The FZ200 is very overestimated.
I own several zoom camera's from different manufactors and with all of them (some from 2003) I can make bright and sharp beautifull photo's.
Until now I still have to figure out a way to make my first decent photo with my FZ200 which is sharp and bright. It is allmost impossible with the freaking noise it produces. Van Gogh could have learned from this cam, it produces paintings! I really tried from all poses in all weather and all possibillities (over 5000 pics), but I must conclude this cam is my first bad buy.
For the zoom, don't bother unless you only want to spy without taking the photo. Yes zoom can be fun, but it doesn't produce usefull pictures. I had my doubts in front, going over 18X. And Boy was I right!
I really regret I bought it and I presume the Canon SX50 will be much of the same.
Too much megapixels and useless ISO will produce only noise. Even from ISO 160. Anyone want to buy it from me?

I compared it to the new Nikon 7700. What's the problem with the Panny? Both JPEGs or Raws, the detail is missing, the noise is higher. The IQ of this camera is really horrible, unless DPR did something wrong with it. Or maybe the sensor here is much smaller, is that correct?

Barney, is this IQ really worth of an 80% score, even for a compact camera?

I have played with one FZ200, this is the best Bridge camera ever made.

Well done Panasonic Lumix, having such a zoom with constant f/2.8 and the other features is great.

Instead of individual camera reviews a 3-way shootout between the flagship superzooms; FZ200, SX50 and the XS1(with fixed sensor/firmware) would have been very interesting to read, ideally with side by side comparisons in studio and real life situations. Of course, dpr's studio comparison tool is very good for studio comparisons but real life photos would be far more revealing of what differences to expect in daily use of each camera.

This would also be something none of the other sites/blogs have attempted in an exhaustive format. In fact I would like to see the same type of comparisons done with the RX100/LX7/XZ-2/G1X/X10 or RX1/X100/DP2M etc.

I find it sad that Optical Zoom became the next megapixel race. I had the FZ20, and it was a great learner camera: 12x optical zoom, 5 MP, constant F2.8 aperture, and Image stabilization. Then came the FZ30 with a little more zoom and an aperture that darkened on the long end. Wrong way, I thought.

I drop out for a while and when I look up again, all these superzooms are coming with 26x, 30x, 36x optical zooms! I thought, just like the MP wars, this is targeted for people who don't know anything except more "X" is better (X = MP, optical zoom, etc.). 12x vs. 30x? 30x is better. 5mp vs 12mp? 12mp wins.

Give me 8-10 megapixels, 12x optical zoom, constant fast aperture, and clean ISO 80-800 (perfect at 80, good at 800) and I'd say you had a killer superzoom.

Of course these cameras have lens issues. Too much optical zoom. My mother in law bought one (26x Nikon) and took it to Ireland. Every zoomed pic she took looked like crap and she never could figure out why.

Bit surprised at a gold award for a camera that is noisy even at low ISOs.

For me, IQ is easily the most important thing in a camera. Other things matter of course but not as much as that. I'd be very reluctant to give any camera a gold award that doesn't even have good IQ at 100.

Cut the crap DPR. Review the real thing.

Get the new X-S1 (with the new sensor). Review it side-by-side with this toy.

State the advantages and disadvantages of each feature (brighter lens, manual zoom, motorized zoom, larger sensor, EVF etc.)

If you can't do it, you will just prove again to us your bias toward Panasonic and Canon superzoom.

While having such lens is great, combined with that sensor its not that amazing. Problem is that if you enlarge sensor, you need bigger lens. But, if you do it clever way - big sensor, low mpix - then you could combine it with F4 lens and still have reasonably big lens.

But then, what stops customer to buy m4/3s and get some slower lens? :)

Fact is that superzooms are dying breed, which are closely followed by most point-n-shoot cams. In not so distant future, ppl will use mirrorless compact systems or cellphones. Era of regular point and shoots and superzooms is pretty much over..

I'm a bit tempted by this camera, many on the strength of it's very good video quality, but ultimately I think I'd prefer a camera like the Nikon P7700, where I'd sacrifice the large zoom range of the FZ200 for better IQ of the P7700.

I will be the first one to buy if the next model have :
1 Touch screen
2 Sensor size 1/1.7 "
3 LCD Screen Resolution 921K
4 Eye sensor to switch between EVF & LCD Display
5 Increased internal memory to be more than 70 MB
6 Reduce red eye problem & edit tool

I find it interesting that Panasonic has finally spec'd out an ideal superzoom camera, but waited to do it until it was too late. It's a shame really because it's not like consumers haven't been asking for a constant aperture, RAW-capable superzoom forever. But now there are so many other options offering larger sensors with higher image quality that, at least for me, make this camera irrelevant.

I read an article this week that detailed the decline of the large Japanese consumer electronic companies like Sony, Panasonic, and Sharp. I have to wonder if their tendency to hold back features and offer consumers the absolute minimum they think they can get away with from one product generation to the next is part of the problem. Canon is the poster child for this marketing strategy and it drives me crazy.

Unconvinced. The FZ150 RAW images are much less noisy than the FZ200 images. From an IQ point of view, this is not progress. No wonder why so many FZ200 users are struggling to tame the beast.

Thanks DPR for expediting the review, even if these collaborative efforts are 75% repetition of DCR. Better than nothing though! :)

I own the FZ200 and am absolutely thrilled with it. In some situations the IQ is not quite as good as the FZ35, but overall it's pictures and videos are excellent. And on occasion jaw-dropping!

Upon careful consideration of its main competitors, given its outstanding battery life, unmatched flexibility (60-1/4000 shutter, included hood, lens threads, HD high speed video, RAW burst etc), well there is no competition, really.

Of course the beautiful Leica glass is in itself is an engineering marvel. The 2.8 aperture should not be underestimated; there are many situations that other cameras just can't get the shot at all, or are forced into hand-shake territory or high ISO land...

As most experienced and intelligent photographers point out, a little (attractive) noise is not detrimental at all in the real world, especially when detail and colour are so well preserved.

In nearly all cases (early-build faulty units excepted), those complaining about noise either have unrealistic expectations, weren't using the camera properly, or live under bridges...

A simple search of the DPR forums quickly validates the incredible quality, flexibility and sheer fun this camera makes possible.

When I was researching cameras, I came across some truly mind-boggling astrophotography shots of constellations using the FZ200. Just wow!

PS DPR please correct the video length limit! In Oceania and Asia (at least) the AVCHD recording length is unlimited (battery and card capacity notwithstanding)

I purchased the FZ200 and used it for about a week, then returned the camera. I agree that it is a good camera and deserves a high score - for a small sensor super zoom. What I did not realize is that the image quality is not what I am used to. The APSC size sensor on my Canon 7D at 55mm, when enlarged to match the FZ200 was just as good IQ. So, I found that the super zoom doesn't really give any more reach than I already have. However, the primary reason I returned the camera is that the EVF lags too much to capture the moment of a moving target. I could never get the facial expression in the image I was seeing with my eye - even when prefocusing.

But what about the optics? superzoom is lens and body in one package, and this preview seems to forgotten the lens. Superzoom is not a SLR body.

Great review.

Been trying to get a fz200 for a month now, it keeps being 'sold out'.

I really would like a review about fuji X-S1. The bigger sensor and the manual zoom could outperform the FZ200.

Great camera of this kind. Well done Panasonic Lumix.

Panasonic Congratulations!
Thank you for this interesting camera - especially for the top-movie mode and everywhere f2.8 - great work

Hotshoe, 1/4000 high speed sync speed, 25mm wide angle and const. f2.8
That alone makes it an outstanding P&S that outclasses many mirrorless m4/3 and APS-C cameras.

Well done !!!

I'm surprised that in such a review the lens performance is not systematically tested ; this is for me the most important aspect of the camera. How does it perform at 25, 35, 50, 100, 200, 500... Wide open and at optimal aperture? Resolution, contrast, astigmatism, bokeh, flare, distorsion, shading, you know... The resolution test or studio test at one focal lens and one aperture only tell us nothing there.

Not a word about the instability of the video autofocus, when panning or zooming. This is a deal-buster for me. There seems to be little attention to video by this reviewer. The sample photos are a bit over-exposed. It's probably necessary to routinely adjust the EV down in sunlight.

An impressive camera. If i were in the market for a zoom camera, I would've got it.

The review said "Panasonic did almost everything right" and "With a few refinements in design and image quality, the camera would be darn close to perfect." So why did it only get 80%? If a camera that had "everything right" would get 100% then how does one get just 80% that has almost everything right and a lacking only "refinements" to be "darn close to perfect"?

Surprise.. I mean no surprise. It is Panasonic so better review = better sales.

How about getting the new version of X-S1 or perhaps just the HS30?
And when will you consider the huge advantage of manual zoom bridge camera over a slow mo buzzing motorized zoom?

In the studio scene comparison shots the FZ150 look MUCH sharper and clearer to my eye in both JPEG and RAW to my eye. Is anyone else seeing what I am seeing?

Good review and validates my own experience. We bought the Nikon P510 early in the summer about a week before the FZ200 was announced, and used it until early September. Glad Costco has a great return policy. As a lifelong Nikon user I am very pleased with what Panasonic has done with this camera:
- the 1.2MPxl OVF should have had more prominent mention in this review. It is SO MUCH SHARPER than any other OVF I've seen.
- The diopter correction in this camera is far superior to the P510's. Nice, crisp images in the EVF were one of my first impressions.
- The constant F2.8 lens really helps with any telephoto situation.
- I like Panasonic's implementation of the left-side manual focus lever much better than Nikon's (where you must set the camera to MF every time you want to use the lever). Unfortunately MF with any of this class of camera is not well advanced - I'm constantly focusing past the sharp point.
- The RAW support is great.
We have been very pleased with the camera overall.