[mattb123]

Who here has had this done? Who did you use?
I'm considering getting my original K-3 done. I remember some people had their Pentax bodies converted in the past and I'd like to hear how it went.
Which type of conversion and filter did you get? Are you satisfied? Looking back, would you do anything differently?

It looks like Kolar Vision is a good option and they can do the K-3 starting at $350.
I'd probably go for the 720nm version unless there is a good reason to get something different.
There are also options for anti-reflection and anti-smudge that I wonder if I would want. Not sure how important those things are.

[stevebrot]

I'm also curious about available options...commenting to follow this thread.


Steve

[cdurfor]

I had Spencer Camera convert my K-100 and loved their work. (https://www.spencerscamera.com/infrared-conversions.com). I was very impressed that they set the focusing to account for IR versus VIS light. This is particularly important for UWA lens. In fact I had to send my DA14mm along with the camera so that they could set it up right.

[cdd29]

LifePixel has done my IR/full spectrum conversions in the past. However the only Pentax they will do is a K-01. I currently have a K-01 I just sent in to Spencer's Camera in Utah for a full spectrum conversion for $100 cheaper than LifePixel. I have talked to a few people that that have used Spencer's and have been happy with them.

[Bob 256]

I had Isaac Szabo convert my K-01. He did a great job and provided a back up guarantee for the procedure. The K-01 is a better choice since it doesn't have an optical VF which you lose anyway with an IR filter over the lens. An LCD viewfinder allows you to see what you're shooting and focus as you would with visible light.

Isaac Szabo

[cdd29]

Mirrorless is ideally the way to go for full spectrum/IR conversions. A DSLR works the same when using live view. You will also need an infrared filter (720nm is basically the standard but you can get 590nm and up) unless the shop puts in a fixed infrared filter. I would recommend full spectrum as that gives you the flexibility to use whatever IR filter you want. Different wavelength filters give different results on the photograph.

[Bob 256]

Mirrorless is ideally the way to go for full spectrum/IR conversions. A DSLR works the same when using live view. You will also need an infrared filter (720nm is basically the standard but you can get 590nm and up) unless the shop puts in a fixed infrared filter. I would recommend full spectrum as that gives you the flexibility to use whatever IR filter you want. Different wavelength filters give different results on the photograph.

Plus a full spectrum converted camera can still be used as a conventional color camera by employing a UV/IR blocking filter over the lens.

[jatrax]

I bought a K-01 converted to full spectrum by Digital Landscapes (eeassa on Ebay). I bought it from another user, not from eeassa direct but if you check on Ebay they have a good reputation of conversions and offer a variety of cameras that have been converted.

I got mine last fall just as the weather tanked and have not gotten to use it too much yet but the little I have accomplished has been fun.

---------- Post added 06-08-21 at 09:03 PM ----------

If you go full spectrum you can then add the filter of your choice. Including a 'hot mirror' filter that will allow the camera to be used for normal photography. But if you go IR then you need to pick the frequency you want and you are (mostly) stuck with that.

Unless you know exactly what you want to do the full spectrum is better in MHO. But the cost of filters might increase the total cost of the project.

Kolari explains it here: What is a full spectrum conversion? - Kolari Vision

---------- Post added 06-08-21 at 09:07 PM ----------

And there is a lot of information on the Kolari site here: Everything You Need to Know About Infrared Photography - Kolari Vision

Especially useful are the articles about which camera system to use and which filters to use and why.

[OzzRod]

I shipped my K5 to Kolarivision for Full Spectrum conversion a few years back. Excellent service and no regrets about getting it done. I use 720nm IR and 590nm Red filters and more recently have enjoyed the effects produced by Kolari's IR Chrome filter.

[travelswsage]

Count me another happy Kolari customer. They did a full spectrum conversion of a Sony a7rii for me and everything went well. I would have preferred to buy a used K-1 and have that converted but Lifepixel did not offer that service and If I remember correctly Kolari also did not offer the service. There are some issues with converting Sony a7rii and also the a7riii so if you could get your K-3 done that would be the way to go.

---------- Post added 06-09-21 at 06:34 AM ----------

Just an fyi also -- Pentax 67 lenses are wonderful for IR work with virtually no hotspots. DFA lenses suck once they are stopped down so if you intend to do landscape work consider looking at some of the 67 lenses which can be had relatively cheaply.

[mtkeller]

Just an fyi also -- Pentax 67 lenses are wonderful for IR work with virtually no hotspots. DFA lenses suck once they are stopped down so if you intend to do landscape work consider looking at some of the 67 lenses which can be had relatively cheaply.

Interesting…any experience with 645 lenses? I’m considering having my K-50 converted (either after I replace the solenoid or in lieu of repairing the solenoid) and have 645 lenses with aperture rings (both A and FA) in the landscape range. My 67 lenses for the moment are the 165 f/2.8 and (late) 200 f/4, which would not be my ideal landscape focal lengths on an APS-C sensor.

[wizofoz]

Who here has had this done? Who did you use?
I'm considering getting my original K-3 done. I remember some people had their Pentax bodies converted in the past and I'd like to hear how it went.
Which type of conversion and filter did you get? Are you satisfied? Looking back, would you do anything differently?

It looks like Kolar Vision is a good option and they can do the K-3 starting at $350.
I'd probably go for the 720nm version unless there is a good reason to get something different.
There are also options for anti-reflection and anti-smudge that I wonder if I would want. Not sure how important those things are.

I had my K-5 done by Kolari. Full conversion cost me about $500 Aud. I guess about $350USD is roughly the conversion factor.
It is great to get use out of a body I would not otherwise use, or would just sell for a few sheckels.

I had trouble getting the camera and lens I sent with it back into Oz because someone put down a value of $1000 on the paperwork that came with the return, and that triggered an import tax event, so the AusGov wanted me to pay a few hunderd dollars of tax on stuff that was already mine. In the end Kolari solved the problem by actually paying the duty. It was a sensational piece of customer service. I could not recommend them more highly.

[travelswsage]

I don't have any experience with the 645 lenses but my guess would be if you have older versions of the lenses produced at the same time the 67 lenses were being produced they will do just fine -- they should have the same coatings as the 67 lenses. If you have newer versions with Pentax's recent coatings I'd think they would perform more like DFA lenses. Modern lens coatings, at least in the Pentax line, is great for regular photography but as one of their features seem to be optimized to reduce IR transmission and I think this is why the DFA lenses I've tested work so poorly.

[JensE]

... DFA lenses I've tested work so poorly.

Could you share which ones you tested? I have noticed a mild hotspot on the FA31mm with a 720mm filter on an unconverted K-1 and haven't tried others yet.

[cdd29]

Kolari has a database of what lenses work well and what doesn't. They list the 18-135 as a poor performer but I have a friend that uses one exclusively on his K-01 without issues.

Lens Hotspot Database - Kolari Vision