Kainas wrote:... makes me feel a bit better about the shots.
Yeah, don't be disheartened. There's not much you can do about it.
The shot of the grasses looks so good because of the narrow depth of field (wider aperture - f8 in this shot but could have got narrower DOF wider still), emphasised by a bit of zoom (only 55mm, but not wide angle per se), and a good bit of distance to the darker background.
With digital, you can paly with all these things when you take photos like that so you can see what you like, what works etc.
Try a narrow DOF on subjects like the Kookaburra so that it stands out better. Zoom will emphasize a narrow DOF as well. The other benefit a wide aperture gives you is a faster shutter (or the scope to move the ISO lower). You could also try centering the bird in the photo - here you have aimed for its head/beak, which is also fine. You lose the tail a bit in the dark bushes behind it - DOF might help make it stand out better, also you could move a little to the left to remove the darkest bits from behind the subject when they are at similar tones. Way too much to think about at first, but it takes practice. The more you study your own results and think about what you could have done differently (I say differently, not necessarily better), the more you will learn what to do in the field to achieve certain results.
The people shot (blurry) was never going to work - you used F4 (assuming as wide as that lens goes?), and ISO 800, yet it still required 1/4 second to catch the required amount of light. Basically, there just wasn't enough light for that photo.
What else could you do there? Bump the ISO as high as it goes, open the lens as wide as it goes, use wide angle to catch more light (try looking at the settings for the same photo in shadows somewhere at wide angle then at zoom and see the required shutter speed for each image).
It's usually better to get a grainy image at high ISO than to miss out by having a blurry result.
Another thing you can do if you really want to catch the image is to use manual exposure, force it to about 1/60 second, try 1/30 second as well), then bump the levels on the under-exposed image on the computer. The result won't be great, but it should be better than blurry.
I had a close look at the bbq shot. It's not sharp and I am trying to work out why.
F5 is partly to blame, though if the focal point was in the right place and the camera steady, it could just be enough. The leading edge of the hat on the left seems to be the sharpest point - perhaps try to lock the focus a third of the way into the area you want to be sharp - perhaps the hand of the young lady. Most important too to hold the camera steady as the shutter is pressed.
Also, think about what you want in the image - when you look through the shutter, pretend you are looking at the image as it is printed or displayed on a computer. Adjust things like -
How high you are (sometimes you need to squat or stand on something)
How much you want in the image - use more zoom, or aim lower to get more of the subject in the photo - in this case it's the trees to the top and left
How much you want in the background - move closer and go more wide angle, or move further back and go more zoom.
Have I got things square and level / straight horizon?
Is there something to prop the camera against to help keep it steady - tree, clothes line, tripod??
Squeeze that shutter gently until the click is done - so often I see the button pressed firmly at "just the right time". It's so important to have the camera as still as possible for the duration the shutter is open.
Here's an example of your photo with a simple crop, and a quick play with brightness, contrast, and mid-tones in Microsoft Photo Editor -

- Cropped and tweaked
It's not that this is any better, just different - demonstrating what can be achieved.
Have fun playing - the more practice you get and the more you study your results looking for ways to change shots, the better you will get in the field, knowing more about what you
can do.
Hope that all helps.