I have a moral question for you. This is an imaginary situation, but I
think it is fun to decide what one would do. The situation:
You are in the Middle East, and there is a huge flood in progress. Many
homes have been lost, water supplies compromised and structures
You are a photographer getting still photos for the CNN news service and
are traveling alone, looking for particularly poignant scenes. You
come across Osama Bin Laden who has been swept away by the floodwaters.
He is barely 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
.Which lens would you use?
I received the same thing in an e-mail and almost wet myself. Too funny.
LOL! I love this site. Especially when you guys are being honest instead of politically correct. As for what lens I would use, which ever lens would best capture his fear, horror, desperation, cowardice, and dispair. Then I would give it to the media, free of charge.
If I was there, I would hope to have an assistant. I would have the assistant reach out with a long sturdy pole (since this is hypothetical, I can have an assistant and a long pole) and the assistant would smack his knuckles until he let go. THEN I would take the picture.
And you thought I was going to save him with that pole, didn't you now....? ;) :D
Stay safe, stay low, everybody.
Well now!!! I'm going to go against the current here.
I would drop my camera. I would use every ounce of training, skill and experience to perform a "swift water rescue" of Binnie. After I secured him and rescued him, I would fly him, in the baggage hold, all the way to NY City. There I would take him to Ground Zero and turn him over to my Brothers there. A job completed, I would pick up my camera and attempt to take the Pulitzer Prize photo I would simply call, "Justice Served."