Well, it does. With proper lighting DoF can be rendered irrelevant, as it should be with a flat subject
Now you've restricted yourself to flat images because of a shallow DoF. Flat images tend to be less artistic than images with some depth, most folks I know prefer a tilted chip subject which shows some of the features better and gives a sense that a chip isn't just a 2 dimensional object.
As for resolution, the problem is that high NA objectives tend to have short working distance and not much space is left for lighting. Surely you can spend four figures on ELWD objectives and precision macro rails, but not everybody will go that far. And if one does, it is not entirely clear why the same money wouldn't be better spent on a metallographic scope and ordinary WD optics with more NA.
If you know what you are doing getting sufficient illumination even at 20~50X can be done without the need for ELWD objectives, or thru the lens lighting. As mentioned spend some serious time over at Photomacrography and learn from some of the world class macro photographers there (I'm not one).
If you have infinite money, I would bet on the latter setup winning too. I don't quite see combining 1.4NA oil immersion with ping-pong balls.
And why would anyone that knows anything about chips, lenses and macrophotography use an oil immersion lens on a chip, seems like a very messy recipe??
BTW don't discount a ping pong ball or foam cup used as a diffuser, if you look at the results over a Photomacrography you'll soon realize just how good they are as diffusers!! Some of the images below likely used a foam cup, but can't remember details since these are almost 10 years old, or older.
All of the above applies to subjects that are indeed flat, of course.
What about a die that has wire-bonds, how do you propose to show such a subject with a shallow DoF, yet the wire-bonds add depth?? The wire-bonds would come into the die image as a surrounding massive blurry mess, but utilizing focus stacking you can create an image like these very low resolution versions which shows the die and the wire bonds both with reasonable clarity.
Also, note the last image below used the $17 AmScope 4X we mentioned earlier, not an expensive lens at all
Anyway, most will prefer the focus stacking rendered image IMO and why we went to all the effort to do such. Folks at IBM, Cornell, USC, MIT-LL, DARPA, Keysight, Harris, Excelis, ITT and a few others I can't mention thought so too
BTW our images have been printed or displayed in very large format (some 2 meters across), and inspected in detail, so they needed to be accurate and have very high resolution
Noopy's images are all very good and he sure does quite a few, my notes were if certain images of particular interest were to be enlarged then he might want to consider alternative techniques, including focus stacking. If he were here is the US and came by, I'd probably help him with some things, and even donate some equipment.
Best,