Perhaps I am not completely understanding the situation, but, generally speaking, the first rule of troubleshooting a system is to remove as many variables as possible.
That would preclude Auto ANYTHING. Put the camera on a tripod on a bright sun shiny day. (So you know the proper exposure should be "sunny 16" . Same subject 2 different lenses. See if you can replicate the problem.
You can of course then try various auto modes or anything else you want, but add one variable at a time.
Keep notes, because if something needs to be repaired you can send examples.
Good luck

One last thing, if you are SELLING Prints, in addition to protecting the print , the packaging should look professional and neat...... it is a presentation.......

Hardboard 2" larger than the print will protect a package from corner damage and bending.
The matted print needs to be wrapped in plastic . You can use 1 layer of hardboard on one side and 2 layers of cardboard on the other to save weight. For framed prints you can do a similar thing with 2 layers of Hardboard separated by 2" wide strips of rigid foam insulation and bubble wrap around the print.
Heavy duty tape on the outside.
You can buy professional Art Mailer boxes and add a shipping charge.
Shipping is a risk, Insure it.

People should shoot whatever makes them happy.
JPEG is an amazing format. It enabled pictures on the internet, when viewed on screen they look great (because most screens and workflows are optimized for JPEG. If you can nail exposure, and the dynamic range of the scene fits within the 8 bit sRGB JPEG parameters your pictures will look great on everyone's screen and your sRGB prints will also look great.
None of that means that there are not limitations to JPEGs There most certainly are.
I personally shoot RAW + JPEG I changed from shooting only RAW a couple years ago when I got a 5D mk IV.
For some pictures the JPEGs work fine , for some, they do not. When I print a file then I always edit the RAW file, and print to a wide gamut pigment printer from 16 bit TIFFs. It makes a difference.

If you choose to use only JPEGs that's fine, it is what most people do.
Good Luck

In A & B the bird is flying into the edge of the frame, looks like missed framing
In C & D the bird is flying into open sky, looks like he has somewhere to go, Better
Since our culture tends to "read" left to right, D works best for me.

It's sort of a Photo 101 exercise, but a good one

Both work, but I use SD cards because I like to standardize and the Micro's are even easier to lose than the already tiny SD's. And I use large enough capacities so I do not have to change them in the field.

The Charles Bessler Company is still in Business, B&H carries the MCRX enlarger (nearly identical to the one I bought 50 years ago. I do not know if the company has changed owners, but they may have files on your dryer.
Those old Print dryers usually have canvass aprons and chrome drums for Ferrotyping (drying F surface paper to a high gloss. They polished steel and can become pitted with rust. Second many of those old canvas print aprons are contaminated with Hypo and should probably be replaced, or at least saturated with Hypo clearing agent or Perma- wash.
Good luck

Look for height first, Measure your comfortable standing Eye height, that is the ball park height you need.
I realize that the camera viewfinder height to base plate could be subtracted from your eye height, but then you have no extra extension for situations where there is a slight hill, or extending the monopod out in front of you a bit because when you do that, your two legs form a tripod with the monopod.
Having to constantly bend is very tiring.
Lastly avoid the skinny 'curtain rod' small sections that some cheaper Monopods have.
You can save money by buying an aluminum one vs carbon fiber, because the extra few OZ. is only an issue for packing and carrying, and you are not backpacking, you are shooting sports (Drive there /drive home)
I won't recommend a brand, but only say that a sturdy Monopod of that height, might be difficult to find at $100 bucks.
Good Luck

I think you mean you shot 120 film on your hasselblad. I can tell you from direct experience I have used and Epson 600 flat Bed and VueScan software to get excellent scans from 120 Negatives B&W and Color as well as Transparencies
There is a learning curve to get the best scans, and you can use higher end scanners, or send them out to be scanned

RG has this correct, Best practice for critical work is to to shoot RAW and keep the greatest bit depth and gamut (color space) for as long as possible while editing. (This helps avoid banding)Then output a file appropriate to the intended use.
While it is certainly true that many displays are 8 bit sRGB (at best), Good graphics displays are now almost all 10 bit. The best pigment printers can print a a much larger color gamut than even the best displays.
So IF you print on such a printer (yourself or through a print house) this is quite important.
And No, you do not send 250-500MB 16 b TIFF files via email, you use them to print, or FTP them to your print house.
Most people DO NOT need to do this, and I do not do it most of the time, because for most uses JPEGs are fine, or even required, like email or the web
No one Prints every picture they take, and even when you do, sometimes JPEGs are fine, but for my best work, it is always saved as a 16b TIFF Print file. And no it doesn't clog anything up, because I print perhaps 5% of what I take. I use COLOR BYTE's Image Print Rip to control an Epson 5000 17" pigment printer. Once a file is saved as a final 16b TIFF Print File, image Print saves it in a database, so I can reprint on demand.
Also remember that as long as you have a RAW workflow, you do not need to keep lots of files as 16b TIFFs, because your editing program can generate them as needed, just like a JPEG.
The reason I keep 16B TIFF Print files is for convenience and the ability to make a new print identical to the last one. It also contains things like output sharpening, and the levels that make the best PRINT. I may have a different version for generating the best JPEG for display or email.
I am not suggesting that anyone else should do this, and I did not invent this workflow, I learned it from master printers. It is appropriate for what I do. I do very little professional work now, nearly all personal work.
The nice part about Photography is that it can be enjoyed at many levels, and enjoyment is why most of us do it.

I agree with @bill Nikon If you buy the camera and the adapter , you can take your time and test your lenses.
You can always decide to spend more money.
The The D500 is a very good camera, I would be surprised if you really Needed the Z8 for better focusing.
You have a lot of 'all in one' type lenses, Have you ever tried a faster pro grade lens, I'll bet any focusing /sharpness issues would go away.
If you just Want a Z8, that is a fine camera too.

From all I have read, it is a wonderful lens. Extremely versatile, and perfect for situations where you need a range of focal lengths, available quickly. But what are the odds that on a "walk through the Zoo" you would find yourself in need of a lens longer than 560mm ? The same is probably true at 100 yards....... But for the end zone position, I would think 200-400 or instantly 280-560 would be Very nice.
Why stack converters on a zoom (even a good one) when you have primes as long or longer?
If you just want to "collect it" that's fine too, it was the first of its kind I think, and a smart Idea.

I DO NOT THINK YOU LOST YOUR PICTURES. Especially if you used Apple's Migration Assistant when you got your new Mac. The pictures will also be on your Time Machine from the old computer
I suspect that since iPhoto was replaced by Photos (and probably could not run on the new os)
I would look in your 'Pictures" folder (MacHD>Users> you> Pictures. There should be some sort of library there.
You can look, but do not move or change anything -just confirm they are there.
It COULD show iPhoto Library, PHOTOS Library or just Pictures
Then try opening the PHOTOS App and see if anything is in there. If not in Photos go to File> Import and navigate to your pictures folder, see what you can find

DOF is a property of the lens, not the sensor. For any given lens the DOF tends to increase with smaller f/stops........ Until you get to a pinhole where everything is sharp (except for the fact that it is degraded by diffraction.

Where things get confusing is that the Idea that crop sensors have more depth of field --everyone leaves off FOR EQUIVALENT ANGLES OF VIEW. If we take a 50mm lens on FF and a 25mm lens on M4/3 they will have the same angle of view and the DOF of the M4/3 will be greater NOT because of the sensor size but because 25mm is shorter than 50 mm.
Think about it this way. Crop sensors are called that because they are cropped relative to FF. It is probably not the best term. But if you had a FF camera that allowed different crops and you put the camera on a tripod and took shots at FF, APS-c, and M4/3 with the 50mm lens , each smaller crop would show a decrease in angular view but the DOF for all 3 would be identical.
In common use we think of wide angle, Normal and telephoto lenses. In order to achieve that we all know that the Actual focal lengths will be comparatively shorter for each type on M4/3 than FF SO, for equivalent fields of view m4/3 will have more DOF that the Wide , normal or Tele in the FF set.

Similarly, the difference between F'stop and Aperture is that One is a ratio, the other a physical "APERTURE"
As a simplification for a 100 mm lens to be F2, it must have a clear Aperture (opening) of 50mm
For a 200 mm lens to be f/2 it must have a clear aperture of 100 mm and for a 50mm lens to be F2 it must have a clear aperture of 25mm. All 3 lenses are f/2 all have different physical apertures

This also explains why longer lenses have less DOF than Shorter lenses. Remember the pinhole unlimited DOF but degraded by diffraction (caused by light scattering when it encounters an edge.)
So DOF increases inversely with the size of the physical aperture. If I have 2 lenses , a 50/2 and a 100/2 the 50 will have more DOF BECAUSE the physical Aperture is smaller ..... approaching the pinhole.
Similarly all lenses have diffraction, we don't notice it with fast lenses Because they have a big Aperture and 99% of the image forming light comes through the big hole and 1% brushes the edges. In a Pinhole, the hole is so small that the proportion of edges to clear aperture is much greater -- I'm guessing 50/50, so diffraction is a big problem.
And Lastly this also explains why crop sensor cameras see diffraction effects sooner than larger formats....
BECAUSE FOR ANY GIVEN F/STOP THE PHYSICAL SIZE OF THE APERTURE IS SMALLER (CLOSER TO THE PINHOLE)

In optics a 'perfect lens' is often described as "Diffraction Limited" meaning otherwise perfect but diffraction is a physical reality for all lenses

F/stops are RATIOS (F.L./Aperture), Apertures are physical holes.
DOF is a property of lenses not sensors
Remember Equivalent Fields of view

I hope this helps a bit....

The Truth about AI is that we shouldn't make too many pronouncements about it's future, and how it will affect us (collectively or individually) until we understand what we are talking about.
It really does appear to me, that NO ONE understands it sufficiently yet.....See below
The things we know so far are that as AI relates to Images and Photography, it is based on machine learning and iterative exposure to existing photographs which were created by other people, and used with or without permission and mostly without compensation to the creators.
I think we can safely say it is not photography in any real sense, but those who cavalierly say "It's just like any other tool for editing, are on pretty shaky ground......
Proponents tell us it is ...."Safe and Effective" Experience suggests perhaps We shouldn't be so sure...

Here is just one example:
https://newatlas.com/technology/ai-index-report-negatives/?utm_source=New+Atlas+Subscribers&utm_campaign=ea1e2a0721-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2024_04_26_09_50&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_65b67362bd-ea1e2a0721-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D