New kit? Too soon to say

 My reasons for considering the three options for new kit that I mentioned in this post are as follows:

• Sony A7rii. This should be just as good as my A7ii for the tiny aperture approach that I'm exploring for invertebrates. However, with its almost twice as many pixels it might be better than the A7ii for use with deep cropping using normal apertures, which might be better than using tiny apertures which destroy fine detail.
• Olympus E-M1 III. This has facilities for focus bracketing and stacking that work well for invertebrates. It might let me get both good detail and the deep depth of field I like, which I can't with the tiny, detail-destroying apertures that I currently use.
• Panasonic Leica 50-200 lens. This is a top of the line lens which might be better for flowers etc than the 60mm macro or 45-175mm lenses that I currently use.    

I'm thinking that there are some things I need to get sorted out before doing a full options analysis on any of these.

Is this tiny aperture approach with the A7ii really going to work for most of my invertebrate subjects? If not, I think this would call the A7rii option into question. If it does work well and gives me really good depth of field for my mid-sized subjects, I think that would undercut the case for an E-M1.

My invertebrates subjects are mostly mid-sized, often rather active, and often on foliage that is moving around in a breeze. I have only tested the tiny aperture approach on tiny subjects like springtails on the ground (for which it is definitely advantageous and practical) and for mid-sized insects that were numerous, often remained in one place for  a long time and were on something that wasn't moving around (a pigeon carcass). Yesterday I tried to photograph medium and small sized insects on foliage that was moving in a breeze and had absolutely no success with the A7ii. 

For invertebrates, I need to do some practical comparisons in contexts that are more typical than I've tested before, switching between the A7ii and one of my close-up lens setups. If the success rate with the A7ii turns out to be extremely low for my typical subject matter compared to the close-up lens setups then it doesn't matter how much better the images are; potentially nice images that you can't actually capture are not much use!

As to the 50-200, for flowers etc I have used both a macro lens and a tele-zoom lens with/without closeup lenses quite a lot. However, I realised a couple of days ago that I really don't have much of a feel for the differences between these two approaches in terms of how easy or difficult it is to capture images with them and also in terms of image quality/visual appeal of what I can produce using them. It is also unclear to me how much difference it would make, for stills and focus stacks, that I can always use f/2.8 with the macro lens but would almost always have to use a slightly smaller aperture with the 50-200 (although not as much smaller as with the 45-175). 

For flowers etc I need to do some practical comparisons between the 60mm macro and the 45-175.

I will come back to all this later.