I was surprised many of their photos seem to show the 3g better than the 3gs. Is this something they could fix in their evaluation photo technique, or inherently an advantage of the 3g?

in the few comparisons I remember studying closely the 3GS pics were always better than the 3G pics (the 4 shown clockwise from top-left ones) -- are we just thinking of different sets?

On p. 4 and p. 5 of the review, the 3g pics (top-left of a 4-set, or leftmost of the 3 magnified) look at least as good to me, if not better, than the 3gs pics (top-right-of-4; middle-of-three).

(The 3g pic on p.4 seems a bit orange compared to all others -- but I don't know the subject's real complexion, and that's why I asked my question of baddox. Is this an inherent skew of the 3g or an artifact of their technique? Except for the color-difference in that set, the 3g photo has as much or more definition/contrast.)