This is a moral question. This is an imaginary
situation, but I think it
is  interesting to decide what one would do.

You are in the Midwest and there is a huge flood in progress. Many homes
have been lost, water supplies compromised and
infrastructures destroyed.

Let's say that you're a photographer out getting still pictures for a news
service, traveling alone, looking for particularly poignant scenes. You
come  across the Reverend Jessie Jackson who has been swept away by the
floodwaters. He is hanging on to a tree limb and is about to go under.

You can either put down your camera and save him, or take a Pulitzer Prize
winning photograph of him as he loses his grip on the limb. So, here's the
question - and think carefully before you answer the question below....







Which lens should you use?

Nice one there Archoo!     [beer]

The Portrait lens, I will be selling posters at
gunshows![smoke]

I would use a ZOOM lense combined with a motorized camera drive so I could snap a lot of photos quickly. The Zoom Lense would allow me to get different shots..from far away to close ups of Jesse's panic stricken mug..

Definately a .28 200mm APO lens -- No use in missing the expression on his face! [:O]

Any lens with crosshairs!

What's the dilemma?

freaking excellent!

Why......the one inside my Comp ML/2 of course!

Nah.

Can you throw rocks so you don't have to hang around so long.

maybe tickle him with a long stick

Telephoto...

next question?

For that answer, I'd ask Jesse:

"Can I [i]lens[/i] you a hand?"

I'd try skipping a few rocks...
Maybe crack him in the nuts...
Then throw him a short rope with a noose.

I'd put down the camera, otherwise he'd never let go. Jesse wouldn't give up a good photo opportunity.