Does anyone else feel that still shots are just not that sharp?  It seems that video footage is tack sharp but my stills are very soft.

I'm shooting in RAW, ISO 100 (usually) and F5.6 (usually).

Not at all.
The P4 pro produces nice sharp inages.

Can you post an example?

Well I can.. but of course any pic is going to be edited.  At least from RAW to jpeg.  So not really a true example plus I will have to resize it to upload, but I will add one anyway.  Will post something with almost no editing.

The first pic is a straight conversation from RAW, no other editing.  The second pic is the same pic but zoomed in.  The pics are always pretty noisy and so by the time I use some noise reduction, they end up even softer.

Labroides Posted at 3-21 17:18
Not at all.
The P4 pro produces nice sharp inages.

Could you post an example of an unedited pic just so I can compare and see what I should be aiming for.. please.

TracieLouise Posted at 3-21 18:20
Could you post an example of an unedited pic just so I can compare and see what I should be aiming for.. please.

I agree with Labroides, P4 photos are pretty sharp. The best way to show us what you mean is to put a un-edited file straight off the camera's SD card onto Dropbox. That lets us see the file exactly as it was shot, without needing to do anything to suit the posting rules on here.

TracieLouise Posted at 3-21 18:15
Well I can.. but of course any pic is going to be edited.  At least from RAW to jpeg.  So not really a true example plus I will have to resize it to upload, but I will add one anyway.  Will post something with almost no editing.

The first pic is a straight conversation from RAW, no other editing.  The second pic is the same pic but zoomed in.  The pics are always pretty noisy and so by the time I use some noise reduction, they end up even softer.

of course any pic is going to be edited.  At least from RAW to jpeg
Just one full-size image - ideally one of some hard detail rather than leaves, grass or water.
Raw or jpg should make no difference to how sharp/focused it looks.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ae1bh7tjq3nxp0l/DJI_0136.DNG?dl=0

Here is a file from a few weeks back.  Interesting what you said about hard edges.  
It's funny you should say that, cause this pic which has hard edges in it actually looks sharper than most of my pics.  But that doesn't really help me since 99.9% of what I shoot is leaves and grass and water.

TracieLouise Posted at 3-21 19:34
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ae1bh7tjq3nxp0l/DJI_0136.DNG?dl=0

Here is a file from a few weeks back.  Interesting what you said about hard edges.  

It's OK for background stuff to be soft but much of your image is background.
You'll get great detail in trees etc when the tree is close enough for each leaf to be caught in several pixels, but when it's several leaves to one pixel, it's going to look soft.

Try to have a prominent subject rather than all distant background.
DO some test shots around the house and everything will probably look OK.

I understand what you are saying. This was not a shot I used for anything. I was just trying to find something with hard edges like suggested. It’s hard to have something in the foreground with aerial landscapes.  I did find another thread on here talking about poor image quality. Maybe the stills are just never going to be as sharp as video.  I would still to see an example of yours so I cam see if my expectations are unrealistic.

TracieLouise Posted at 3-22 01:25
I understand what you are saying. This was not a shot I used for anything. I was just trying to find something with hard edges like suggested. It’s hard to have something in the foreground with aerial landscapes.  I did find another thread on here talking about poor image quality. Maybe the stills are just never going to be as sharp as video.  I would still to see an example of yours so I cam see if my expectations are unrealistic.

The stills should be every bit as sharp as video, in fact, the still resolution is much higher than video. Whether video or still shots, the camera should focus the same and the shots should be quite sharp.

Geebax Posted at 3-22 14:09
The stills should be every bit as sharp as video, in fact, the still resolution is much higher than video. Whether video or still shots, the camera should focus the same and the shots should be quite sharp.

Well they clearly aren't as sharp.  To the point where I am even considering just taking screen captures of the video footage in order to get a sharp shot.

TracieLouise Posted at 3-22 15:13
Well they clearly aren't as sharp.  To the point where I am even considering just taking screen captures of the video footage in order to get a sharp shot.

It would be an idea to work out if the issue is the camera or not.
Have you tried shooting a simple subject at 10 metres to see if the camera is capable of sharp images?
A well-lit house is a good test subject.

I pm'd you some example images.

Labroides Posted at 3-22 15:28
It would be an idea to work out if the issue is the camera or not.
Have you tried shooting a simple subject at 10 metres to see if the camera is capable of sharp images?
A well-lit house is a good test subject.

I will give that a try.  But it is like Geebax said above... if the video is coming out sharp which it is, then it can't be the camera.

TracieLouise Posted at 3-22 16:03
I will give that a try.  But it is like Geebax said above... if the video is coming out sharp which it is, then it can't be the camera.

It would also be worthwhile taking the stills in JPEG, that saves processing them while you are trying to work out the issue.

Geebax Posted at 3-22 16:05
It would also be worthwhile taking the stills in JPEG, that saves processing them while you are trying to work out the issue.

I did all my pics in jpeg when I first got the drone but that was cause I didn't even realise I could shoot in RAW