You might be looking at this matchup and thinking why I'm comparing these two products. The Samsung is a great deal cheaper than the Pioneer, often about half the price, so why even bother? The reasoning behind this is that I'm a sucker for value. Sometimes, I find value in mid-range products such as the Samsung in this comparison, and sometimes in a premium (ish) product such as the Pioneer. I think it's well worth looking into which TV is really more "worth it." Even though price separates these two TVs by a mile, they're actually pretty evenly matched up in specs. Both are 50" plasmas with a native resolution of 1920× 1080, and are current-generation models from their respective manufacturers, which means they both have a host of modern features."
The similarities end there, though. Samsung and Pioneer have traditionally gone about things very differently, and today, Samsung wants to be all things to all people, which is why they make both LCDs and plasmas in a huge range of sizes and prices. Coming from humble beginnings and initially faced with the same sort of brand equity as Hyundai in the late 80s and early 90s, Samsung went out of its way to reinvent itself and position itself with the biggest of the mighty Japanese companies. Pioneer, on the other hand, is quite the niche manufacturer. Pioneer introduced the plasma TV to the world in 1997, and has been a leader in plasma technology development since.
The Kuros especially, eighth-generation units, practically revolutionized plasma displays and were widely regarded to be the absolute best HDTV flat-panels available. Along with this superiority came a very high price tag, often much more than people could justify, putting Pioneer in a difficult position, and ultimately leading it to outsourcing its displays to Panasonic for generation 11, and then abandoning plasmas in favour of LCDs after that. We generally know that the PDP-5020FD is superior to the PN50A650. Contrast ratios and black level (interrelated, of course), could not be more different.
We're talking around 1300: 1 and 0.030 fl for the Samsung vs. 10,000: 1 and 0.001-0.004 for the Pioneer. Experts mention that shadow detail is far superior on the Pioneer, as is colour accuracy (after calibration, before calibration the Samsung is better). Should this be the end of the story? I think not. For the price of the Pioneer, you could have two Samsungs, and that should mean something.
In fact, the deeper you penetrate into the woods, the more intelligent, and, in one sense, less countrified do you find the inhabitants; for always the pioneer has been a traveler, and, to some extent, a man of the world; and, as the distances with which he is familiar are greater, so is his information more general and far reaching than the villager’s. If I were to look for a narrow, uninformed, and countrified mind, as opposed to the intelligence and refinement which are thought to emanate from cities, it would be among the rusty inhabitants of an old-settled country, on farms all run out and gone to seed with life-everlasting, in the towns about Boston, even on the high-road in Concord, and not in the back woods of Maine.
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
Are those numbers really that important? Do they make a four-digit difference that you'd notice? In my testing, when I had both TVs optimally set up, I could not notice much loss in shadow detail on the Samsung. It's capable of higher gamma, something not adjustable in the Pioneer, which makes up for its drawbacks somewhat. But because of its much muddier blacks, some detail does get lost in the shadows. Put another way, the Pioneer can show a greater range of shades. Is this difference very apparent? No, in fact, unless you're a videophile who has both TVs side-by-side and is looking for differences in shadow detail, you're unlikely to notice them.
What you will notice, however, is the vastly inferior black level. It is worse off than most modern LCDs, but the Samsung plasma redeems itself by virtue of evenness. You see, LCDs are always very uneven in their lighting. This isn't something you're likely to notice in bright scenes, but you will notice it in dark scenes.
Some parts of the screen just have more backlight bleed than others, and it's referred to as clouding or mura as well. Even if the Samsung has a black level inferior to these LCDs, it is less distracting than the unevenness found in most LCDs (the exception being the uber-expensive LED-backlit ones). So, while the Samsung is very far behind the Pioneer, it's still better than most LCDs. One difference that was significant to me was the amount of image retention found on both sets. The Samsung had a serious bit of IR, almost to a point that was unbelievable for a 2008 set. Now, plasmas should be broken in for about the first 100 hours or so, but after that, they should not be very susceptible to IR. The Samsung still is, and I looked around a little on the net and found it to be quite common.
Most people will just run the IR tool which consists of a scrolling white bar for a while after watching a movie, or play some sort of full-screen content, but it is there. Mind you, this is not the same as burn in, which is IR becoming permanent. That is probably nearly impossible. On the other hand, the Pioneer had zero IR. Even under 100 hours, it had no noticeable IR after hours of 2.35: 1 movies or 4: 3 content.
I was interested to see how a pioneer lived on this side of the country. His life is in some respects more adventurous than that of his brother in the West; for he contends with winter as well as the wilderness, and there is a greater interval of time at least between him and the army which is to follow. Here immigration is a tide which may ebb when it has swept away the pines; there it is not a tide, but an inundation, and roads and other improvements come steadily rushing after.
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
Even with a PC hooked up and the Start bar frozen in its position, I didn't notice anything. Finally, we come to the most important factor. You have to consider how you watch TV or movies. If your TV is in a room where you have light coming in, or the lights on, right away, I can tell you, this reduces the value of the Pioneer for you. It does not show its true colours (so to speak) until you have it in a very dark environment. That doesn't mean that it's no good in a bright environment, quite the contrary actually - it washes out less than other plasmas in bright and even direct light.
What I mean here is that you essentially pay a premium for the best black level, contrast ratio and shadow detail, and all of that is lost in a bright environment. And in this context, bright environment means even normal room lighting. I watch in a dark room myself, but I can't imagine that most people do. If you do indeed watch TV in a room with some light, I can tell you that you should go for the Samsung, maybe even the larger 58" (which actually measures 59.5" on the screen for some reason) for less than the 50" Kuro." It will provide you with all the detail you can see in that type of environment, and you will have saved your money to buy, well, whatever else you want.
Even if you had a Kuro beside it, in a lit environment, you wouldn't notice a difference where you'd find the Kuro to be vastly superior. And if you're a hardcore, almost obsessed movie buff who watches their movies in the dark and can justify huge amounts of money for AV gear, I'd wholeheartedly recommend the Kuro for you. It will reward your purchase with superior shadow detail, black levels, contrast and even build quality. It is the best that money can buy, but it's a little like an exotic supercar, where unless you have access to a track, you can't fully enjoy it, and in the real world, a cheaper sports car would give you as good an experience for less.