVB.
The difference in color between 254nm and 310nm is a factor of 1.22. That is about the same proportion as the difference between the colors yellow and red.
Actual UVC LEDs are also very expensive and I haven’t seen any cheap versions that looks legit.