Jay, thanks for asking as I enjoy sharing what I do and how I do it.

The camera that I use is a small Fujifilm X-T20 mirrorless. I mount it on a bellows so that I can vary the amount of magnification by extending or retracting the length of the bellows.

The optics that I use for a session are based on the size of the subject to fill the frame of the camera. I chose the 50mm f/2.8 enlarger lens for this session because it was the best fit for the size of the woodlouse. The measured to be about 3X magnification and I set the aperture at f/5.6. Enlarger lenses are inexpensive and they are designed to be sharp from corner to corner. Because they are engineered to enlarge a flat piece of film, they have a flat field of view which makes them a good choice for focus stacking.

I mount the specimen on an insect mounting pin which is stuck into a dab of plasticine modeling clay that is stuck on a ball bearing so that the specimen can be rotated with pitch and yaw to get it into the position that I want for the session.

Knowing the measured amount of magnification allows me to determine what the resulting depth of field will be for depth of field varies with the amount of magnification and the f/stop used. When I know the magnification and the f/stop used, I know that the depth of field, in this case, will be calculated to be 0.12mm.

I use a motorized digital focus rail and I move the camera to a point where the closest point of the subject is in sharp focus. This is usually the tip of a hair. That determines the "start point". I then advance the camera forward until I reach the farthest point of the subject in focus where I want the camera to stop and that becomes the "stop point". The total distance that the camera traveled from start to stop measured in millimeters is then divided by the depth of field that was calculated and that number becomes the number of times that the camera will move and take a shot. For this session, the number of shots taken was 131.

I use constant illumination provided by two LED desk lamps diffused with layers of vellum tracing paper. I keep the ISO at the camera's lowest amount (ISO 200 in my case) and I adjust the shutter speed based on the histogram. In this case, the shutter speed was 1/5 second. It is important to keep the ISO at the camera's native number for not only does magnification increase the apparent size of the subject, digital noise is also magnified so lower is better by far.

When finished, I process the stack of images in Zerene Stacker or Helicon Focus depending on the number of images in the stack.

Attached are a few photos of my tabletop setup.

Wondering what people think of this article from Cult of Apple?

https://www.cultofmac.com/484054/today-apple-history-newspapers-replaces-photo-staff-iphones/?utm_campaign=Cult%20of%20Mac%20Today&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Revue%20newsletter

I'm not a professional - nor claim to be.
I've shot film since 1980, moved to digital in 2004 once the D300 came available.
Have since moved on to another crop and a full frame DSLR. Will likely move on to a mirrorless at some point - but my equipment now serves me well.

But still feel that for true professional pictures - whether it be studio/field/photojournalism - the quality does not compare between a DSLR (regardless of brand) and a cell phone.

I use my cell phone for quick off the cuff pictures such as of my dogs doing dog things. But otherwise - I use my cameras for my hobby.

Your thoughts?