Asking a question is fine, accepting the defence's claim without further substantiation and the rest of the follow up is less so.

And how do you resolve conflicting technological claims from the defense and prosecution? By expert witness. Which is what the judge did. So what’s the problem?

That's not what happened. The judge placed the burden of proving that zooming didn't do that on the prosecution, and only afforded them a few minutes to find an expert witness.

In the end the iPad was not used.

Untill iPad is open source, you can't trully know what they did to the image