Logical, david-tu, but I ask because I borrow cameras for my main projects, and don't have time to experiment with them. I don't want to choose sub-optimal settings due to my own ignorance of things I might not have considered. And since I recognize that everything involves trade-offs, I'm open to the possibility that capturing at a higher framerate and having Vegas Pro convert to the output rate might actually be preferable for reasons I do not yet know.

It would only work well if you capture at something like twice the framerate. Any other framerate (such as 29.97) would involve throwing out frames at intervals you have no control over and sometimes interpolating frames and actually possible synthesizing frames. I don't see any good reasons to shoot at other than delivery unless you are having multiple delivery formats, then I would shoot at the one that is the most important. I personally do not like 23.97 framerate. I would prefer shooting much higher (even 120 if possible) because I want as many frames as possible. I find 23.97 to jittery and distracting. In a theater it doesn't bother me because of the persistence of vision but normal TV viewing it drives me crazy.

That's good info, david-tu, thank you.

As 48fps (or its drop-frame variant) aren't available on the cameras I borrow, I suppose I won't be shooting HFR with that benefit of no interpolation. I understand the limitations of 23.976, but it is a requirement for my project. Actually, I do prefer that framerate for movies, because (I suppose) my brain has been conditioned to associate it with movies. 29.27 or 59.94 look like TV shows to me, rather than "cinematic." But I do want to minimize jitter, which is one of the possible reasons I have wondered if shooting at higher rates might have some benefit.

Framerate is part of the perception, but a bigger part is lighting and camera focus. At least that is my opinion. On broadcast TV you have never seen a movie shown at 23.97. It has always been converted, by interpolating frames to 29.97. If you have seen the Hobbit, it was not shot at 48fps. Still looks cinematic to me. (not one of my favorite films though)

I watch movies via bluray or ultra hd bluray more than via broadcast, and my television plays such content at 23.976fps.

I saw The Hobbit in a theater at 48fps; it looked like a very expensive soap opera.

Given that, I don't think you will like the look of higher frame rate video ("ultra realistic"). I would shoot 24p (23.976) for majority with 60p (59.94) for slow motion scenes. I typically don't pan or zoom, and by shooting UHD there is lots of latitude for stabilization (if necessary) and NLE digital pans/zooms.

yea, I'd stick with 23.976 if that is the final

In order to prevent suboptimal results, all cameras should record at the delivery frame rate. Other compatible frame rates are 2x, 4x, etc.