Yes - you are absolutely correct. In fact Plasmas pixels have a very fast response time and so there is no need to have any high refreh rates. What I meant is that some times the input video data itself will have judders based on the way the picture is captured. So if the input video itself has judder, then the Plasma will try to display as it is and it will look like as though the plasma is the culprit. So in case of input videos having judder, then one can set IFC to MIN. Even other wise, having IFC to MIN does no harm even if the input video is judder free.
Again, even if the lag is small, it all depends on the source content.A picture is as good as the source.All the problems of display started when we abandoned the CRT tvs which smoothly scanned the screens.When frames of pixel data were used as part of digital recording/storage and transmission, all the issues started.
To store a high resolution pixel frames, say for example 1 frame contains 1024x1920 pixels, and 24 frames per second would yield too much data (assuming 8 bits of memory per pixel of information) that can be stored on disks or that can be transmitted. So they intelligently store only the relatively changing parts of the image as pixels.
For example my digital camera recording a video at a resolution of 1024x1920(full hd) pixels per frame, and data of 30 such frames per second, it does not have the internal storage to store such huge data that is being generated per second. Instead a standard like MPEG is used.
This MPEG software analyzes dynamically ,the data in the pixels of the frames that are being recorded by the camera. It only stores the most dynamically changing parts of a frame. For example if we see a football rolling on a grass field, the most changing part of the consecutive frames that is used to record this is only the pixels of the ball.The background grass more or less remains the same.So very few pixel information is recorded of the grass.
Now a mpeg player(it could be tv itself) will re-create the frames from the mpeg file recorded earlier.Now we can imagine the plight of the digital tv.
With less information it has to fill the screen by creating frames intelligently.
Its plight gets even worse to predict pixel data during fast motion scenes.
It resorts to interpolating the display process by repeating/adding its own frames.(See, we already are contaminating the original recorded picture)
So more than a display, I feel that the player(blu-ray/dvd) should properly create frames from the recorded data on the disks and feed them to the display. A good tv just shows the frames at the given rate.It should not be blamed much.But how faithfully it can display the frames created by the player differentiates a good tv from the not so good ones.
Now when a dvd/blu-ray is created from a film, if the transfer is not good, a blu-ray player might produce blurs/motion artifacts etc. That is why we see that some blu-ray/dvds are better than others.
If the source is not good, we can never get a good picture even if we have a good blu-ray player, a very good tv(plasma or led).
Thanks.