For your kind comment about my photo. It was shot with a point and shoot camera (Nikon Coolpix L820) with a chipped lens. I am considering buying a nicer one, but don't want to go the DSLR route. Any advice?
I am terrible at providing the size of bugs I shoot. Most times, I don't want to provide the wrong information because I have not collected specimens this year (maybe next) and my attention at the moment is focused in obtaining the best image I can, not in figuring out the bug's size. If I am pressed, I would say this one was about an inch long.
I enjoyed reading your profile.

I refuse to call this a point and shoot, I reserve that for the little playing card sized cameras. This I call an "All-in-one" camera, which I think has a lot more dignity. I was always amazed by the macro capability of my old Sony. But in those days the imager could not even come close to the resolution the lens was capable of. If they put the same lens on a modern camera...but I guess that is what they must be doing these days.

If I recall, the greatest magnification was at the shortest focal length. You could focus on something actually touching the lens!

Still, you are doing a lot of technique. I imagine the lens is very close for these close-ups. The size and expense of DSLR's are hard to justify, unless you just think they are fun to use. I like 'em, but must admit it's a lot of weight to lug around.

You wrote two comments here and I only noticed the second one. I believe the lens must have been about 10 inches away from this fly, but I had my arms extended to avoid getting my body too close to the bug. I am not always that lucky. A lot of bugs fly away if I approach them closer than 3 feet; while others let me place my camera right in their faces.

What irks me is that lenses always talk about minimum focus distance which is the distance between the object and the imager. I much more useful distance is the "working distance" The distance from the object to the lens. The 60mm lens I've been using lately (Because it's light!) you have an object distance of some where around 3". Which makes it better for things like moths that are hypnotized by lights, then, say, an Halictid bee!

My last all-in-one was less than one megapixel. I think a lot of them come with everything I could ask for. Image stabilization, macro capability, and many manual setting options. I would probably look for ISO sensitivity, and short delay for shutter release, and some sort of viewfinder other than the screen which is hard to see outdoors. Anti-shake is probably a given. My all-in-one was pretty good except in low light it was not very good, and there was a bad time lag on shutter release. My friend has a camera similar to yours and loves it. The main thing that makes him jealous is the quick shutter, and 7 frames per second (I don't even use burst shooting). I like the working distance. The results you get are amazing, but can you get them with a dog leash in one hand, LOL!

Thank you for your tips. The biggest complains with my camera:
long time-lag with shutter release
no viewfinder
LCD screen is fixed
overheats quickly in 100+ weather
drains batteries fast
very challenged by tiny bugs
I shouldn't be so hard on this camera because I didn't spend much and it has provided me with some very nice photos and allowed to learn more about bugs.
Today, I went to a small park with native plants and found a large variety of bugs I hadn't seen before. It reminded me of your neighbor who has native plants in his garden. Take care,

I didn't mention the battery issue, I was hoping it was solved. It is actually related to not having a viewfinder, since the screen takes more battery power than the tiny viewfinder. That, and perhaps an over-reliance on a flash. My Canon DSLR's at one time were getting 1,000 photos per battery charge. Now it's seldom an issue except using live view, because the camera came with two batteries and I swap them between outings. I used to actually take 8-900 pics a day, when I was somewhere new and interesting. Now 2-300 would be a big day! Under 50-100 more usual.