Love for "The Brick" in the Washington Post

Absolutely! I have a Matchmatic which, I'll admit, I bought for the two-tone colour scheme and the traction engine gear rangefinder - they are really quite rare here in the UK - I've seen no more than half-a-dozen, and one of those was on an American WW2 re-enactor's parachute harness - just hope he didn't land on it! I slipped off my bike seat once with it in my coat pocket, got the corner right in the chest as it and I hit the handlebars, drew blood from me, camera unmarked!

They are big, clunky, and counter-intuitive to use, you do need a masochistic streak to enjoy it, but you can get very decent images from the Cintar lens. If it's broken they are built to be taken apart and there's plenty out there for spares. For the price of one, it's well worth risking a go.

I'd add to the above - get a flash, it's a lot easier to grip that way - and turn the cocking lever round so it won't foul your finger. Oh, and avoid the Matchmatic, sorry my camera, but when the light meter dies, the number coupling just becomes confusing.
 
I'd hazard a guess that at least 20% of us got our start in in photography with a Argus C-3 either given to us or bought 2nd hand or swiped from our dad (me!).
 
A number of years ago I was teaching a sports photography class, and got tired of my students complaining that their pictures weren't good enough because they didn't have a "professional" sports photographer's camera and lenses. So I found an Argus C3 on the auction site for under $20 and went out and shot a high school basketball game, just to show them they didn't need the latest and greatest to get the shots.


ArgusC3a.jpg​
ArgusC3b.jpg​

It's a cute little camera, but not one I'd like to use every day. The boxy, squared off, brick like shape just doesn't fit my hands comfortably.

Best,
-Tim
 
"It's a cute little camera, but not one I'd like to use every day. The boxy, squared off, brick like shape just doesn't fit my hands comfortably." Probably why the case has the rounded ends -- which adds close to two inches onto the width.

I guess I need to go find one of these!
 
I have another Smena, they just keeps on coming to me. FSU thing.
I have M4-2 as well, can't let it go, it is proud to be Canadian thing.
I would be an American RFFer I would get Argus for sure :)
 
My Dad had a C3, although he took more photos with a CC earlier on. I remember seeing it sit on the mantle just before he sold it. When he passed away, I inherited all his camera stuff, and in amongst the items was the box for the camera.

Anyway, I got hooked on C3's myself, and once people knew I would use one all of the sudden they started giving me the ones they had, so I have now about a dozen of them, maybe even a C2 in there somewhere. There was a fad going around where one flips the middle element on the 50mm Cintar for that center-sharp look, and I did one for a friend of mine, but never felt like doing it to one of my cameras.

I was more interested in trying out the Lithagon 35mm and 100mm lenses, and once again I was gifted a pair with their cases. The 100 is a sweet operator, while the 35 leaves something to be desired, though it worked better with b&w than color film. Then I found the Soligor 135/4.5. That is an amazing lens to mount on the old Brick. You need to cobble up a finder for it though as I've never seen one advertised.

Sample photo with the 135mm f4.5 Soligor:

Solitude Barn at 135mm by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Soligor 135mm f4.5 lens on the Argus C3:

Top View by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Cobbled-up viewfinder mask for the Soligor 135mm f4.5:

Finder Mask for Argus 135mm Soligor by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Later on I used a different model with the meter mount, and converted it for a Leica or other 135mm finder:

Leica VIOOH Finder by P F McFarland, on Flickr

PF
 
farlymac said:
Another thing about the Argus C3, you never had to worry about blasting a hole in the shutter.

PF
Click to expand...

Was out walking this afternoon on a blindingly bright and blisteringly hot day, and had that same thought. I had a Kodak Retina IIIc with me and realized I was instinctively blocking the sunlight from hitting the lens, then realized, "Hey, I'm not carrying a Leica, I don't have to do that."

It's nice to not have to do that.

Best,
-Tim
 
Didn’t Saul Leiter take a majority of his photos with a C3? His photos always had medium format feel to me. Especially the color stuff.
 
My father used a C3 throughout the 1960s, lots of fondly remembered family photos. The 5cm Cintar was a sharp lens, although prone to vignetting in some circumstances. The Argus fell by the wayside when my father bought a Canon FTb.
 
As I've mentioned before, I was a bit disappointed in the performance of the 35mm 1:3.5 Sandmar when using color film, but using b&w with a contrast filter really upped its game.

Argus C3, Sandmar 35mm 1:3.5, Yellow Filter, Kodak 100TMAX

Vacation Bound by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Just remember to remove filter when changing film to color.

Argus C3, Sandmar 35mm 1:3.5, Yellow Filter accidentally, Kodak Gold 100

Oh Well by P F McFarland, on Flickr

Ah, this is better.

Argus C3, Sandmar 35mm 1:3.5, Kodak Gold 100

The Visitor by P F McFarland, on Flickr

PF
 
I have a 1930s C2, and a C3 from 1963. I've searched vainly for a 1966 C3, but as of yet I've never come across one with a serial number that indicates a year of manufacture later than 1964. That final '66 run, if it did in fact happen, must've been very short. I haven't used either camera in years. I have two problems with it: The tiny viewfinder, and the lack of strap lugs. The everyready case is surprisingly compact (compared to some cases out there) but still a bother to leave on the camera. The Cintars are pretty variable in quality. I've had one that was very sharp, and I had one that was so soft in the corners, I have to wonder if they accidentally put one of the elements in backwards at the factory. The shutter in the C3 is a mechanical disaster, a Rube Goldberg contraption, which though it can not be killed by abuse, never worked accurately to begin with. I've read that Argus were well aware that the 1/300 top speed advertised on the dial was a complete fantasy, but for some reason they never renumbered it for a more honest 1/200. Still it's a Classic, and everybody owes it to themselves to run at least one roll through a C3 just for the experience.
 
Thanks raydm6, yours as well.

This thread got me thinking and I dug the old Brick out of storage in the basement. As I thought I remembered, I found a Argus Sandmar Wide Angle 35mm f4.5 lens and mated that with the camera. It's the set up I used for the basketball game above, and for these two below.

Yours truly, with Brick and 35mm lens
ArgusC3.jpg - Click image for larger version Name: ArgusC3.jpg Views: 0 Size: 77.4 KB ID: 4784854​


My buddy who use to work at Subway. Notice the creamy bokeh ;-)
ArgC3a.jpg - Click image for larger version Name: ArgC3a.jpg Views: 0 Size: 102.0 KB ID: 4784856​


Fun times.

Best,
-Tim
 
In the 1970s, I had a book with photos by Duane Michaels. He used an Argus for several years because he said it was easy to do double exposures. A lot of his photo series were done this way. I think he said he owned several at the time. He said he later went to a Nikon F. I don't recall the Nikon F being that easy to make double exposures but it apparently worked for Duane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top