the celt 2 Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Ebay item number 220322660799. Lots of money for an Argus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doug grosjean Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 No wonder there's no bids.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walter_degroot Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 what gets me is a 0.99 lightweight item and $13.00 shipping. what is he coung to do, take a taxi? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 And the RF doesn't even work, what a deal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmanley Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 If you look close you'll see the super rare black finish is flaking off revealing it's just a painted regular one. He said he bought it because he liked the black finish, I guess the guy that painted it liked black too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_mareno Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 The seller is quite a liar, ain't he? A black Argus. Well, you can see it's been spray painted. Probably w/ the cheapest paint he could find too. I like how they sprayed the lens gears and it's rubbing off! This is actually the infamous PhotoArsenal seller under one of several aliases. I really wish they would kick this seller off the site, or someone would sue them for selling fakes. They are known for selling fakes and forgeries, as well as charging 10 times what something should be worth. Whatever description they print up is what ever they made up in their heads. Probably the worst seller on that site, although they have a lot of competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 I looked at the rest of the listings currently on the site. Some prices look decent until you read the description carefully and discover that a "few" parts of the diaphragm are "out of place", and so forth in each description. The gods only know what is <i>not</i> being disclosed. <i>Rare</i> is certainly the word! Not surprisingly, everything is sold "as is". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longname Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Isn't this one the O.S.S. version that the government gave to secret agents when they were on vacation? Excellent! It looks like whoever did it did it with a sharpie or a marker. The purplish hue to it gives that impression. They sure did a clean job with the lettering on the body and dials though, but I guess if you stand to make a huge profit on something might as well put effort into it. And here I was all this time with a house full of sharpies and a large debt... He does have some excellent Christmas decor though, but it's probably just a painted grenade with the pin missing.. and sold as-is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmanley Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Some other things to note: The shutter release is jammed down and probably won't even work. The lens with the deep knurling goes on the model with the round viewfinder rear lens. This black painted one has the rectangle viewfinder and should have the lens with the fine knurling. This isn't even the right lens for the camera. It was built up from junk parts. That's why the rangefinder gear doesn't match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmanley Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Ok I found some pictures. Here is the infamous "Black" lens and notice the deep knurling on the barrel and the viewfinder rear lens. This is the body that "Black" lens should be on.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmanley Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Here is the infamous "Black" body and notice the fine knurling on the barrel and the rectangle viewfinder rear lens. This is the body of the infamous "Black" c-4 with the right lens. It is a built up camera form parts of two models that don't fit and the camera shutter is jammed up, and being sold as is, no return.... What an ass that guy is<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmanley Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Why doesn't someone report that fraud to Ebay and site this post as proof that he is selling broken, mismatched parts, and defaced with black paint junk as a prototype... TOTAL FRAUD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmanley Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 I just notice that he also took the heavy knurled knobs that match the lens and switched them too. What a jerk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmanley Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 I just sent the seller this comment. I'll let you know if there is a reply. "Please change the listing to JUNK Camera Parts. These are mismatched parts from two different models, that's why the rangefinder gear doesn't match. The lens and knobs are off of a different version than the body. This is not some highly collectable camera but rather a black painted abortion of junk parts. Ebay doesn't take too kindly to misrepresented items. It also looks like the shutter release is jammed down?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_medin Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Infamous PhotoArsenal seller? I've seen that name attached to some extremely overpriced items, but are they misrepresented also? I wouldn't know much about them, because I never buy items that are overpriced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donnie_strickland Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 I don't know if it's a fraud camera or not, but it is normal for the C4 shutter button to be down like that. It stays down after you take a picture, and rises when the film is wound for the next shot. At least that's what my C4 does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig_supplee Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Maybe you should check this site out. I have been there before looking up info, and it seems accurate. It just might be a real version. http://www.cameraquest.com/arggeiss.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig_supplee Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Go to the bottom of the page for the black Argus. Same purple/black color as in the ebay ad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j.ed_baker Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 I have handled one of the known black C-4s and this camera is very similar. The top and bottom plates are a purplish black. As to the rangefinder, an "uncoupled" rangefinder is not uncommon on the C4/44 series of Argus. The rangefinder assembly slips on its mounting screws and the gears no longer mesh correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmanley Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 You can see on this close up of the camera in question that it is paint. If there really was an Army version that was anodized , someone went to great lengths to try to copy that color with paint. while they had the paintbrush wet they painted the flash shoe gold and even the rangefinder gear teath were painted with the gold paint, I guess to dress it up alittle more.You can see the chrome where the paint has flaked off on the front right and paint wrinkled up at the top back edge. I can see why he made his photos dark and says AS IS, NO RETURN. If anyone thinks this is real, you better hurry up and buy it.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmanley Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Maybe the lens was genuine and they tried to make a body to look real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sg_adams Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 Yuck ! What a mess. But don't let the listing bother you too much unless you have spare time to pursue it. I see all sorts of the Graflex stuff I look at way over-priced and re-listed repeatedly, some of it up for seemingly years. Someone told me the other day they bought a TV or something like that and received a cinder block. Yes I said cinder block. I couldn't help laughing. There's some good folks selling on the site, but like anywhere else in life, there is everything else too. My take on it is don't bid more than can be afforded to lose just in case. wePray is the reason I learned to fix my Graphics and shutters etc... Not to mention a couple 35mm RFs. And I sent a number of lenses and cameras back on occasions. The only camera I ever had sent back, a well used but refrubished, working and tested Century Graphic Special (Gray with red bellows and Rodenstock 101 Graflar), was returned because the buyer, checked out by my own superior detective skills, was buying camera stuff on wePray and trying to re-sell at higher prices. Had the nerve to call me names and all before I could even respond. Wigged out I guess. So I did my little research and unloaded such an appropriate and persuasive retort that I don't think I have ever been so thouroughly apologized to. He payed what it was worth, probably less, but could not have sold for very much more to make it worth while. But after a good butt kissing I just decided sure, send it back; I'm a nice guy ( I am quite sure I scarred him after his original uncontrolled email outburst.). I still have the camera three years later; it still works fine, but I haven't been interested in selling one of my refurbished Graphics since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmanley Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 The Army versions of the Kodak and Bosley were green or green and black. Plain grey for the Airforce. They all had military designators, such as KS-6, KE-12, Ph324, Ph324A KE-7(1), KE-7A M4, etc, and were marked with a plate or engraved with some type of us property desigination. This Black, " said to be ", has no such designators or markings. And from the discussions by Lynn Jones, the military had some strict rules about supply and spare parts, before any procurements were made, which put a lot of camera companies out of business. How could this be a military anything, with only one " said to be " picture by Philip Sterritt, and no supporting military documents or designators, or markings on the camera ? If there are in fact only 5 of these cameras that were ever made, I'll bet that they were all made by the same guy, and aren't military at all. And maybe there aren't 5 of them, but only this one we see here, that used to belong to Phillip Sterritt ? P.S. The seller answered me by reference to the black one like his on the argus collector site which is the same picture "Said to be" by Phillip Sterritt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Currie Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 I'm curious, since he shows the serial number, whether that is any clue to its age. My C-four is about a hundred thousand past that one, but I don't know how many were made, or where the number sequence starts. The contention that the black one is early, or a prototype, should be indicated by a low serial number, so if someone here has a garden variety one with a lower number, that would be interesting. It looks as if the back on the black one is correct for the lens and the knobs, but the top cover appears to belong to the later version, which would explain the non meshing rangefinder. It's certainly at least suspicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffmanley Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 The only "Black" cameras I can see, that were ever issued, were to the Navy. Aparently Phillip Sterritt is a member here, and maybe he can show up and tell us where he gets his information and if this is the same camera he had the photograph of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now