The best Solariums, compared.
Top pick: Jitesy three-panel lamp Best value: Funthy 001 LED panel – Best value: about £49.99, score 60, 4.7 from 10 reviews, the highest score under £80. No wavelength is printed, and ten reviews are a short sample. Updated October 2026.
On amazon.co.uk, the word solarium covers visible-light LED lamps and one 12-tube facial tanner of ten listings. Check the stated wavelength, or the tube description, before you treat them as the same product. A useful listing names a wavelength, a timer or a distance, and eye protection. Prices and stars here are the amazon.co.uk figures saved. The NHS says there is no safe ultraviolet tan, and this stored page does not print a UV wavelength, so the award is the star-and-count result. How to pick a light family and a coverage shape is in the [solarium buying guide](/hub/steam-baths/solarium/sub/solarium-buying-guide). A solarium is either a visible-light LED lamp or one 12-tube facial tanner. 460 nm and 490 nm are visible blue. 660 nm and 850 nm are red and near-infrared. Do not invent a wavelength the listing omits. Watts and an LED count are not an ultraviolet dose. The (Regulation) Act 2010 defines a sunbed as a powered device that tans skin with ultraviolet radiation.
On amazon.co.uk, the word solarium covers visible-light LED lamps and one 12-tube facial tanner of ten listings. Check the stated wavelength, or the tube description, before you treat them as the same product.
36 products checked · 58 hrs invested · +18,600 readers
Swipe for more
1-2 of 10
Personal buying guide
Question 1 of 2
What are you comparing?
The Jitesy three-panel lamp is about £159.99, with 168 LEDs split as 84 at 460 nm and 84 at 490 nm. The bullets say you can use one panel, two, or all three, with modes for either wavelength or both, continuous or pulse. The timer is printed as 5–30 minutes, with five brightness levels. Wattage, distance, and goggles are not printed. Amazon shows 5.0 out of 5 from 4 reviews, and the file has three texts. One German text describes 225 LEDs and a hanging hook, which these bullets do not name, so that review may not be this unit. A perfect star line on four ratings is weaker evidence than 3.1 from 90 on the four-head Jitesy. The package is 44.2 × 16.5 × 6 cm at 1.22 kg. You pay for a modular panel set and a printed timer, without a review sample that clearly describes this lamp.
Pros
Cons
Best for: You want removable panels and a printed 5–30 minute timer, and you will not treat four stars as a settled result.
Less suitable: You want a review count you can lean on, or goggles named on the page.
Specifications
Common questions
How do the panels work?
The bullets say you can use one, two, or all three panels, with 84 LEDs at 460 nm and 84 at 490 nm. Modes are either wavelength or both, continuous or pulse.
Is a timer printed?
Yes. The title and bullets say 5–30 minutes and five brightness levels. Distance, wattage, and goggles are not printed.
How strong is the 5.0 rating?
The listing says 5.0 out of 5 from 4 reviews, and the file has three texts. One German text describes 225 LEDs and a hanging hook, which these bullets do not name.
Funthy's foldable 225-LED lamp is about £49.99, and the title names an eye mask and a tripod. Wavelength and wattage are not printed, and there is no timer on the page. Amazon shows 4.7 out of 5 from 10 reviews, the strongest star line among the panels under £50, and eight texts are in the file. Several United Kingdom reviews mention colour and even coverage, and none of those texts describe a failed unit. The seller copy says 30–50 cm and 30 minutes a day, with a colour change usually in 20–30 days, which is a claim rather than a measured result. Ten reviews are still a short sample next to the 90-review four-head lamp. On the star-and-count score used here it is 60, three points behind the tube tanner at about £399, which is why it is the best value in this table. The missing wavelength is the limit: you do not know which light you are buying.
Pros
Cons
Best for: You want the strongest star line under £50 and you can accept a panel that never prints a nanometre.
Less suitable: You need a stated wavelength, a timer, or a review count in the dozens.
Specifications
Common questions
Does the listing name eye protection?
The title says an eye mask and a tripod. The bullets do not describe the mask. Wavelength and wattage are not printed.
What distance and routine does the seller give?
The bullets say 30–50 cm and 30 minutes a day, with a colour change usually in 20–30 days. There is no printed timer.
What do the reviews in the file say?
Amazon shows 4.7 out of 5 from 10 reviews. Eight texts are in the file. Several United Kingdom reviews mention colour and even coverage. None describe a failed unit.
The Facial Tanner Eurosolar 9212 is the only tube unit in this set, at about £399.00, with 12 tubes, a package weight of 7 kg, and bullets that describe a turbo model with blue and red tubes. No nanometres or wattage appear in the stored technical block. The stored amazon.co.uk line is 4.0 out of 5 from 59 reviews, and the star-and-count score is 63, the highest here. Praise in the file is often easy use and facial colour. Complaints include a stand that blocks the doors, side panels that will not stay open, sitting close, and some reports of no tan. One review says the English manual starts every skin type at 5 minutes, steps by 5 minutes, says no closer than 25 cm, and says 48 hours between sessions. Those figures are that review of a manual, not the bullet list. The NHS says there is no safe ultraviolet tan, and this stored page does not print a UV wavelength, so the tubes are not a measured UV type in this file. The score leads the table because of stars and review count.
Pros
Cons
Best for: You want the 12-tube facial tanner with the strongest score in this table, and you have read the NHS warning on ultraviolet tanning.
Less suitable: You want a visible LED lamp, a price under £100, or a result described as safe.
Specifications
Common questions
Is this an LED panel?
No. The title says a facial tanner with 12 tubes, and the bullets say a turbo model with blue and red tubes. No nanometres or wattage are printed. The package weight is 7 kg.
What do reviewers say about the timer and distance?
One review says the English manual starts every skin type at 5 minutes, steps the timer by 5 minutes, says no closer than 25 cm, and says 48 hours between sessions. Those figures are from that review of the manual, not from the bullet list.
What fails in the reviews?
The listing is 4.0 out of 5 from 59 reviews. Praise is often easy use and facial colour. Complaints include a stand that blocks the doors, side panels that will not stay open, sitting close, and some reports of no tan.
The BTSAE four-head lamp is about £74.99 and prints 460 nm and 490 nm, 60 W, 420 LEDs, and four gooseneck heads on an adjustable stand. The remote is said to adjust mode, intensity, and time, but the minute steps are not listed, and goggles are not named. The seller routine is 20–30 minutes at 30–50 cm, once or twice a day. The listing is 3.9 out of 5 from 9 reviews. Of the four texts in the file, two mention a skin condition, including one that calls the lamp UVB, which these bullets do not print. One calls it junk, and one says it does not tan. A reviewer's UVB label is not a specification, and nine reviews cannot settle a skin-condition claim. You are paying more than the panels at about £39.99 for four heads and a printed blue pair, without eye protection in the bullets.
Pros
Cons
Best for: You want four heads with 460 nm and 490 nm on the page, at about £74.99, and you will ignore skin-condition comments in the reviews.
Less suitable: You want goggles in the bullets, a large review file, or a lamp for a skin disease.
Specifications
Common questions
What light does the listing specify?
The bullets say 460 nm and 490 nm, 60 W, four heads, and 420 LEDs. They do not name goggles or a plug type.
Can you set a session time?
The bullets say the remote adjusts mode, intensity, and time. They do not list the minute steps. The seller routine is 20–30 minutes at 30–50 cm, 1–2 times a day.
What do the four review texts say?
The listing is 3.9 out of 5 from 9 reviews. Two texts mention a skin condition, including one that calls it UVB, which the listing does not print. One calls it junk. One says it does not tan.
The Jitesy 225-LED panel is about £39.99 with 45 W, a folding stand, hanging hooks, and protective goggles named in the bullets. No nanometres are printed, so you cannot treat it as the same 460 nm lamp as the BTSAE panel beside it, even though both state 45 W and 225 LEDs. The listing is 3.8 out of 5 from 12 reviews. Three of the five texts in the file are positive, including one mention of SAD, one says only the self-tan oil worked, and one says five uses did nothing and the lamp failed on the sixth. The seller distance splits into 30–50 cm for a full-body claim and 16–20 cm for a local area, with a once-a-day line of 7–15 minutes, and there is no printed timer. A SAD mention is not a treatment, and a bullet that says harmful light is filtered is a claim, not a test in this file. You get goggles and a stated watt at about £39.99, with a mixed result on a still-small sample.
Pros
Cons
Best for: You want a cheap panel with goggles in the bullets and you will read the mixed 12-review file before you expect a colour change.
Less suitable: You need a printed nanometre, a timer, or a result the reviews agree on.
Specifications
Common questions
Which wavelength is printed?
None. The bullets claim harmful light is filtered and name 45 W and 225 LEDs. They do not give nanometres.
Are goggles included?
Yes. The bullets say to wear the provided protective goggles. The listing also says it is not waterproof and is corded.
What do the five review texts say?
The listing is 3.8 out of 5 from 12 reviews. Three texts are positive, including one mention of SAD. One says only the self-tan oil worked. One says five uses did nothing and it failed on the sixth.
The Jitesy four-head stand is about £109.99, with 60 W, 432 LEDs, 460 nm and 490 nm, five brightness levels, constant or pulse, a timer, and a remote. It is the largest review file in the set: 3.1 out of 5 from 90 ratings, which is why the sample block of the score is at the cap. In the 35 texts stored with the listing, no tan is the repeated complaint. A few report colour or less itching, and two describe a skin condition improving while the person was still using prescribed cream. Distance and timer steps are not printed. The bullets do not name goggles, though one review says the included sunglasses were too large and left untanned skin around the eyes. The technical dimensions are listed as 5 × 8 × 8 cm against a weight of 1.69 kg, which does not describe a floor stand, so treat that size line as unreliable. This is the lamp people have argued about, and the argument is mostly that colour did not change.
Pros
Cons
Best for: You want the blue LED stand with the most amazon.co.uk reviews, and you have read that many of those reviews report no tan.
Less suitable: You need the reviews to support a colour change, or you want goggles named in the bullets.
Specifications
Common questions
What is printed for light and controls?
The listing says 60 W, 432 LEDs, 460 nm and 490 nm, four heads, five brightness levels, constant or pulse, a timer, and a remote. Distance and timer steps are not printed.
Does the listing include eye protection?
The bullets do not name goggles. One review says the included sunglasses were too large and left untanned skin around the eyes.
What is the main review theme?
Amazon shows 3.1 out of 5 from 90 reviews. In the 35 texts in the file, no tan is the repeated complaint. A few report colour or less itching. Two describe a skin condition improving while still using prescribed cream.
The BTSAE panel at about £39.99 is one of the cheap rows that prints a wavelength: 460 nm, with 45 W and 225 LEDs. The bullets include goggles and a hook or an adjustable desktop stand, and they suggest 20–30 cm for 30 minutes, once or twice a day. A timer is not printed, and a tanning-lotion line in the bullets is seller copy. Amazon shows 2.8 out of 5 from 4 reviews. The only text says the lamp was really light and the buyer was disappointed, without saying whether that means weight or brightness. The package weight is 1.1 kg, so a light unit is plausible, and that reading is still a guess from one sentence. Four reviews are a thin file if you are hoping for a colour change. The printed light is 460 nm visible blue, and the page does not give an ultraviolet type.
Pros
Cons
Best for: You want a panel at about £39.99 that names 460 nm and goggles, and you will not treat four reviews as proof of a tan.
Less suitable: You want a timer, a large review file, or a 12-tube canopy.
Specifications
Common questions
Does it include goggles and a stand?
The bullets say goggles are included, and that you can hang it on a hook or use a desktop stand with adjustable angle and height. A timer is not printed.
What distance does the seller give?
The bullets say 20–30 cm, for 30 minutes, 1–2 times a day. They also suggest a tanning lotion. That is seller copy.
What is in the review file?
Amazon shows 2.8 out of 5 from 4 reviews. The only text says the lamp was really light and the buyer was disappointed. It does not say whether that means weight or brightness.
Hocomay's 126-LED stand is about £29.99, prints 660 nm and 850 nm, and states 20 W rather than the 50 W on the Axelrivet row. The stand height is given as 65–186 cm with an adjustable angle, the timer steps are 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, or 30 minutes, and the bullets name protective goggles. Amazon shows 2.5 out of 5 from 2 reviews, and the only text in the file says it is a good price for a basic item without describing a tan or a fault. The lamp is corded and listed as not waterproof. The seller routine is 5–20 minutes at 30–50 cm, once or twice a day, which is a shorter window than the Axelrivet copy on a similar wavelength pair. Two reviews cannot tell you whether the stand is stable at 186 cm. This is a red and near-infrared lamp with goggles named, and the star line is too thin to lean on.
Pros
Cons
Best for: You want a 660 nm and 850 nm stand with goggles and a stated height range, and you will treat two reviews as a hint only.
Less suitable: You want a star line you can trust, or a blue LED or tube tanner.
Specifications
Common questions
Are goggles in the listing?
Yes. The bullets say the stand includes protective goggles. The lamp is corded and listed as not waterproof.
What timer steps are printed?
The bullets list 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 minutes, plus five brightness levels and three wavelength modes.
What do the reviews in the file say?
The listing shows 2.5 out of 5 from 2 reviews. The only text says it is a good price for a basic item and does not describe a tan or a fault.
The Axelrivet stand lists at about £24.88 on amazon.co.uk with 126 LEDs, a stated 50 W, and peaks of 660 nm and 850 nm, which is red and near-infrared. The bullets give a timer from 5 to 30 minutes and a seller distance of 30–50 cm, with a suggested 20–30 minutes once or twice a day. Eye protection is not named. The file has no customer-review line, so the score is 0 because there is nothing to count, and that zero is not a quality mark. The stand is described as height-adjustable and retractable without a centimetre range, and the package is 34 × 15.5 × 5.6 cm at 1.15 kg. You are looking at the cheapest row in this set, with no buyer text on a tan, a fault, or whether the stand stays put. Treat the seller routine as copy, and do not read 50 W as an ultraviolet output.
Pros
Cons
Best for: You want a cheap red and near-infrared stand with a printed timer, and you will accept a listing with no reviews.
Less suitable: You want buyer feedback, named goggles, or a tube facial tanner.
Specifications
Common questions
Which wavelengths does the listing print?
The title and bullets say 660 nm and 850 nm, with three modes: both, 660 nm only, or 850 nm only. They do not print a UV wavelength.
Does the listing include goggles?
No. The bullets name a metal base, a 5–30 minute timer, and a 30–50 cm distance. Eye protection is not listed.
How long does the seller say to use it?
The bullets say 1–2 sessions a day for 20–30 minutes at 30–50 cm. That is the seller's routine, not a tested dose.
The Jitesy pad is about £209.99 and states a soft surface of 100 × 60 cm with 360 LEDs at 460 nm and 490 nm. It lists five brightness levels and three modes: constant, a 10 Hz pulse, and a 40 Hz pulse. You can lie it flat or hang it. A minute timer, wattage, distance, and goggles are not printed. The package is 40.5 × 31.7 × 10.3 cm and 2.34 kg, which is the carton rather than the unfolded pad. The raw file has no customer-review line, so the score is 0, and that zero is a missing sample rather than a verdict that the pad fails. At more than double the price of the four-head Jitesy, you are buying a stated area with no buyer text in this file. The seller line is shorter sessions first, then the instructions, which is not a dose you can copy from another row.
Pros
Cons
Best for: You want a 100 × 60 cm pad with 460 nm and 490 nm on the listing, and you accept that this file has no reviews.
Less suitable: You want buyer feedback, a printed timer, or a face canopy.
Specifications
Common questions
How large is the pad?
The bullets say 100 x 60 cm with 360 LEDs at 460 nm and 490 nm. You can lie it flat or hang it. The package is 40.5 x 31.7 x 10.3 cm and 2.34 kg.
What controls are printed?
Five brightness levels and three modes: constant, 10 Hz pulse, and 40 Hz pulse. A minute timer, wattage, distance, and goggles are not printed.
Are there reviews in the file?
No. The raw file has no customer-review line and no review texts, so the score is 0. That is a missing line, not a quality mark.
Ten amazon.co.uk listings, saved on 20 October 2026, were scored from the stored star lines. If the raw file has no star line, the score is 0. Otherwise the score is the star share, out of 50, plus a review-sample block out of 25 on a log scale that reaches its cap at 90 reviews. There is no sentiment adjustment and no price inside the score. The top pick is the highest score, once. Best value is the highest score under £80. This is not a laboratory test, a spectrometer reading, or a safety verdict. In sentences this page says top pick and best value.
Amazon star share
67%The first block of the score: stars divided by 5, then times 50. A 4.0 contributes 40. A missing star line contributes 0, and that zero is not a quality mark.
Review sample
33%The second block, out of 25, on a log scale that reaches the cap at 90 reviews. Ten reviews stay a short sample. Ninety reviews fill the block. Review text is not added or subtracted.
Choose the light family before the wattage. On amazon.co.uk this set mixes visible-light LED lamps with one 12-tube facial tanner, from about £24.88 to about £399.00. A useful listing names a wavelength, a timer or a distance, and eye protection. A star line only means as much as its review count. Nothing here was spectrometer-tested, and this is not medical advice.
A solarium in this set is either a visible-light LED lamp or one 12-tube facial tanner. 460 nm and 490 nm are visible blue. 660 nm and 850 nm are red and near-infrared. Twelve tubes are another emitter. Do not invent a wavelength the listing omits. Watts and an LED count are not an ultraviolet dose. If the device emits UV, the NHS says there is no safe cosmetic UV tan. The Sunbeds (Regulation) Act 2010 defines a sunbed as a powered device that tans skin with ultraviolet radiation.
Nine of these listings are visible-light LEDs. 460 nm and 490 nm are blue. 660 nm and 850 nm are red and near-infrared. Only the Eurosolar 9212 is a 12-tube facial tanner, and even that page does not print a UV wavelength. LED watts are not a UV dose.
Seller routines in this set do not agree. Some say 5–20 minutes, some 30 minutes, some a colour change in 20–30 days. A printed timer is not that routine. The 5-minute steps, 25 cm, and 48 hours on the tube tanner come from one review of a manual, not from the bullets.
HSE INDG209 names burns and eye irritation without proper goggles. Oversized shields can leave a pale ring, which is what one review says about the included sunglasses on the £109.99 Jitesy. A comment about psoriasis, eczema, acne, or SAD is not a specification, and these listings do not claim those uses.
Light family comes first. 460 nm and 490 nm are visible blue. 660 nm and 850 nm are red and near-infrared. Twelve tubes are another emitter. Do not invent a wavelength the listing omits. The Funthy 001 and the Jitesy 225-LED panel state no nanometres. The BTSAE panel at about £39.99 does print 460 nm. Coverage is the next split. A compact panel, four heads, three removable panels, a pad stated as 100 by 60 cm, and a face canopy do not cover the same skin in one sitting.
Some boxes name goggles. The Hocomay, the BTSAE 460 nm panel, and the Jitesy 225-LED panel do. The Funthy eye mask is in the title only. Several stands do not name eye protection in the bullets. HSE INDG209 names burns and eye irritation without proper goggles. The ASA forbids calling UV tanning safe. The NHS says there is no safe UV tan. Evidence is the star line plus the count.
Three typical situations, each with a recommendation from this comparison.
A salon-style colour change points at the tube tanner, and at the NHS warning, not at a 660 nm and 850 nm stand. The Eurosolar 9212 is about £399.00, 12 tubes, 7 kg, 4.0 from 59 reviews, score 63. The stored page does not print a UV wavelength. Reviews often mention easy use and facial colour. Some report no tan.
Funthy 001 is about £49.99, 4.7 from 10 reviews, score 60, with 225 LEDs. The title names an eye mask and a tripod. Wavelength and wattage are not printed, and ten reviews are a short sample. The Jitesy 225-LED panel is cheaper at about £39.99 and scores 52.
A face lamp and a bed pad do not cover the same skin. The Jitesy four-head stand is about £109.99, 460 nm and 490 nm, 3.1 from 90 reviews, and many of those reviews say it did not tan. The Jitesy pad is about £209.99, stated as 100 by 60 cm, with no star line in the file.
The top pick is the Facial Tanner Eurosolar 9212 at about £399.00. It has the highest score in this set, 63, from 4.0 and 59 reviews. The award is that star-and-count result, not a safety verdict. The NHS says there is no safe ultraviolet tan, and the stored page does not print a UV wavelength. The best value is the Funthy 001 at about £49.99, score 60, 4.7 from 10 reviews. It is the highest score under £80. The Jitesy 225-LED panel is cheaper at about £39.99 and scores 52. Funthy's missing wavelength stays a limit. A score of 0 means the raw file has no customer-review line.
Funthy 001 LED panel
Best value: about £49.99, score 60, 4.7 from 10 reviews, the highest score under £80. No wavelength is printed, and ten reviews are a short sample.
Editorial
Peter F. is the editor for DIY & tools at productscompared.co.uk. Comparisons in this category are checked against amazon.co.uk listings, review evidence and public UK sources.
Guides on what to look for, how to use a product, and common mistakes.
Public UK sources used for this comparison. Listing prices, stars and review counts are the amazon.co.uk figures saved for these ten ASINs on 20 October 2026.
This page contains affiliate links to amazon.co.uk. If you buy through them, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Prices, stars and review counts are the UK listing lines saved on 20 October 2026. We did not run a lab test, and this is not medical advice.
