I don't live in London so I can't be too much help to you, but I'd suggest giving SnappySnaps a try - I've used several "professional" (read: expensive) mail order labs and none of them have done as good a job as my local SnappySnaps branch. I don't look anywhere else for 35mm any more

As an aside, you can use M42 screw mount lenses on your K-m with an adapter; so if you already have something suitable with your Zenit it may be as well to try that before buying new lenses.

Just a thought

To be honest 2008 and 2009 were very disappointing in comparison. In 2008 we had around 3-4 days of great colours and blue sky, in 2009 I don't think we've had any. In 2007 (when these were shot) we had several weeks of perfect conditions so I had many more to choose from - I've got my fingers crossed that 2010 will be similar.

Thanks Stefan - it is appreciated!

I'm glad folk like them, I might even reconsider my anti-frame stance...

Is there a record for the longest time taken for a reply? I actually posted these over two years ago and took the ominous silence to mean the frames were rubbish - I've not gone down the same route since...

The colours were nice that year though - this year it's all been a bit grey around these parts.

No need to stop counting blades, if you want your specular highlights to be circular then more blades will give you a better chance of achieving that - just don't assume that more blades automatically means better bokeh because there are many other parameters that come into play (the 135mm Sonnar that does so well in those tests is a humble six blade design yet it trounces many more complex lenses).

As for lighting the test scene, you'll be using a tripod so long exposures won't be a problem - hence ambient lighting is just fine for the purpose. A crystal vase or similar in the background is good at picking up light points from any bulbs in the room - as are any shiny metallic objects. Flash would probably be overkill at this stage.

For landscape work you tend to want everything in focus from front-to-back, hence bokeh isn't really a consideration. What you want is a lens that's razor-sharp at a medium-small aperture like f/8-f/11 and I think you'll find your 18-55 would be perfectly acceptable in that role. The 50-200 probably is too but I've never owned one of them so I can't say with any authority. I've certainly had excellent results in daylight with my 18-55 stopped down a bit.

I've seen Carpent's 50mm shoot-out before and it does make for very good reading - a lot of time went into it! If you want to look at another similar test that's much more bokeh-focussed then have a read of this (one of the subjects is a Jupiter-9). As I said, I personally don't mind hexagonal highlights as long as they don't have a halo - the M50/1.7 picture you linked to would be acceptable to me, albeit not perfect (see the specular highlight on the extreme left as an example of what I don't like).

On the subject of the J9, yes - just like checking for dust. From my experience with Jupiters (and I am fond of them) they tend to be at their best / sharpest at, or close to, maximum aperture (between f/2-f/4) so any imperfections are unlikely to ever show up in real-world situations. The Jupiter-9 is a Sonnar design and I believe these (Sonnars) are unique in the lens world for being at their peak wide open and dropping off at medium apertures - at small apertures (f/8 and below) they tend to be pretty woeful so wouldn't be a first choice for a landscape lens anyway.

I don't think there's a real secret to testing lenses, if you're looking at using a Helios mainly for flowers and portraits then take each of your examples out and snap a few flowers and portraits - see which (if any) appeals to you most.

Bokeh's quite a subjective thing, some prefer a smooth and creamy result while others like a more "painterly" effect - the Helios lenses (and your Jupiter 9) will almost certainly give the latter. Take some shots where the out of focus area contains point light sources (for example; sun on water, daylight through branches, specular highlights on a candlestick). To get what is considered "good" bokeh then these points of light should be rendered blurry but without any halos - a smooth fade towards the edges is ideal. Some will also maintain that these points should be circular (this is where the shape of the aperture comes in) but I'd rather have a smooth hexagonal than a perfect circle with a halo - like I say it's all very subjective!

As for testing your J-9, can you discern the scratch on your photos? If not then don't stress about it - it's unlikely to show up but if it did it would be when the lens was stopped right down and you were taking a picture of a blank sky. Not the sort of thing you'd use the Jupiter for very much I'd imagine.

Good luck.

No play in mine either - have you checked the five cross-head screws on the back of the lens are nice and tight? A few seconds with a screwdriver *could* save you the hassle of a return.

Nail. Head. Hit on.

Sony no longer make the 10.2MP CCD sensor the K-m used, the K-x is the same camera but with the new sensor Sony are offering coupled with a re-jigged firmware.

Not something Pentax have any control over and the K-x will drop to K-m price levels soon enough.