Mostly correct. It takes a fair amount of testing to figure out. If lucky one correction suffices for the range. If less lucky you have to compromise by picking one or two and calling it a day.

Congratulations on taking up a wonderful hobby in your retirement. The above advice is the usual suggestions. It assumes that you have steady hands. Stabilizations help if you dont. If you do get blurry images from too much camera movement then adjust to faster (briefer) shutter speeds. If you dont have enough light to make those adjustments consider leaning against stable strucures or using a tripod.

And yes, you can get away with using 18mm (wide) when longer is causing troubles. The limitations suggested above are more forgiving at 18mm than at 135mm.

Moral of the story is that 4k stresses your resources a great deal

Practice with it using good technique. If the autofocus is delivering sharp images then you are good to go. If you are not pleased by the results there are lots of possible culprits, and calibration is pretty far down the list.

I was under the impression that the compression algorithms involved in jpg production were absolutely standardized.

That means that what we really are discussing is the camera's combination of settings chosen to apply. Nikon (the one brand im really familiar with) labels these as picture controls.

Another option is to ship unmounted prints rolled up in a tube.

Bebu...nice try. As linda noted they are on sale right now for the lowest price they've ever been.

I respectfully disagree with Paul and do see a pattern. Thriftyness. Chances are each of these bodies was purchased long after their successors appeared, at greatly reduced prices. And now the same opportunities present with these two choices. I would argue that both of them represent significant advances over the current fleet. At this point the d40 should be donated to a museum.

The D500 will be particularly well suited to wildlife. The D750 may be better with high iso astro work. Either one will be a major step up from what you have. Ask in the astro section here at UHH and see if one is better with hot pixels or ease of using live view for star focussing. If you are pushing weight limits with the tracker, the d500 will give you that dx edge allowing less beefy lenses for the same reach.

Nice try Spazz...these guys have sorted out their lens collections in the intervening 8 years.

Since this is a list of essentially 1 item per manufacturer...fairly artificial

For $199, no brainer, breakthrough photography x4 cpl. Order direct through them. In stock now.

Its not often that the best possible product is also the least expensive. The other brands have bananas pricing at 105mm.

All of your lenses would operate on the Zfc since it is a dx body. Any full frame lenses would work also. Yes you would need the ftz, but you already know that. As to functionality derived from the body I'm not sure you would lose much at all. In exchange you would be setting yourself up much better for the future. There is a risk the Tamron's would have compatibility issues. Others may know more about that.

perhaps....if future posters compelled to answer....read the thread first

Lens manufacturers pretty much have this figured out. If a lens is large/heavy enough that is poses a threat to the camera mount, they almost always come with a separate tripod mount. Usually a 105 macro is not that heavy that you need to worry about it.