Originally posted by jamespentax I will attempt to bump my shutter speed above 1/250 when possible. To note, these pictures are taken in raw .pef and are converted via Lightroom to the highest quality .jpg. I had a Nikon d610 before this and did not experience this problem although I did not like the camera itself and therefore traded up for a K1. I've considered getting a prime as well. I just wanted to make sure this wasn't a defective lens/camera and something I should return within the first 30 days.
On a windy day, I'd probably try to shoot at, say, 1/500s or above (regardless of focal length)... the same kind of shutter speeds you'd use for a reasonably-fast-moving subject without panning. Perhaps the difference between your D610 and K-1 shots was the breeze? Perhaps not, but it's a consideration. The static elements in your scenes (the fence and, to a lesser extent, the telegraph cables - they
can move, but are heavy) look plenty sharp to me, which suggests movement in the parts of the foliage that are blurry.
That aside, I agree with Adam that a good prime will pay dividends in sharpness and detail... plus, it will likely give you those results at faster apertures, allowing you to keep the ISO down as low as possible (always advisable for landscape / foliage). Of course, faster apertures will result in shallower depth-of-field, but there's always a trade-off
Since there are plenty of elements across your scenes that are sharp and detailed, I don't think you have any reason to be concerned about the lens