Hey Biagio,
I tried to find an easy way to explain the problem. The MAXON developer team has created a solution that comes close to their idea of shutter and motion blur. There is as well a long discussion where the shutter opens and how does relates to keyframes. The keyframes itself have a discussion on their own, are they on the start-position (time wise) of the frame or in the middle of the frame.
Put all this into an equation and the discussion about this might take a while. I do not say that anyone is wrong or right here. It was a long discussion so far, and I respect the participants a lot.
Now you might think, who cares, give me something that works for me. Right. I agree, that is the target. To gap all the problems the Shutter has an “offset” option. Only available it “Movie Camera” is enabled - hence the shutter is the core element here.
Keep in mind that you track “features” in any tracking application, and these might not always sit on the middle or start of the frame. Or do they, ...and here the discussion starts Again, it is a little bit complex. But the “Offset” should make it simpler.
In your example the movement has a lot back and fore, nothing that is easily recognizable on a frame by frame exploration: Too similar. This produces the impression of “All over the place”. If the movement would have been a left to right “pan”, with variations in speed, it would be easier to spot the problem.
So, if the offset isn’t working, perhaps the camera key-frames need to be moved (Timeline>>Function>Move/Scale) It is a simple work, after the tracks are selected. Do it on a copy.
=========
To illustrate the problem and its native C4D solution, do the following, (perhaps after you put the time code on the footage and a MG-text object connected to the frames [Xpresso])
Render a still, perhaps on frame 45, with the standard renderer. Then switch to Physical and do another render. Don’t change anything else right now. Select the Standard rendering and while the mouse-indicator is over the name in the picture viewer press the A key. Select now the Physical render image in the picture viewer and press the B key. Select the “Difference” and you might see the problem clearly. You don’t? Then go to filter (picture viewer) and switch that on, crank up the Exposure. Now you can examine if the background is the same or the object. based on the lines around the objects you can see how much they differ, and even better, same timeline slider position, but different frame numbers (!?) yes, that is the way to solve a problem but to create a new one, certainly a difficult balance the developer had to go here.
My personal take here is to try to keep the frame numbers in sync, if you go further in VFX work. If that is final and only grading will happen to the the material, then it is not important (not really)
A little hint, the less the back ground shows up, the more in sync it is. That might be clear - but just saying.
=========
So, it is a little bit difficult to dial in the right offset (perhaps in combination with shifting keyframes +/- one frame). But if you establish a working Pipeline, this is the work that needs to be done one time, then you know the “parameter”. A reason why I normally like to stick with my apps and not run and gun with any new cool toy. As a side note, not based on your lens, it seems nearly distortion free in the shoot, I wouldn’t like to work without the lens workflow during tracking.
I hope the images below give an idea of what I’m taking about. Yes, it is a little bit abstract. I used only the shadow disc and you might see the difference in position between the Standard and the Physical render and the different frame numbers. In the other image I changed some of the details I mentioned above to get it more in sync with the standard. It is a puzzle.
All the best
Sassi