There is another possibility, the scourge of flower photography is that they sway in the wind.

So even if the camera was still, sometimes the subject isn't.

It must be said that the park doesn't look that busy! Perhaps there was a crowd of people behind you all kindly waiting for you to take the shot...that actually does happen to us at times.

My suggestion would be to use Av mode so you are sure you have enough DOF, use a tripod if you can but that's not totally necessary for this sort of view, make sure the plants are still and just concentrate on the images. You don't need the histogram examining after every shot, just review them for learning purposes before you move from the location.

Hope that helps and have fun!

That's the message, and commenting further just keeps it going. Classifieds is for sticking to the point and discussing the sale only.

Just take care. I use my non-WR lenses in the rain (modest rain anyway) but shield the lens and keep it as dry as possible. The same applies to dust.

Otherwise, you wouldn't take it anywhere such as Egypt, which is dusty enough!

In very bad conditions I might use a filter for protection from such things as excessive dust or sea-spray.

So, having read the article linked to by Stefan, i wonder if we think there's something in this or whether it's a csae of "The Emperor's New Clothes" or maybe the descriptions at a wine tasting.

What I can say is that if there is such a thing as good bokeh, then my Pentax 55-300mm certainly possesses it as it renders out of focus areas beautifully. But this is not just the highlights as the whole area is soft and lucious.

I'm still thinking it over...

Some do, I don't. My feeling is that filters should only be used when necessary as adding any extra glass to the optical system can only lead to a reduction in IQ, however slight.

Others feel the need to protect the lens from damage, arguing that it's cheaper to replace a filter than a lens. Having said that, a smashed filter can damage the lens anyway with the broken glass shards.

I would try with and without your filter and see what you think.

That's a great set of images. Superb quality and a brilliant seeing eye.

In the early days of SLR photography the classic 3 lens kit would have been 35mm - 50mm - 135mm, by the late 1960s it would have been 28mm - 50mm - 135mm.

My choice was the slightly different 24mm - 50mm - 100mm.

If we still only used primes, where do you think our choice would lie these days?

Both the images need a small aperture to ensure sharpness from front to back. I'm not sure what you are doing in terms of settings but what I would do is set a smallish aperture of say f11 or f16 and focus one third of the way into the scene. In picture 2 that would be at a point between the two flower beds.

If this meant a slow shutter speed I would use a tripod.

So that means Av mode and either manual focusing or locking the focus on the required point and then recomposing.

How does your technique vary from that? When that is known the answer might be a step closer.

A tripod is Pentax related too, we need them to put our Pentax cameras on.

It's not intended to be restrictive, but to exclude for example someone selling an Olympus camera, which opens the dorr to Nikon and Canon and...soon it wouldn't be Pentax User.

You took no liberties with a tripod, it was fine. Hope that clarifies things. Just common sense really. No dishwasher sales....

It's a nice set of pictures that show some of the fun that was being enjoyed by the family. That's great - one of the best uses for photography.

Technically they are a bit over bright but the content is what matters here. You've caught some great expressions!