In theory maybe. In practise the D-o-F is microscopic - making stepping the focus sufficiently finely a challenging task - and lens aberrations might demand a smaller aperture. Whatever you do, diffraction is your nemesis at high reproduction ratios. I chiseled the top off an old I.C. to get a tiny subject of known size. Here's the highest RR I could get with my old 55mm f/3.5 Micro-Nikkor, mounted reversed on a PB-4 bellows at full stretch. Maybe getting closer with a shorter focal-length gets us more detail? Here's a reversed 28 mm lens at 6.6x - Not really any more revealing. Going to a yet higher mag with a 28mm lens at full stretch on the PB-4 - The above were all shot on a DX format D7200, and the whole frame shown. In each case I found that f/5.6 was the optimum aperture in terms of playing off lens aberrations (mainly LoCa) and depth-of-field against diffraction. They've also all had some sharpening applied in PP to offset diffraction, and they're still not very satisfactory IMO. My conclusion? Fancy and expensive lenses are largely wasted at an RR much higher than 3:1, because cropping and digital 'zooming' probably get more worthwhile results. The reason being that you're effectively using a smaller format size. Uprezzing and Smart-sharpen are definitely your extreme macro friends - as well as an extremely rigid camera platform and a good speedlight! Fancy lenses? Not so much.