Rejected Photos.

I thought that it was because they were taken with an Olympus SP100 and not a DSLR.

By @MsScorpio

So, just because you have good and expensive pots does mean your soup is not over-salted? Of course, good cameras take technically better pictures (especially in poor lighting conditions) but a camera with worse technology (less sophisticated lenses, smaller sensor), can still take perfect pictures. It's just that all images are examined according to the same strict standards. If you are new to stock, you should consider these resources: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/tutorials.html
Please read the contributor user manual for more information on Adobe stock contributions: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/user-guide.html
See here for rejection reasons: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/reasons-for-content-rejection.html
and especially quality and technical issues: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/quality-and-technical-issues.html

These ones had been accepted by Alamy who have fairly high standards so I was a bit surprised that these got rejected.

By @MsScorpio

I am not convinced that Alamy has such a high standard. I never had a refusal from them. And most of my Adobe refusals, accepted by Alamy got refused with reason.

1) noise and blown out highlights - many of those white bits of rope have no detail whatsoever

2) nothing in sharp focus and some blown highlights

3) very noisy, and some blown highlights

What were the rejection reasons Adobe Stock gave you?