Is that with full AF?

Have you tried centre point AF with the back button, then compose the shot... and fire!

Surely nobody really expects a camera to know what you want to focus on? They don't have a mind reading setting (just yet!)

If anyone uses a DSLR as a P&S camera I guess it's pretty well pot luck what you get in focus, as it is with all P&S cameras, some of which don't even have a focus adjustment facility relying instead on the hyperfocal distance helping out. If folk want one of those why spend mega money on a DSLR?

This is APSC we're talking about, right? not full frame?
The smaller the format the sooner diffraction sets in.
The EPZ review has this MTF test chart:


https://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-da--16-50mm-f-2-8ed-al--if--sdm-lens-r...
The difference between f/8 and f/11 is perhaps higher than you may expect and at f/11 centre resolution is worse than at f/2.8.
I believe the 16-50 was designed to be more efficient at wider apertures to enable good resolution at wider apertures for sports type photography. All lenses have compromises.
Maybe you're right the 16-50 isn't fit for your purpose, The 16-85 will probably suit better.


https://www.ephotozine.com/article/hd-pentax-da-16-85mm-f3-5-5-6-ed-dc-wr-review...
The 16-85 resolution holds up better up to f/11.
Also consider that the 16-85 is a much more recent design, which no doubt helps.

Thanks Algi. I use white on a very dark grey for my own personal site. Curious to know if you find this unreadable? However there is an option to customise the display with alternative schemes which I feel all sites should offer.
Some colour combinations just don't work together!
There are further thoughts on the matter here:
https://www.wired.com/2016/10/how-the-web-became-unreadable/
As to preparing images for the web I set them up to look right on a dark background. They sometimes look wrongly exposed when displayed on a white background!

eg: https://www.pentaxuser.com/photo/user-10524/painted-lady-109407
vs
http://jkpg.myqnapcloud.com/piwigo/picture.php?/3788/category/2

That could be down to subject movement then given the relatively slow exposure. 1/20th sec wouldn't freeze that. Wind induced ripples on the water do not cover the entire area either.

Bear in mind one can crop a photo taken with the 16-85 but one can't achieve a 16mm FOV with an 18mm lens. Those extra 2mm can be really useful.
The 16-85 also pairs well with the 55-300 whereas with the 18-135 quite a bit of that range is being duplicated. Get both!

Using tripod doesn't always eliminate camera shake as the tripod can vibrate too in some circumstances, eg if its windy or even induced by the shutter movement. Also some tripods are better than others.
Was shake reduction turned off?
Did you try JR's newspaper test suggestion?
OTH maybe you found out why it was an open box item,

I believe the 16-50 performs better at wider apertures, f/4 & f/5.6. By f/10 diffraction is starting to take the edge off its ultimate sharpness.
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-da--16-50mm-f-2-8ed-al--if--sdm-lens-r...
Also of note is that the two images were shot at 1/20th & 1/25th sec respectively so every likelihood of suffering camera shake causing unsharpness too.
A wider aperture and a faster shutter speed might have been preferable.

Thanks. Seems they really enjoy a fresh juicy wasp now and again.

A dark theme as an alternative to choose from would be very helpful. Also photos tend to look better against a dark background in any event.

The 12 'winners' are on this page.