I found the chart immediately below some time ago and have referenced it for UV wavelength applications:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I then came upon the chart below from http://www.theledlight.com. If you compare the two, it seems like someone had the original, and someone else modified it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
The question is, which chart is more accurate?
I am considering the Streamlight Night Com UV, Nitecore CU6, and Nitecore P20UV.
I am looking for a well-rounded UV light that can be used for viewing animal/bodily fluids, scorpion/insect hunting, AC/leak detection, and just as importantly--document/currency examination. The white LED light makes it a good general carry.
On first blush, it would seem like the Night Com UV, with its dual 365nm and 390nm setup would be ideal. After some research, it seems like a more powerful 365nm can be just as good for all those applications?? This is where I am unable to find definitive information and the charts above only add to the confusion.
I am clear that 365nm is needed for many "real" UV applications while 390nm is closer to visible light (I have read the Night Com UV review comparing the two). Question is, then, why have 390nm at all? Again, the charts above seem to offer no definitive guidance. The CU6 claims 3000mW of UV while the Night Com UV is only 24mW. The P20UV claims to output 320mW.
Will the CU6, with its single (realizing that there is wavelength spill), more powerful 365nm, "outshine" (pardon the pun) the Night Com UV, OR, will the Night Com UV, with its additional 390nm diodes, reveal certain things that the CU6 will not (albeit at a closer distance)?
I would appreciate any information.... Thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I then came upon the chart below from http://www.theledlight.com. If you compare the two, it seems like someone had the original, and someone else modified it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
The question is, which chart is more accurate?
I am considering the Streamlight Night Com UV, Nitecore CU6, and Nitecore P20UV.
I am looking for a well-rounded UV light that can be used for viewing animal/bodily fluids, scorpion/insect hunting, AC/leak detection, and just as importantly--document/currency examination. The white LED light makes it a good general carry.
On first blush, it would seem like the Night Com UV, with its dual 365nm and 390nm setup would be ideal. After some research, it seems like a more powerful 365nm can be just as good for all those applications?? This is where I am unable to find definitive information and the charts above only add to the confusion.
I am clear that 365nm is needed for many "real" UV applications while 390nm is closer to visible light (I have read the Night Com UV review comparing the two). Question is, then, why have 390nm at all? Again, the charts above seem to offer no definitive guidance. The CU6 claims 3000mW of UV while the Night Com UV is only 24mW. The P20UV claims to output 320mW.
Will the CU6, with its single (realizing that there is wavelength spill), more powerful 365nm, "outshine" (pardon the pun) the Night Com UV, OR, will the Night Com UV, with its additional 390nm diodes, reveal certain things that the CU6 will not (albeit at a closer distance)?
I would appreciate any information.... Thank you.