Impossible to tell without seeing a screenshot. The overall number of features isn't actually that important for 3D tracking as long as there is a reasonable minimum number of them (from an idealized math POV, 7 points would be enough, but usually the sweet spot is about 15 to 20). It's more important how they are distributed across the frame to allow for stable vector calculations. if they are e.g. all on the floor with a very flat perspective, inevitably they would be merely a line of dots and no proper vertical up vector could be used to stabilize the rotation. Generally pre-processing is nothing to be ashamed about as long as those changes do not falsify the original data too much...
The camera tracker needs fixed geometry in the scene and a change in perspective. Without that you cannot get a good track. If the scene is incredibly flat and you have no edges on any of the geometry Camera tracking is not going to work even with filters. IOW, you cannot Camera Track a shot like this:
And you cannot track a shot on open water like this:
But you could Camera Track a shot like this if you don't include the cars:
Thank you both for your replies. Well, to a certain extent this is a parallax issue because at first there is a lot of it, but when it loses the solve it's when I stop and pivot my body to the left. However, like I put in another thread, I have two shots that are actually far more difficult than that, where there's parallax forward, sideways, then a turn to the left, and it solved it like a king for both.
However, those were in my front yard, while this difficult shot is at the end of the driveway almost on the street. That's why I thought maybe this shot needs a little bit extra help to solve.