Ah, you’re not after bird photos, so ignore my comments on lens lengths (even so, I’m sure there will be birds, and probably still interesting to see in detail - the UK has many small often-common brown birds, and most are really pretty plumage close up when you look - for that matter, I’ve even photos of crows that I think interesting).

You mention macro shots - do you mean of insects, flowers and the like? Good macro shots again tend to depend on the lens, and some lenses are much better than others. You’re looking for maximum magnification in the specification, and you might be surprised how poor that seems even for an expensive lens. It might only be x0.5 and still be “good” (even if by some definitions that’s not even “macro”). Even the top end Canon RF 100mm F2.8 is only x1.4! As a great bonus, macro lenses should also work as normal lens, usually really rather well.

I’ve not tried the R50, so can’t comment - though these days I use higher end Canon cameras and like them. Other people dislike them, especially due to their policies on their best lens mounts that mean third parties like Sigma couldn’t produce lenses for them.

While I really wouldn’t try pointing a camera at the sun without heavy filters, it’s probably not instant destruction, and through a mirror-less view finder it won’t directly blind you (DSLR view-finders might!). A significant issue is that your lenses and camera bodies will likely have a fair proportion of black plastic that will heat up fast in the sun, and then transfer that warmth to where you really don’t want it in a camera - especially during heavy use when the camera will be internally heating up as well.