Micro-step stacking is probably best reserved for closeups of relatively static objects, where DOF even at modest magnification is measured in fractions of an inch. Like any tool, it must be used appropriately. It is usually best to leave the background out of focus for closeups in nature, but you might want to show more of a flower in crisp detail than single-focus can accomplish. Landscapes can be handled more simply, IMO, with as few as two or three images. In lieu of swings and tilts, focus stacking can render key details in a landscape from foregound to infinity. I stacked two images for this shot, to capture the fence in the foreground with the round barn in the background. If you look closely, parts of the fence are OOF where they overlap the barn, as well as the grass in middle plane. Even at f/8, one or the other would be greatly OOF without stacking. Anything which moves between frames may be doubled in rendering, like grass or twigs in the wind. A minimalist approach is probably the best. However just because you have dozens of frames doesn't mean you have to use them all. At close range, the magnification can change significantly, due to focus breathing (internal focus changes the focal length), or simply because the lens moves further from the film plane when focused closer. Software like Helicon Focus will adjust and align key points in the images so that there is near perfect overlap. I prefer to use a focusing rail for macro stacking (product and table-top photography), which results in far less change in magnification, and allows focus on key areas with great precision. Manual focusing is appropriate if the depth of the subject exceeds the range of the focusing rail, and improves the odds that AF with stepping will hit on the right plane.