This is true, I understand what you point... but IMHO this is not the nasty effect the OP should consider.
Ok, the displaced nodal point (in Tele glass) provocates a parallax shift when tilting, in the shown situation (see drawing) we should lower the tripod head some 50mm to compensate it, wich is irrelevant por distant subjects but it may require a correction for close subjects.
This is somethig that's better compensated with the tripod than by the camera movements, if we want exactly same optic axis than with the non Tele lens.
The nasty effect is another thing: the wild circle displacement and a the change in the focus, both are lower with the tele lens, so a Tele is more suitable, in this regard. While the parallax shift (that can be corrected anyway) is mostly irrelevant in landscape.
Not about Macro... We are talking of a field camera with a Nikon T system with long focals and with a moderate circle, so the Tele can tilt more in the front before exhausting the available rear rise and front drop necessary to keep the coverage circle on our sheet.
With long focals a Tele allows to tilt more in the front because the circle displaces less.
Well... then we also may consider that a Fujinon C 600mm has a 620mm circle so with it we may displace all what we want !
It was nice you pointed that, now I understant all that a bit better.
Bookmarks