Great stuff, Shaun, I must have a go at this!

Lovely shots!

Thanks for the comments on the picture; that and some of the other shots of the Rift Valley on my Flickr stream were only possible in IR due to the amount of haze. They were taken at 665nm.

I have toyed with the idea of converting a K-01, which unfortunately wasn't available when I decided I wanted a better IR camera. If the K-02 or whatever comes next in mirrorless from Pentax (phase detection AF is a must for aerial shots using a zoom, as is an electronic viewfinder, which is why I bought the Sony) has an EVF, I will definitely get one and convert it, so I can use all my Pentax AF lenses.

Yes, getting the WB right makes a huge difference to the final image. I have found it much easier to adjust the WB in ACR if the WB was set in the camera, even though it will still look pink when you import it into Bridge or Lightroom. I adjust one image of a similar batch in ACR using a custom profile, import them all into Lightroom, then copy and paste the settings from hte adjusted image onto the other images from the same batch before processing them either as colour or mono images.

I can't post the image here (not taken on a Pentax), but this is a link to a shot I processed using this plug-in, finishing by adjusting the hue of reds, yellows, cyans and blues.

I stumbled across a free Photoshop action recently that I am very impressed with for converting colour IR images. It swaps the red and blue channels (giving blue skies), adjusts the levels, and finishes with opening the Hue/saturation command so that you can tweak the individual colours. The WB has to be correct on the original image. It works better than anything I have tried or made myself.

Here's the link, just click on the link on the Downloads, open the zip file and it automatically installs. I hope some of you find it useful.

I would also thoroughly recommend the site where I first found the link, Mark Hilliards IR blog. Lots of useful info there.

What filter are you using? If it's 720nm, then you need to get the WB right. In-camera it can be done by setting the WB on sunlit grass (or white paper if there's no grass available), but ACR and Lightroom will still make the image look red as they only go down to 2000K. You can make a custom camera profile using Adobe DNG Profile Editor, or I can send you one I made if you like. This allows you to get different colours in the image, which will give you far more control if you want a mono image, by means of using the channel mixer to convert it to monochrome.

If you are using an 830nm filter, setting the WB in camera should give you images that look mono straight from the camera. 830nm images can be processed by desturation as there should be hardly any colour in the first place, but you'll lose detail and contrast using it on 720nm images.

It looks like there is a hot-spot in your image, I have found that most lenses have less tendency towards producing hot-spots if you keep the aperture around f5.6, at f8 and smaller they get worse.

Edit: I have put a couple of links in the General Digital Photography section that are worth looking at.

It does look good from these; I am more impressed by these shots than most others I have seen on the net. Maybe some of the naysayers will stop whinging about the Q...

The only reason I was wondering about "pixel peeping" was what size prints you can realistically get from it, should you want to. In mono of course you can get away with more noise so therefore larger prints.

I love the K5 (except for the lens release falling off and the wonky level indicator). The K7 was great too, I never had a single problem with it, though it was nowhere near as capable as the K5. The K5/K7 are also the perfect size for my hands. The K5, in spite of the problems, is by far the best camera I've had, though the only other manufacturers DSLR I have tried is the Olympus E-520, which I liked, but it's high ISO performance left a lot to be desired.

I've also had two IR-converted models, the *istDS and the K10D. I didn't like the K10 much, it was too bulky, though it took excellent IR images. The *istDS was a lovely little camera and I really liked it, but I wanted more resolution. I also really liked the Spotmatic I had years ago.

They look pretty good on here! I find the second one (the gull)interesting, as the background is out of focus. I didn't think with such a small sensor that limited DOF would be much of an option.

I love the pic of the wreck, also the fishing hut. I have to say from these that the camera looks a lot more capable than I thought it would be, though it would be nice to see some 100% crops from processed Raw files to get a better idea.

How's the handling of the camera? It looks so small as to be perhaps a bit fiddly to change settings etc? Have you tried any high ISO shots yet? I was considering the Q when I decided to get a compact as a carry-anywhere camera, before I bought the Fuji X-10. In the end I went for the bigger sensor and the fast zoom of the Fuji, though it's not quite as pocketable methinks.