From the manual of the lovely beast that is the RF200-800:
Since the lens is heavier than the camera, turn the camera when attaching or detaching the lens. Ensuring that the lens can rest safely on its own is recommended, such as first mounting it on a tripod.
I do like the way you've subverted conventions. You've all those strong leading lines leading to ... nothing. Instead, the beauty is on the far right, out of the way. and the rest just contrasts that beauty with urban.
This is of course just my opinion, but I'd say you've an interesting subject, and parts of that photo are really satisfying, but some of the rest, especially at the bottom, badly detracts from the rest.
Personally, I'd either consider redoing with a different choice of aperture, distance or even focus stacking to get more in focus, or if that's not practical, some significant cropping.
And that, too, is a proper use of a camera :) Quietly satisfying.
if you haven't already, one thing to ask yourself is whether you should rotate the shot to make the leftmost verticals truly vertical. it's not a question with a universal correct answer - with a photo like this, you could easily decide that true vertical will look too clinical and against the spirit of the rest of the photo, and that the "out of the camera" angle is better. And it is your opinion that counts!
Perhaps try setting the camera to manual focus and a plausible distance - I almost feel sorry for auto-focus trying to make sense of what it's seeing in those circumstances!
In passing, since you are learning about RAW format processing, you can do some quite extreme things to the luminance/histogram/gamma/whatever to bring out a little more detail in these sorts of shots, because the range of tones is rather narrow. Some also have fun boosting one of the colour components - "Mineral moon processing".
If you get addicted to trying for the best possible moon shot, you may find
https://clearoutside.com/forecast/
Useful for knowing when the nights will be clear
Also, don't discount early morning/evening moon photos - there can still be enough details to make the effort worthwhile even in daylight (if you play with the RAW).
Interesting article and photos within it, but what made you want to post this one here out of all possible interesting articles on photography? Can we look forward to your own work with stairs?
It always amuses me to think how common blue moons actually are: "A blue moon refers either to the presence of a second full moon in a calendar month, to the third full moon in a season containing four, or to a moon that appears blue due to atmospheric effects." - from Wikipedia, so maybe once or twice a year even just from the "twice in a month" form.
Two of them are seeing the trees on the left looking a bit over-exposed/washed out - have you tried any post-processing (especially of RAW Format versions) to try and get the dynamic range under control?
Have you tried taking RAW format photos and doing a little post-processing (in particular whatever more detailed Histogram or Luminance tools you have)? This sidesteps a lot of functionality that usually guesses right, but can go horribly wrong.
Are you manually setting all three of aperture, ISO and speed? If not, double check what the auto settings of the others are (you should be getting those details in the photo meta data - visible under Properties|Details in Windows, as well as "Live").
The photo with the dead tree in the water is really satisfying - well done. A large print and put up on (a shaded) wall sort of thing.
The other photo, of the far side of a lake, doesn't really work for me - there's the tree lines and their reflections pointing to the centre, but there's nothing there to look at. You needed someone waving, or a large treasure chest (X marks the spot) or something.
Out of interest, did you also take a shot while in front of that patch of herbs? It could be taken as obscuring things, rather than deliberately breaking up the man-made parts (which is what I guess you intended).
For all depth of focus is more with a telephoto lens, I'd guess that's still the cause of the issue. I'm just delighted the bulk worked so crisply, I'll forgive the camera/physics a few hairs :)
From the manual of the lovely beast that is the RF200-800: