Are these photos all of the same tree? The last one appears to have pinnate leaves unlike the first two pictures.

The first two pic shows the tree from the other thread. The last pic might show some kind of mountain ash (sorbus)

Here is the closer look...I attached the wrong close up...

Yes - that one is a Sorbus.

I was going to say-we're clearly being shown two different plants here. So, the latter specimen does look like some kind of Sorbus to me too. Korean mtn. ash? Never seen that one in person, so without doing a search, not sure if foliage looks like that. I do know it does not feature the pinnately-compound foliage of N. american and European Sorbus species.

As to first tree....still don't know. could be Prunus of some kind, but does not immediately ring a bell. Are leaves finely serrated? I can't tell.

+oM

Those leaves look pinnately compound to me, wisconsintom.

The common one with this appearance is S. aucuparia.

The leaf edges are pretty roughly serrated for sorbus aucuparia, but otherwise a match

The toothing is probably the main point visible in this picture that makes it like that species.

Although that photo is the Wiki illustration for S aucuparia it doesn't look quite right for the ones we see here where it is a very common native tree. The berries are the wrong colour, for a start. It looks a lot more like one of the named cultivars or hybrids, maybe 'Joseph Rock.' The OP's leaves look more typical.

You're right, the berry colour is wrong, but the leaf margins look exactly like on my trees. Now when I found my camera I will post a pic.

But sorbus is a very variable genus and I guess british rowans might have different leaf shapes. And it is not unlikely that american trees descend from trees brought over by british immigrants.

Yes - Sorbus certainly are variable. I'm looking at leaf now which I just picked from a Rowan tree in a local park. Its teeth are very similar to your picture except I now notice that the bases of the leaflets aren't toothed at all.

There is a rich folklore attached to Rowans and it is very plausible that immigrants took it with them, especially Scots.

S. aucuparia is a naturalized weed in my region, which also continues to be offered by nurseries and planted deliberately on properties here - by now I have probably seen thousands of examples. Nothing about the leaves of the tree asked about here makes me think it must be another species. One factor that should be considered is that younger specimens of woody plants often produce more complex leaves than older examples, a familiar instance of this is the wavy and spiny leaves of small Ilex aquifolium (that have arisen from seed) vs. the often at least partly spineless and comparatively flat leaves seen on adult trees.

The leaves on s. aucuparia are pretty much the same on older and younger trees, but they do grow large on suckers if you cut the tree down and can even lose the pinnate structure. But this particular tree is actually adult enough to start flower any year now.