Consider the function
$$\phi :\begin{align} \mathbb Z_4 &\to \mathbb Z_4\\z &\mapsto 1\end{align}$$
Why is this not a group homomorphism?
On the other hand
Why $$\psi :\begin{align} \mathbb Z_4 &\to \mathbb Z_4\\z &\mapsto 2z\end{align}$$ for all $z\in Z_4$ is a group homomorphism?
My guess was that because only the identity can be linked to the identity, but in our case 4 elements are linked to the identity.
For case 2, simply check all possible combinations to see if $f(z_1z_2)=f(z_1)f(z_2)$
You have to be careful, when talking about groups, to make sure it is clear what operation is being used. In this case, it appears from context that the group $(\Bbb Z_4,+)$, is intended.
Your intuition about the image of the identity is correct: in fact, we have the following:
For ANY two groups $(G,\ast)$ and $(H,\ast')$ and any group homomorphism $f:G \to H$, we have: $f(e_G) = e_H$. To see this, note that for any $h \in f(G)$ (so that $h = f(g)$ for some $g \in G$):
$f(e_G)\ast' h = f(e_G)\ast' f(g) = f(e_G \ast g) = f(g) = h$,
$h \ast' f(e_G) = f(g) \ast' f(e_G) = f(g \ast e_G) = f(g) = h$.
This tells us that $f(e_G)$ acts as the identity of $f(G)$, and since $f(G)$ is a subgroup of $H$, they have the same identity, namely $f(e_G) = e_H$.
So for your first example, since $f([0]) = [1] \neq [0]$, $f$ cannot be a homomorphism.
Now, in your second example, we DO have $f([0]) = 2[0] = [2]\cdot [0] = [2\cdot 0] = [0]$, but this alone is not enough to prove we have a homomorphism. We need to verify:
$f([k] + [m]) = f([k]) + f([m])$.
So, starting with the LHS:
$f([k] + [m]) = f([k + m]) = 2[k+m] = [2]\cdot[k + m] = [2(k+m)]$
Now, inside the brackets, we have "ordinary integers", and can use the rules we know about such:
$[2(k+m)] = [2k + 2m] = [2k] + [2m] = [2]\cdot[k] + [2]\cdot[m]\\ = 2[k] + 2[m] = f([k]) + f([m]).$