Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

Dear Chums, I am considering purchasing either a 'used' Sony A7II or Sony A7RII as a dedicated macro camera. I already own a Sony A7III but am fed up with having to change lenses. Up until recently I owned two camera bodies; so there was never a need to change lenses in order to shoot macro or general wildlife. Though I am happy with the macro images I have produced with my A7III, I am conscious of the fact that most of my images are cropped. In the past, I have used a Canon 7D mark II, a Nikon D500 - both of which are APS-C format, and an Olympus EM1 mark II M43 format for macro work. Now I have changed to a full frame format I wonder if, given the fact that a lot of my images are cropped, whether I would be better off with the 42 megapixel A7RII, rather than the 24 megapixel A7II. If you have experience of using higher megapixel cameras for macro photography, and have a few moments to spare, I would be grateful for your observations regarding cropping (vs cropping a 24 MP image) and whether handholding at shutter speeds of 1/250th or less is a real option. Thanks a lot.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

I am NOT familiar with Sony, but I concur that high pixel count is superior for macro-photography. I upgraded from 24MP to 36MP, and really enjoy the ability to crop tighter in past processing.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

With my hand-held, diffused speedlight macro set-up, my camera settings are ALWAYS 1/250-sec at f/16, ISO 200. For correct exposure, I vary the speedlight output, depending on color brightness of subject.

Mark Sturtevant Loc: Grand Blanc, MI

I would love to use two camera bodies outdoors, using them similarly to how you describe. Right now I have to switch out the macro with my telephoto lens. But I believe I would also want an external flash on both cameras (!) That is b/c I often still use the flash to help fill in shadows when I am using the telephoto. So, oy, using two cameras, both with a flash, would be cumbersome!

I always crop. It is not usually not to effectively enlarge the subject so it is the main part of the picture. It is more of a compositional/aesthetic thing. Cropping is cropping.

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

Thank you for your reply. Whilst the theory of more megapixels for cropping is easily understood, the practical difference is not always apparent. I am grateful to you for posting your practical experience.

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

I do use a Neewer 320 mini speedlight and Apurture, credit card size LED panel. But on a number of occasions this summer natural daylight has been sufficient for 1/60th - 1/125th @ ISO 100. Whilst those shutter speeds are fine for a 24 MP camera I feel thay may be too slow for a 42 MP camera: but with no practical experience I felt it better to ask.

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

I have used two camera bodies for many years but recently swapped (literally) my Nikon D500 system and Olympus EM1 mark II system for a single A7III system. I won't bore you as to why I changed, but at the time I believed I would manage with just one camera body. Alas, that is not the case. Generally, I use one body + long prime or zoom for birds in flight/dragonflies in flight and other, non macro subjects: and the second body is fitted with a macro lens. I only really need a mini speedlight/LED panel for macro work; though I do have a speedlight with a GN of 60 + flash extender for non macro subjects, should extra light be necessary. Always check out the second hand market if you are on a restricted budget. My query related to whether the extra megapixels might be outweighed by the need to always having to use a tripod, or whether handholding is readily achievable.

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

Remember that the same macro lens on a 24Mp (APS-C) camera and then on a 42Mp (full frame) camera, is set at the same Working Distance. The difference will be MORE field-of-view will be captured on the physically larger sensor, at the same magnification.