ok some feedback, whilst most are well exposed you need to watch microphones covering faces, the group shot for example if you had moved to the right a touch would have revealed the centre persons face.

the photo of the back of the ladies head doesn't do much for me.

i am guessing you are using spot focus, after focussing recompose so the face is nearer the top of the frame then you will get a full length shot which is more pleasing to the eye.

the key to good concert photohraphy is composition composition composition, settings are nearly always iso 1600 f/2.8 & shutter between 1/50 to 1/320 if you are really fortunate with the light, so settings are really easy hence importance of composition.

good effort, concert photography is a hard discipline in photography.

I guess if you have a hobby & are willing to pay over a £1000 for your hobby, then no matter what that hobby is, you would be considered serious about it surely.

As for difference between a pro & amateur any kind of paid photography makes you a pro, it certainly isn't defined by percentage of income. For example a merchant banker earning half a million a year also shoots weddings at weekends & earns 75k per annum from those weddings is he a pro or a hobbyist?? In my book he is a pro despite less than 20% of his income coming from photography. I have also seen some fantastic quality work from amateurs, which forever reason they choose to not pursue a career in photography.

I have a day job, which allows me to choose the photography work I like doing, I also shoot for magazines & my work is represented by agencies. My photography income is probably approx 15 to 20% of my day job, does that make me a pro??? Yes, in my book, but it does not make me a slave to my photography work, it does however keep it enjoyable. well except when it's cold & raining & you are waiting for this months X Factor idol to turn up

I do whatever is best for the image which means get the best shot out of the camera & then improving & finishing it off in post production.

The two go hand in hand, all pro images have some post processing, no pro would let unprocessed images out into the world, digital cameras are just not perfect enough, whether that is 1d or d3 to a ist d.

I have been fortunate to work alongside some of the best pro editorial photographers in the world & some of the post processing you see go on would make you scratch your head in head disbelief, the amount of work that goes into those images you see in the papers. If its good enough for them its good enough for me too...

Getting back to the OP's problems. Do you have SR switched on & are you waiting for the hand to light up in the viewfinder indicating the SR is locked & ready??? Are you also waiting for the focus confirmation light to light?? The hexagon in the bottom of the viewfinder.

It's been a long time since I used the kit lens & I don't have the k-7 however coming from a bridge camera to a DSLR is a huge difference in photography, I jumped to Pentax k100d from a Fuji s602 & also had the same issues you have.

The kit lens for a start will not focus as close to an object as the lens does on the Fuji's, this could be why some of your shots are not sharp. when I first bought my k100d I was also dissapointed with my images not being sharp, but once I got to grips with my new toy the difference was night & day

It takes a little time to get used to a DSLR & their differences to a bridge, but it is worth it.

Also the Pentax kit lens is one of the best kit lenses out there, the k-7 is also an excellent camera as are most of the Pentax bodies within their limitations.

when using the sharpening tools press the alt key on windows or the squiggle key on a mac, this will whiten the screen & show you the parts thst are affected. there is an excellent tutorial on youtube search "lightroom 3 sharpening"

i always use the noise reduction, clarity & vibrancy +10-15. But on import i only add keywords & metadata.

so you edit all 304 images you have shot & then what? keep them all?

sounds like hard work to me....

ooh Lordi should be good, the DA*50-135 is an excellent concert lens.

Its all about work flow in the end. If you are happy with a little pp to jpegs then that's good.

Myself on a shoot I only work on between 10 to 15 images from a set, so for me working in RAW is simply a no brainer. I have improved the majority of my images from using RAW, there is always an improvement in white balance or even a slight change to exposure which can improve the shot.

I also find noise reduction in lightroom works better with RAW files. I have yet to meet a pro shooter who does no post processing with the their files, all photos are improved with some simple changes in pp.

Raw all the way for me & pp in Lightroom 3

I started shooting RAW as soon as I had a DSLR, no point messing with in camera jpeg compression when software can do it so much better...

I am guessing all Tokina lenses must focus & zoom the same direction then