A bridge bluffing

I answer 2 comments under the same name "Fred", one entitled "No more" and the other "Disappointed"
I am surprised by your so negative assessments and draws the following conclusion: either you fell on a bad camera or you do not know how to use. I have a Nikon D700 with f2.8 optical pros, as saying that the quality of a photo and sharpness of an objective I know and this gives me elements of comparison with the Lumix FZ200.
Or just the Panasonic blew me away: telephoto to 600mm show of hands (without foot) pictures I get absolutely precise, detailed and blur-free.
In standard focal length, even wide angle (25 mm) quality is also the rendezvous, photographs have good definition, which is comparable to that of an SLR general public (eg. Nikon D90) with also a consumer perspective (eg. the 16-85 mm).
Although indoor pictures are fairly noisy but sharper than those obtained with some reflex, especially those who do not go up tremendously in iso further in Intelligent Auto mode (iA) white balance is excellent.
Besides its constant openness to the Lumix FZ200 2.8 offers the ability to shoot images in RAW (and raw + jpeg) with the "scene" modes, P, A (aperture priority), S (Shutter Priority), M ( manual mode), which is a definite advantage when you want to work photos in post-production with software (Aperture or Lightroom 5 for example - I have not tested the software supplied with the unit) to get a professional look .
The panorama mode is interesting, you just know the constant speed scanning stage for a sharp picture from one end to another of the image.
Finally the viewfinder is accurate (and adjustable at the sight of the user, the default is that the wheel turns too easily), its only drawback is displaying unnatural colors, enough "synthetic" but since those pictures are just not very serious.
Last, the discretion of the Lumix FZ200: hard to imagine that in such a small objective hides a super telephoto lens, paparazzi go unnoticed ;-).
By the way I read the comments of a person who said that 600mm is useless: Well yes, it is very useful especially when doing wildlife photography or when we look at the elements remote architecture.
As for the person who puts only one star because the Lumix is ​​sold without memory card, it is clear that she did not used to buy camera equipment: SLR even the most expensive are sold without .
Finally, those who criticize the "gadgets" of the device, these are for those who want to "have fun" with their device, everyone is free to use them or not.
I almost forgot: coupled with Raynox DCR-250, the Lumix allows you to get super macros.
In conclusion, although the Lumix does not replace a pro DSLR (that is not to his vocation elsewhere) it is an excellent complement when you want to "travel light" and is in every respect a unit of very high quality.
And because images are always better than words I advise those who want to realize the device performance and go to Flickr to type Lumix FZ200: you will see all the pictures taken by users of the device.