Yes, this is a tremendous example of what can be done.
Photographically speaking, this image is tight, well-composed and well-exposed. There is detail in all of the highlights and in all of the shadows. The tonal range (histogram) is a smooth curve with almost nothing allowed to be pure-black or pure-white, and in highlight areas such as the saucer there is still a slight variation in the pixel intensity.
Although a real photographer would probably not have quite this degree of specularity in certain things, such as the sugar, nothing in the image screams of being “a render.” The brain knows that the image is synthetic but the eye can accept it as real. The cappucino looks positively tasty… I’ll have a cup now, please!
The very best part of it, though, is the unexpected richness of “little details that mean so much.” The Euro coins, the receipt complete with bar-code, the crumpled top on the creamer (with brand-name), tiny drops of milk and bubbles! Wow.
I like the choice of materials both on the ground and, particularly, on the table-top. The table is a very large area that would be photographically very difficult. It could easily command attention and distract from the overall presentation, but this choice of materials helps to make it work. It’s attractive, yet soft and muted, and visually interesting with a whirl of curves. It doesn’t have any specularity to speak of, making it the perfect backdrop.
Finally, I’m impressed with the use of depth-of-field. The “photographer” used a very short lens, keeping the subject in tight focus but allowing the background almost immediately start to go soft … a sound technique for keeping the viewer’s eye firmly centered on the subject. It may be that in a real photo the legs of the table would have started to go a little soft, too, but that’s a nit. The technique is well-applied in this digital image just as it would have been by a professional photographer.