I generally skip just about everything and go straight to the samples and conclusion, as this is where you get a "feel" for what a camera's IQ is all about or can do.
I do read some paragraphs if I need to find out more in the area that
I am interested in.
To me, "Resolution"/ "Noise" comparisons etc etc...
though important to reviewers
(to show that they know what they are talking about,) is largely "Academic".
So, from the samples, it does not appear to me, that the D90
is better significantly, if at all,
than the D80 or indeed the D40 from the point of view of IQ...
The samples from the D40 especially, taken by that particular reviewer
were outstanding and to me, showed the camera at it's "best",
up to ISO 1600. Not too many snaps better at ISO 1600 to my eyes.
I don't get the same feeling from the samples of the D90.
Does anyone else think this?
Also, review snaps in general, spend too much time with the vertical portrait
shots whereas computer screens are more suited to the
"normal" wide at the bottom mode.
Finally, with the D90, there could be a few more snaps of the ISO 1000 to 1600 region, indoors where most people would use such a setting...ie in churches, museums, stadiums and the like.
Overall, regarding the D90, as far as IQ is concerned, I have to say I was more impressed with
the IQ from the Fuji S6500 samples.
This is despite me being a Nikon player from the early 80's.
noise to one is music to another