Awesome. OK, it's not a Pentax camera, but it could be.

A longer focal length lens, 135mm instead of 50mm for example, would have produced an image with much less of the background and more detail of the butterfly because it would have appeared larger in the viewfinder, and on the film.

A faster shutter speed would 'freeze' the motion blur of the butterfly's wings.

You say you are new to photography. If you want to learn faster, my advice is to switch to a DSLR as soon as possible. You will learn much more about photography in a much shorter time scale. The major difference between digital and film is the speed at which you can see the image. If you are not satisfied with it, retake it. You simply can't do that with film.

You could start with one of the older Pentax models, they still produce excellent results and are not terribly expensive.

Assuming you are using a Pentax DSLR, did you have Shake Reduction turned on? Is it perhaps taking the extra time to stabilize?

I think you could have usefully used a longer focal length lens on this subject, together with a faster shutter speed. If you hadn't given the clue "butterfly" in the title of your post, I wouldn't have known what I was looking at.

#2 is out of focus.

#1 looks better with a bit more contrast and a much tighter crop leaving the main subject and its reflection. Like this:-




The white feathers around the head are still a little over exposed, but I'll leave you to work on that. I may have overdone the sharpening a little bit too.

I think it's the longest prime that is faster than f2.8.

No, I never did follow photography as a career. I chose electronics because at the time I thought that it would serve me better in terms of career, prospects, and income. I think I was right to go that route. Whilst it didn't make me rich, it made me comfortable and allowed me to retire at 55 and live in the sun.

I think I would probably still need to work if I was a pro 'tog.

I do help my son occasionally with his event photography ( www.rsphotographics.com ) and some of my shots have been sold.

Whether that makes me a professional photographer, I don't know.

Like you, my son missed the film era and started with a *istDS. He gave in to the Canikon hype and now shoots with a Canon 30D which is actually a very good camera.

You're doing very well Stefan and good luck with the job seeking. When you are successful though, I hope you'll stick around here.

When I left school a very long time ago I wanted to be a professional photographer . . . so I went into electronics I did my first photo course when I was 17 (the year England last won the world cup) and have only really been dabbling with it ever since.

You've achieved a lot in 2 years, such is the speed of learning with a DSLR.

I'm dreading George joining in. I didn't mean it George, honest.