Well Will thinks you used AF, I don't know. I never would. doesn't help with macros.
My hint is that is the ONE thing you want to do manual. Just use your eyes. Takes far too much time to start selecting points and all that and then do you like it. Your DOF button will tell you what the picture will really look like.
As to the speed being too slow, Will is right. 1/400 in the wind Tell the guy who told you about 100 ASA to go and shoot some birds. Or flutterbys
The DOF is too shallow.. if you do this to get a special soft effect like Mandy D or in here get at least one flower center really very sharp.

I now I'm again lecturing here. If I annoy you, I'll stop. And the colours are gorgeous, so is the composition.

a lovely series, what a great flower.
maybe a bit more DOF might help here. you don't really need 100 iso, it doesn't help with macro. We usually try to get a smaller aperture to get more detail and DOF.
No I'm not nagging, just trying to say how to improve a picture with fantastic light and composition..

ok. Critique... it is not easy to take birds with a short lens, but those are big enough to stand a chance. a group like this is spectacular, exposure and light are spot on.
I would have cropped off the twigs on the right, some of the green in the bottom and removed the greey twig in the front. it is quite easy with any cloning tool. if that is too tricky, you can always dye it green with a brush and colour only.

maybe I would have gone for just two of them in 'dialogue'.

It often helps to wait till you get the right view, with no interfering branches etc, like at takeoff.
well that is my two cents worth of bird experience.

beautiful composition and light.
May I suggest that you avoid the obvious cloning duplication in the center though? it is better to gently transplant bit of forest left and right and let them then overlap with reduced transparency.
Or use the healing brush to clean up the seems.

A wonderful portrait, the soft bit is fine here.
Now the technical stuff!
photoshop gives you several options.
Nearest neighbour is ver sharp but jaggy.
Bicubic soft is a pain, and unfortunately standard in ps2 and 3 .
So if like me you don't have a fortune to spend on adobe, make a small script that you assign to a handy shortcut like F12
And the script does image-size. Pixel 1000 in both.
Click constrain proportions. Click on the little pull down for method and chose bicubic sharper.
Save the whole thing and call it EPZ. Done.

Yes the smaller cop would be nice, too. But I also like it as it is.
I might have tried 'diffusion' in the lens effects or clean without twirly ness as a prior enhancer .
Simplify might have given the groups edges... It would have left the groups sharp and clear and softened the surroundings.
Keep experimenting. My night shot was a 'simplify' conversion.

Hard to jusdge detail if you upload such small crops. 1000x1000 is already very small but you didn't use them
the best detail is in no 2. There is oodles of detail in the bee and part of the flower is also sharp.
the DOF in no 1 is almost not here, I reckon the fur could be a tad sharper.
In no 3 it seems you focussed on the petal, not the ant. Well I would have gone for the ant.

I just saw that you used a 60mm. Now for insects that is very difficult to get so close without standing in your own way. To get a 1:1 you have to be at about 12 cm.. not ideal so you are facing a really difficult job.
Try perhaps a 90mm or 105 or even your tele with an extension. I can hear you say well you got all that I haven't. Since I miss my 180mm I had to come uo with all sorts of ideas how to get my insects any which way. So far the best workaround was the tle for butterflies and the 90 with extension for everything else.

very cute... you get my vote for sure.
but: please crop half of what is on the LHS of the starling. Meaning leave the space where he is looking, not on his back.
Also the pic lost somewhat detail in conversion. Try to do it on your own device, I saved a setting in LR3 called epz that converts everything to 1000x pixels with 'sharpen for screen' and a folder epz-up for output. So now I can prepare all my uploads accident free.

In principle, it is very nice.
Two ideas from someone who is not an expert at architecture.
... The branch touching the high tree in the background doesn't help.. It pulls the together instead of spacing them apart.
... The trunk is a bit too close , so there is no space on the left. One step further back might have been better but maybe you were hiding a yellow bin or a lady in a red coat.

a very good composition which could be easily improved: either try mono to emphasize the graphic waterfall or use a proper white-point. I miss a true white and a bit of detail in this one. maybe it just the compression.

an appealing winter image. I lke the parkle in the drop and the new bud pointing toward the old leaf.
I might have been tempted to crop the blurry bits on the right, as in leave only the LH side of the 'T'

A stunning ky, lovely yellow grass and impressive hills.

I would have been tmpted to remove or darken the one white fencepost, though, it is a bit distractiing

beautiful sunset panorama.. could you please turn the image 1.3 degrees CCW to straighten the horizon?

hell of a storm... and what a great shot.
to make it exceptional, could you please turn it CW 1-2º to straighten the horizon?