Wedding Macro > Lens vs. Small camera w/ Macro?

While sitting here deciding between Canon's 100mm L macro and Tamron's 90mm macro w/ 6 yr. warranty, a thought came to mind.

Have any others opted to shoot macro needs like rings, using a small camera instead

The thought behind the question isn't money. Just wondering whether others found a benefit from having a 2nd or 3rd camera more so than an extra lens., like a G7x ... G 16 or other?

I'm long retired from wedding work but I don't see why it couldn't work just fine. I have the Canon 100mm macro lens on a 5D & a Canon G5X. They both do wonderful macro or closeup shots. The G5X will usually have a bit more depth of field than the 100mm macro for a similar shot. So I guess it' whether you want to carry an extra camera versus the 100mm macro lens. The extra camera such as a G7X would probably weigh less.

Not likely to ever do a wedding, but is there a reason folks don't just carry an extension tube? Buying a macro lens for one (or a couple) shot seems overkill.

I guess if your other lenses are zooms, then they might give you too much CA, especially with shiny objects, but they should be OK stopped down a bit.