Equipment Upgrades

[myxomop]

Hello PM/AM,

Long time lurker, infrequent poster, and constant endorser, here to get some insights from this invaluable community on potential upgrades to my macro (and to a lesser extent, micro) setup(s).

I am a photographer of fungi, particularly (but not exclusively) tiny ones, and particularly (but not exclusively) those of the Andean-Amazonian region. Example images can be found on IG @kallampero.

My present collection of equipment is as follows:

-Canon 6D
-Canon MP-E 65mm Macro Lens
-Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro
-Komura Telemore95 II 2x Teleconverter
-Yongnuo YN-14EX-C Macro Ring Lite
-Yongnuo YN-24EX Macro Twin Flash
-Venus Optics/Laowa KX-800 Flexible Macro Twin Flash
-Manfrotto 035RL Super Clamp w/ 037 Reversible Short Stud
-Gitzo GT2540EX Tripod
-Acratech GV2 Ballhead
-Wimberley P-5 Camera Body Plate
-X-Rite ColorChecker Passport

Micro Equipment:

-Trinocular Olympus BHS
-SPlan 4x, 10x, 20x, 40x (1.25 N.A.)
-SPlanApo 100x Oil (1.4 N.A.)
-BH2-AAC Aplanatic-Achromatic 1.4 N.A Brightfield Condenser
-WHK 10x 20 L Eyepieces
-NFK 2.5× LD 125 Photo Eyepiece
-Diagnostic Instruments PA1-10A SLR Camera Adapter

In the decade-plus since my Canon 6D came out, a lot has changed. Mirrorless bodies seem to have taken off, and it seems like many (most?) flagship bodies now offer some sort of in-camera focus stacking/bracketing. A Chinese competitor to the StackShot has emerged in the WeMacro line, and Laowa, also from China, has put forth several alternatives to the still expensive (prohibitively so for some) 65mm MP-E. There's also been all manner of improvements in sensor and processor technology which I'm sure puts my ~2012-era tech to shame by comparison. In light of all this, my questions are as follows:

1. Are any of the in-camera image stabilization options available in today's bodies "intelligent" in a way that their predecessors were not? It used to be necessary to turn IS off when on a tripod, otherwise IS would introduce its own camera shake. Is this still the case, or does modern IS in one or more makes/models have a way of "knowing" when to activate, and to what degree? Does one camera maker's IS system stand out among the rest in this regard?

2. Do any of the bodies with some sort of built-in focus bracketing feature allow for the same level of fine tuning and customizability as the StackShot/WeMacro motorized rails, or are they more of a gimmick, or simply ineffective at magnification levels up to and including 5x? Am I correct to be basically disinterested in full-on, in-camera focus stacking, preferring instead to manually retouch on a proper display with Zerene Stacker?

3. As a rule, I try to never shoot above 400 ISO, and prefer 100 ISO whenever possible. I've heard tell of major improvements in high-ISO performance in newer bodies, but would trust this community's opinion on the matter above all else. Are the rumors true? According to some other fungal photographers, Sony is one of if not the best performer in this category. Is that accurate?

4. I'm interested in printing at just about the largest dimensions I possibly can without moving into the prohibitively expensive realm of medium and large format bodies. My assumption has always been that this is just about the only area where megapixel values actually matter. Does increasing my max print size depend on more factors than this, and if so, what are they?

5. Have any crop sensors "matured" to the level of being equivalent, if not superior, in image quality to full-frame ones, at least those of my 6D's vintage, or is full frame still the gold standard?

6. If at all possible, I would like to retain the use of my 65mm MP-E, and to a lesser extent, Sigma 50mm Macro w/ the Canon EF mount. Are there body options out there which will possess some to all of the features/performance improvements listed above while also retaining lens compatibility (if only via an adapter) with my EF mount lenses, ideally without any pesky cropping or vignetting?

7. If willing to buy used and/or discontinued bodies, can I realistically enter into this new era of gear with a budget of $2500 or less?

8. What else am I missing/forgetting in terms of features/functionality in today's world of macro photography gear that I should be taking into consideration?

Any and all help is greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

Yours in Spores,

-Danny N.

EDIT: At the time of writing, I am currently considering the Canon EOS RP for its combination of small size, light weight, full-frame sensor, mirrorless action, surprisingly low cost, built-in focus bracketing, lens compatibility (w/ adapter), and meeting or exceeding most specs on my 6D. The only compromises (whether compared to the 6D or significantly newer and more expensive bodies) seem to be the lack of internal GPS, the single SD card slot vs. dual, and no built-in image stabilization (perhaps overkill anyway for a mirrorless body mounted on a tripod?), and minimal resolution increase.

[Scarodactyl]

I don't know most of that so I'll stick to what I do. On the micro side you might see an improvement moving up to a newer infinity system. Even though the splan objectives on your BHS can cover a 26.5mm FoV with an ultrawide head Olympus never made a way to access that full field with your camera sensor--you have to use nfk eyepieces to get full corrections and they crop off a lot of the field of view. Essentially you are forced to work at a worse magnification to resolution ratio and thus much further into diffraction territory. With current infinity nikon or olympus scopes no eyepiece corrections are needed so that whole rated field and more is usable if you direct project onto aps-c or sometimes even full frame (but usually aps-c).

That said the BHS is a very good system and you'd likely be spending quite a bit for an improvement which may or may not make a big difference with your workflow. In particular if you would already be cropping the images down there's not much benefit to adding that extra FoV.

[Lou Jost]

Really the forum has tons of material that are relevant to your questions.

I just will add my two cents about in-camera focus bracketing in the field. This is no gimmick, it is a transformative advance in field techniques. I'd never even consider a camera without this feature.

Stacking the results is still best done in a specialized program like Zerene, and I expect that will always be the case, at least for the foreseeable future.

Magnification limits with in-camera focus bracketing depend on the depth of your subject. For very flat things 5x can be reached (with the right equipment) on micro four thirds; I don't know personally of tube lenses on FF that have a wide enough focusing range to allow the use of a 5x objective on a non-flat subject, but there might be some.

[myxomop]

Thank you both for the prompt and informative replies. I agree wholeheartedly about the in-camera focus bracketing, the more I read/ask about it (the in-camera stacking into a "completed" JPEG is irrelevant for my purposes). It is for precisely that reason that I had to abandon the Canon RP and entire Canon product family, upon discovering that an autofocus lens would be required to take advantage of the in-camera focus bracketing feature. No AF lens with the focal flexibility of the Laowa infinity-focus-to-2x models is, at the time of writing, available for Canon bodies. Indeed, it would appear that the *only* body and lens combination that exists right now is the newly-released Olympus M.Zuiko ED 90mm f/3.5 Macro IS PRO, paired with any one of the several OM System micro 4/3rds bodies to have in-camera focus bracketing. I've therefore decided to go for the OM-D E-M1X EM1X and the aforementioned lens, which should not only eliminate the need for a rail until or unless I wish to shoot at higher magnifications than the in-camera focus bracketing increments will permit, but will essentially never have to remove that lens while in the field. It will be what I use for everything from in situ shots to context shots to studio "portraits" of entire collections to close-ups (up to 2x). There are a handful of serious additional benefits to this setup as well, such as an IPX rating on the body and "weather sealing" on the lens, (handy if not necessary for working in the Andes and Amazon), body- and lens-based image stabilization, and this High Res Shot Mode that can, apparently, churn out eighty megapixel RAW files, enabling heretofore inconceivable levels of detail even at a 100% crop, which effectively turns this setup into a medium to large format camera, provided one has the card storage capacity to store the resulting image files, and the card write speed to write them in less than an obnoxiously long amount of time. There are probably more benefits that I'm forgetting to mention here, but the takeaway is that this is just about the most compelling macro field setup I have ever come across, and I'm very excited to be able to use it for many, many years to come.