[Pentax Syntax]

Was Argus the reliability brand before Pentax?

Thanks for posting this. I still have my Argus C3 without the flash which died years ago. It was a gift when I was young and now I can appreciate how much it set my dad back in 1958 :-)

[stevebrot]

Was Argus the reliability brand before Pentax?

My dad had an Argus C-3. I will have to ask him what influenced the purchase decision. I suspect that part of the popularity was that it was made in the U.S. and felt sturdier in the hand than similarly-priced Kodak cameras.


Steve

[g026r]

My dad had an Argus C-3. I will have to ask him what influenced the purchase decision. I suspect that part of the popularity was that it was made in the U.S. and felt sturdier in the hand than similarly-priced Kodak cameras.

Wouldn't be surprised if it was also that it had more features than similarly-priced Kodaks. $69.50 in that catalog gets you a coupled-rangefinder camera, the case, the flasholder, and an uncoupled exposure meter. For that price you could alternatively get a coupled-rangefinder Kodak Signet 40 with flasholder, but no case or exposure meter.

(And technically the brick also had interchangeable lenses, even if they weren't very convenient.)

[tuco]

My Argus C4 taken back in 2009 that my parents had. It has a stamped aluminum top and other parts. It feels solid weighing in at 1.62 lb (=7.2N =732g of mass). It needs a CLA - sticking shutter.

[timw4mail]

My Argus C4 taken back in 2009 that my parents had. It has a stamped aluminum top and other parts. It feels solid weighing in at 1.62 lb (=7.2N =732g of mass). It needs a CLA - sticking shutter.

That's a really clean one. But yeah, the first problem with those is always the shutter...

[monochrome]

My father also had a C-3. It is sitting on a Display shelf with the flash attached and the leather case in pieces.next to it. I don’t believe any part of the camera functions.

[Digitalis]

the Scnheider lenses often found attached to Graphic Pacemaker LF cams were justifiably considered the second tier option

The funny thing is when Rollei switched from Zeiss lenses for the Rolleiflex TLR cameras to Schneider, all hell broke loose: for years there were arguments over Carl Zeiss or Schneider and which lenses better. The Schneider lenses were eventually proven to be superior optically to the original Zeiss designs.

On the second hand market the Schneider TLR lenses sell for less than the Zeiss, even though they perform better. The cachet of Carl Zeiss still commands hefty prices .

Schneider lenses are highly regarded in the LF community these days, you hardly ever hear of Zeiss. Kodak lenses are still used to great effect, the old Aero ektars are best admired behind thick leaded glass.

---

Last edited by Digitalis; 11-01-2017 at 07:39 AM.

[g026r]

Speaking of large format, this 1926 ad from another of @Nesster's scans gives a good example of how perspective is everything: the 3"1/4 x 4"1/4 Ica Reflex is advertised as: "Light and compact!", "Speedy!", "Efficient!".

Y'know, this thing:



Which I suppose it was when compared to a lot of the other cameras available at the time.

[Alex645]

The funny thing is when Rollei switched from Zeiss lenses for the Rolleiflex TLR cameras to Schneider, all hell broke loose: for years there were arguments over Carl Zeiss or Schneider and which lenses better. The Schneider lenses were eventually proven to be superior optically to the original Zeiss designs.

I run a school darkroom with 21 enlarger stations that was once exclusively 50mm Nikkors. But when production went to China, and I started getting premature fungus on the Chinese lenses, I started replacing old enlarger lenses with Schneider and Rodenstock. Out of the box, they are very similar, but over time, the Schneider Componon have been less prone to fungus than the Rodenstock Rodagon.

When Nikon moved their enlarger lens production to China (late 90ʻs), I saw less quality in materials and build and remember when Sigma was considered the lesser alternative to the camera brand lens. Even today, I have a hard time erasing my old perception of Sigma.

[gofour3]

he 3"1/4 x 4"1/4 Ica Reflex is advertised as: "Light and compact!", "Speedy!", "Efficient!".

A 1920's P&S camera!

Phil.

[Alex645]

A 1920's P&S camera!

Phil.

I think of the Kodak Brownie as the ultimate P&S...but that would be more like 1900ʻs.

[stevebrot]

I think of the Kodak Brownie as the ultimate P&S...but that would be more like 1900ʻs.

...and 1910s and 1920s and 1930s and 1940s and 1950s and 1960s...The first photographs I ever took were taken on 127 film with a Brownie in the mid-60s.


Steve

[gofour3]

The first photographs I ever took were taken on 127 film with a Brownie in the mid-60s.

Yep same here with my mom's Hawkeye Brownie. (620 film)

Phil.

[ChrisPlatt]

Interesting thread. I was born in 1961 and grew up in a working class neighborhood in suburban Queens, a borough of New York City.
As a child I can't recall ever seeing anyone using an adjustable lens camera, with the exception of the company that yearly came in to our school for portraits and class photos.

My mom had an old Kodak folder (using 620 film perhaps) from high school but no longer used it. She used a cheap Kodak 127 Instamatic-precursor.
Neighbors or relatives would sometimes show vacation or special occasion photos, invariably the characteristic squares from a 126 Instamatic.

I was in junior high and high school in the 1970's when the 35mm photography boom really started. I was one of only a few younger users I saw.
Even then it seemed that it was still a hobby for old men in camera clubs.

Chris

[Digitalis]

he Aeros are a whole different beast entirely, designed for reconnaisance photography andonly sold later as surplus for general photography. They are pretty hot, but due to the inverse square law, the leaded glass is certainly not necessary.

i'm aware of that, but the fact that these lenses, which were made in the 1940s are still outputting a substantial amount of radiation to this day. I have a Kodak commercial Ektar 14cm f/6.3 which is a more normal-ish lens than my favourite Rodenstock 240mm f/5.6 APO- Sironar-S for my 8X10 camera the Kodak is better for portraiture, the APO Sironar is a diffraction limited lens, and is best suited for product/architectural photographic work.

I run a school darkroom with 21 enlarger stations that was once exclusively 50mm Nikkors. But when production went to China, and I started getting premature fungus on the Chinese lenses, I started replacing old enlarger lenses with Schneider and Rodenstock.

That is perculiar, i'm curious as to which mechanism made these lenses more susceptible to fungus, was it really a manufacturing issue or was it an environmental one?