Thanks for all the replies so far.
My next question is this, my aim with it is a do it all type camera, so do I need such a "fancy" camera. I'm aiming to do a range of things with it. I want everything from stunning landscapes to almost telephoto style for motorsport stuff. Now I'm not sure whether it's just I've got an outdated point and shoot, but from what I've experienced, it's not bad at either, but it's not great at either. Motorsport is too far away really, and the landscapes just seem to lack the crispness and detail I've seen in photos from more advanced cameras.
Another thing is "long exposures" I've got a love for them, and the panasonics 60 second shutter time is more than ample for me, even the sony nex's 30 would be enough. But can modern point and shoot do this, mine certainly can't. Is this something a bridge camera could do, but then I revert back to my previous paragraph, I want something with the capability to do it all, can a camera that cannot change lenses do the wide range of things I want my camera to do?
I know the lenses are going to be expensive but even when packed away in a bag it's still a hell of a lot more portable than the bulky DSLR option.
EDIT: Just seen the Panasonic DMC-GX1 - which seems to tick even more boxes - It has a built in flash, has a wider range of exposure compensation, quicker continuous drive than the gf3 though less than the Sony NEX - but is the gx1 therefore worth the extra expense over the gf3 - what else makes it "better"?
Quite honestly, couldn't give a crap about filming from them.
You really get what you pay for, in any format camera. High ends of each will give manual controls and the option for long exposures. Bulb modes might also be something you could be interested in.
To get the very best 'stunning' photographs, you'll be spending a lot on very fast and sharp lenses, which can really rack up the cost into thousands - especially in DSLR territory. You can easily spend a couple of grand on a fast telephoto lens alone, and to get the reach of a similar smaller-format camera means BIG bulk.
There are high-end point and shoots, but the (relatively) small sensors and and limited-reach fixed lens of these sounds like it won't tick all of the boxes for you. You certainly wouldn't be able to get any motorsport pictures with them, unless you're standing on the track. Some compact cameras have big zoom lenses, but to pack that kind of action in a small lens usually means compromising sharpness. No long-zoom, high-performance compacts come immediately to mind.
Bridge cameras are very versatile, idiot-friendly and VERY fun to use (speaking from experience), but you'll still be looking at the results of a small sensor camera. I shoot a HS20EXR, and it's great fun to use. If I want to put effort into getting a good photo, I have the option to shoot RAW and post-process for a better result, but it still has far more limitations than a system camera. It's still a small sensor picture - no matter how I process it. If you don't mind dropping high-iso performance and picture quality for an 'all-in-one' camera, then bridge options are definitely there. The Pana FZ150 is very highly regarded, and I'd strongly suggest checking out the new Fuji XS-1: the larger sensor bridge camera that's getting good reviews.
M4/3 cameras really come into their element in the kind of 'middle-ground' between quality and versatility. Their sensors are pretty much there now in terms of performance - and the range of lenses, whilst limited when compared to DSLR lenses, is still very good. You can easily get a fast pancake lens for the wide angle or portrait shots, and the 2x conversion factor means that the Pana 45-200mm or the 100-300mm lenses will give you huge reach on the telephoto end (equiv. 90-400mm and 200-600mm, respectively). Due to them being system cameras, though, they're certainly not 'all in one' cameras. Bridge cameras have that title IMO.
I will say that, for telephoto shots, you'll do better with a viewfinder. If you're going to want to shoot from a distance, small body cameras like the GF3 will be very hard to stabilise at arms length when a big lens is attached to it. Something worth considering.
I don't know a lot about DLSRs, other than the fact that they big and pricey
Can't really comment too much here.
Just be prepared for compromise. There isn't a camera out there that is the best at everything, it just depends on what you want to prioritise. Like I said, head into jessops with an SD card, and ask if you can take some shots to take home and compare. You'll get a feel for the cameras and get to see if the results are what you're looking for.
If you want some example photos from real-world use, head over to photography forums like DPReview, or search around on Flickr. You'll get a feel for the kind of quality each camera is capable of.
