Interesting article; I think there's a serious point in the idea of going for more environmental shots of wild animals, rather than the typical "gotta get the whiskers and the highlight in the leopard's eye" photos.
As much as I enjoyed the article (and the shooting and procedure tips) I also agree with Sekoya that Mark's comparative equipment views aren't particularly useful. Most highly skilled, professional wildlife photographers use Nikon and Canon pro gear, and do quite well with it...wouldn't you say? If Mark simply doesn't like it, that's fine. But to suggest that it's anything other than excellent gear (and that he wasn't handicapped by not having it) is just not right.
On Bernard's comment, I think he's correct for those few people who print very large and very professionally, but most people -- even those who go on once-in-a-lifetime safaris -- may never actually print at all, but will look at their photos on video screens. Of those who do print, I would suspect a large majority never go beyond 13x19 or so, and really don't have plans to publish the photos commercially. If you fall into that category, Panasonic equipment makes great sense. And it even works for most publication (typical magazines, web use, etc.) I have a bunch of Panasonic equipment, purchased for its size, and for daytime street use, but I also have Nikon and Pentax gear. If I were going on Safari, I'd probably take a couple of D7000s for the combination of relatively light weight, high picture quality and good low-light response.
I certainly would not take a single Leica S2, not so much because of usability issues, as because on that kind of trip, where equipment does get banged around a bit, I'd want a back-up body and perhaps some backup lenses.
