The "traditional" use case for focus stacking is macro photography, and today I think most jewelry/watch/etc photographers use stacking extensively. In those cases the stacks can be of several tens of shots, say 20-40 shots as the depth of field is ultra-short in macro photography. Many jewelry shots we see today aren't possible to do without stacking.
However focus stacking has become popular in landscape photography as well, and there the technique seem to differ between photographers. Usually the full focus range close to far in a landscape (non-macro) shot can be covered in say 5-8 shots, but rather than shooting all those shots as you would in a studio macro setup most make one shot focused on an important foreground object, and then another shot focused at an important background object, so you have two shots which does not really give equal sharpness throughout the scene but you have high sharpness where it counts. If you pixel peep and have a continuous scene you see that it goes a bit soft midway, and then turns sharp again for the far shot.
As I mentioned in a different thread I don't use it myself although I have experimented with it a bit to see how it works, both in macro and in landscape applications. For my own work I prefer to "compromise" with tilt/swing and smaller f-stops and do it in one shot.
The scenes I've seen other landscape photographers do with stacking is typically one with a very close subject like a group of flowers (camera is low, close to the flowers) or a close tree trunk with visible bark structure, and then a background that stretches into infinity. Often the midway is either not visible or without much features so that it's less sharp on the middle doesn't really matter.
When you google for stacked landscape images many compositions are "gimmicky" with ultra-close foreground, but among tech cam users it's quite common to shoot pretty normal compositions which you could shoot with say f/22 but you stack to make it with f/11 to gain more resolution.
One problem I discovered with stacking for landscape is that since you have focus breathing the stacker needs to scale at least one image slightly to fit together, and if you have a very sharp f/11 shot with jagged lines (which you get with tech lenses) the slight scaling doesn't look that good on pixel peep level, and then I rather step up to f/16 or even f/22 to make the scaling look good, and when you've done that you already have pretty deep depth of field, especially if combined with tilt. So I haven't found much value in it personally.