>>3081106So can I challenge a bit here? Both require possible traveling, being in remote area, bad conditions, non-camera related gear etc.
But both also require pre-planning combined with a bit of luck. You can go to an area that should be dark on a night that should be clear and any number of things could go wrong, just like you can go to an area where XYZ random animal frequents and NOT get the jerks to fly over or whatever. The level of difficulty scales with the level of exoticism. Sure a cheetah is waaaaay cooler than a beaver, just like a glacier is waaaaay cooler than a green rolling hill.
I can concede that wildlife can and most often does include wildly more expensive gear and sometimes you have to paint your skin like a redneck and spray yourself with deer pee, but to say that that are vastly different in terms of outings to keeper ratio might be a stretch.
To be clear, i dont have a dog in the race here, i have done both as a hobbiest, but i find the most fulfillment shooting people, not things. A camera is secondary to me because i like hiking and being in the wild. I shoot people because i love people and the relationships and stories that they have.
