Wow, Dave, so it is the compression effect of a super-tele!
Staying away from the collage seems to be part of your pride as landscape photographer.
1) Yes, that's right, and there is a clue to the fact that the moon is not an add-on - it's not sharp. I think if I were adding the moon in this sort of context, I'd add a sharp moon.
2) That may be part of it. I feel that the ability to "capture", to freeze, to record faithfully, a moment in time is photography's USP, and that unique ability is endangered by the routine use of collaging multiple images. In landscape work, people seem to use the technique to show the world, not as it is, but as they wish it to be. The resulting composite is therefore a product of the imagination, therefore an illustration, and not a photograph. People are of course absolutely free to combine as many images as they wish, but imho they should no longer describe their work as photography; perhaps a new name should be coined for it; photographic illustration? A bit clumsy.
There is a new "photo-art" movement which is becoming very popular (a friend of mine is expert at this), in which elements are combined which are not only shot at different times of day, but may be from different locations and even from different continents. The resulting images vary from the bizarre to the idealised to the exotic, and can be extremely beautiful, but what is their point? This is something I don't understand.
