Honestly, it’s more like turning one light into a whole other light, vs just improving any shortcomings on the original.
365nm vs 395nm, okay, I can see that. (Well, figuratively.)
Photo-red vs “regular” red… yeah, okay, but as long as people realise that photo-red will not be as bright as regular-red at the same power levels (unless you can see into the infrared, that is).
Lighted switchcap, that’d be a hoot, so sure, I’m in.
I’m perfectly fine with using a 26 as-is, vs a 21, as you can always drop a 21 into a tube bored for a 26, but not v/v. Plus, that just makes the tube skinnier vs on-par with the head, making it more like a stubby plunger light vs a chunky tubelight.
The UI, honestly, I’d leave as-is. For the ’30, it’s nigh perfect. 1/2/3 clicks to get into white/red/UV, then diddle with brightness, etc. And nomem on red/UV, always start on low. (To this day, I still can’t replicate the white+red both glowing bug.)
So yah, if anyone wants a different light based on the WK30 concept, great. But I wouldn’t molester the original ’30 and call it a WK30S :confounded: or WK30A, or WK30v2, or anything like that.
And definitely don’t discontinue the original. I think they pretty much nailed it on the first try.