Best camera for Macro Photography 'out of the box'

[Oswoc]

I think the key to all of this is finding what you enjoy the most and keeping with that. I LOVE my 'ebay' 1:1 Sigma macro lens, with my 2nd hand Pentax KS2 - gets me the shots I want - but I'm also aware it takes a fair bit of time and faffing around to get those shots, whereas on a phone it's so much more portable and easy to take snaps.
I just wish I had photoshop so I could i learn 'focus stacking'. I only have Lightroom at the moment.

The other thing I WISH I WAS TOLD SOONER, is to shoot in 'RAW', not jpeg, as I get so much more detail out of my photos.

Secondly, composition is king, a really emotional, unique and captivating photo taken on a phone is always better than a boring yet graphically/technically perfect shot on a Mirrorless.

Anyway, attached are few more recent attempts with my DSLR set up. And I love them

 

[AlbaArachnids92]

Finally taking the plunge to ask something relating to this topic......I hate and love this specific thread.......
The pictures really nice! And you can see improvements from page 1 to page 5! Love them.
The feeling I need to wise up about cameras and buy one as another utensil for my T keeping! Hate it!

My use of camera equipment has always been as a feature of smart phones (Samsung S20 FE - currently).
I feel like I am outgrowing the convenience factor and would like to try my hand at the real deal for the first time but even after reading through here a good few times I still don't feel like I could make an educated choice so:

I'd like the option to use this for my inverts as well as for landscape/scenery shots. I'm not desperate to get into macro right off the bat but would definitely like to have the option in the future.

Would anyone care to recommend a good starting point / camera for a complete novice photographer?

Is there a camera equivalent to an Airsoft M4 platform? Reasonable quality, reasonable price and an extensive range of interchangeable parts/accessories?

I feel going into DLSR might be expensive overkill at this stage or would it be worth the extra investment?

Many thanks!

 

[TechnoGeek]

Answering your question about a DSLR (mirrorless is even better and they're equally affordable nowadays) should be easy.

If you only want to take macro shots of inverts and Ts then the answer is probably no. But if you're really into photography, like you think of it as a hobby and really like taking pictures, then yes it might be very much worth it.

 

[AlbaArachnids92]

Answering your question about a DSLR (mirrorless is even better and they're equally affordable nowadays) should be easy.

If you only want to take macro shots of inverts and Ts then the answer is probably no. But if you're really into photography, like you think of it as a hobby and really like taking pictures, then yes it might be very much worth it.

Ah I see, my noobie-ness showing through there It's really the T's and likes of family and scenery etc, so yes.....more than just macro of the beasts.

 

[Jumbie Spider]

I LOVE my 'ebay' 1:1 Sigma macro lens

I have a Sigma 1:1 macro lens too, it's awesome.

 

[arthurliuyz]

Raynox DCR-250

Has anyone used Kase macro lens for cameras that snap on? Can't seem to find Raynox in my country.

 

[Lowkey57]

I know this is a necrothread, but I'll throw my 2 cents in for anyone digging for camera info. If you're just looking for an "all in one" for macro, I can't recommend the Olympus TG-6 more highly. If you research it, you'll see a million reviews of it's capability as a diving camera. However, it has incredible marco capability for insects/Ts, it's almost indestructible, it shoots RAW, and it fits in a shirt pocket. You can get two different inexpensive lighting addons, one is a flash, and one is a continuous ring light, and they're both like 40 bucks apiece. There's also a fairly affordable teleconverter that works with the macro setting as well.

More or less every picture of bugs I've taken in the last few years was with it.