In Praise of the C-Forty-Four

[Rick_van_Nooij]

<p>Nice review of the C-44 Rick,<br>

Mine looks nowhere near as nice as yours. It has someones SSN scratched into rear of the top plate.<br>

I don't have to worry about the lens mount as I've only got the Cintagon lens that came with it. Shutter release is VERY smooth, if a bit loud. Winding to the next frame takes a number of turns as I recall. But your photo's prove the lens is indeed very sharp and renders very nice colors.<br>

Mine desperately needs exercise :-|</p>

[doug grosjean]

<p>At the estate sale, I was struck by how nice and smooth the C44's controls felt, and the camera's shape and rounded corners, compared to an Argus C3 Brick. The C44 feels very refined in comprasion, extremely so.</p>

[Troll]

<p>Nice camera.<br>

What does anyone know about the f:2.8/50mm lens? Is it a triplet, or a tessar type 4 element, or something else?</p>

[Andy Collins]

<p>Excellent write-up along with excellent pictures as usual Rick. And a good choice of camera to review, as well! I'm pretty fond of the C4 and C44 cameras as I have found them to be good performers, but they do look rather crude around the area of the hotshoe. I enjoy using the C44R but I've read that the rewind crank has a tendency to break, although I never had that experience. However crude certain parts may feel, as Doug said it's quite refined compared to the C3, although that one's fun to use too. Thanks for another great post, Rick!</p>

[david_smith110]

<p>Wonderful review and photos as always Rick. I would like to take a moment to thank you for all the time you have spent posting up information and pics of the old cameras you have. Since I have joined photo.net and gained familiarity with the quality of your posts I have really looked forward to seeing a new <strong>Rick Drawbridge</strong> article show up in CMC. I know then I'm in for a feast of historical and photographic significance.</p>

<p>Thank you again sir. Maybe this post should be entitled "<em>In praise of the Rick Drawbridge photo.net archive legacy.</em>" :)</p>

[Julio Fernandez]

<p>Another beautiful writeup and photos. I look forward to your posts on old cameras, always learn a lot from them<br>

A question about your point that "The C-44 is a continuation of a long line of Argus rangefinders of similar pattern, and the first with interchangeable lenses". Wasn't the C3 (Brick) an earlier model, and didn't it have interchangeable lenses? (I am far from an Argus expert , anyway).</p>

 

[j.ed_baker]

<p>The C-3 did precede the C-44 and did have interchangeable 35 & !00mm lenses in addition to the standard 50mm. The C-3 also was still in production after the C-44 was discontinued.<br /> The one thing to watch with all the metal-bodied Argus cameras (ColorCamera,Markfinder,C-4,& C-44) is the shutter drive link tends to be fragile. Any of these should be closely watched for any hesitation in the shutter operation and the shutter flushed of migrated oil and grease. Additional information can be found on the Argus Collector's Group website. http://www.arguscg.org/</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Thanks for the responses! You're quite right, <strong>Julio</strong> and <strong>J.E.D. Baker</strong>, I didn't word my comment on the interchangeable lens issue at all well, in that I was referring to this development of the Argus rather than "the Brick". Interesting to learn that the C3 continued in production after the demise of the C-44's, <em>that</em> I didn't know.</p>

<p>Thanks, <strong>Rick</strong> and <strong>Andy</strong>; I'm a novice when it comes to Argus cameras, though I'd love to own more. As <strong>Tony</strong> said, they're hard to come by, downunder. Glad to hear you feel the same as most Kiwis about the footy, Tony! I'm interested to hear how you got on with your deliberations regarding that tempting C-44, <strong>Doug</strong>...I don't think the C-44's picture-taking ability gets too much criticism, <strong>Dave G</strong>, but there seems to be lots of putting-down when it comes to the design and ergonomics, which I felt to be a little unjustified.</p>

<p>The lens is supposed to be a four-element "Tessar-type", <strong>Bill</strong>, presumably 4 elements in 3 groups, though I won't swear to it. I can't find too much to dislike about the lens, <strong>Wayne</strong>. Thanks for the high praise, <strong>David</strong>...(blush...). It's nice to know my potterings are appreciated! I'm pleased you liked the post, <strong>Steve</strong>, <strong>Rod</strong>, <strong>Chuck</strong>, <strong>JDM</strong>, <strong>Mike</strong> and <strong>Donnie</strong>, and thanks for your comments.</p>

[doug grosjean]

<p>Hi Rick, I went back to the estate sale today, as usually things are marked down on the last day. Alas, the C44 was gone. Oh well, you win some and you lose some.</p>

[richard_]

<p>always liked the sound of the shutter on the c44. A fine camera and excellent shots.</p>

[dave_g1]

<p>Yep, Mansfield bought Argus in 1962. <br>

At that time all of the cameras except for the C3 and Autronic were discontinued. In fact camera production ended in Michigan altogether, and production was moved to Chicago (I think). <br>

This was when Argus began importing cameras from Mamiya and rebranding them. <br>

When Sylvania bought Argus from Mansfield, all Argus camera production ended in the U.S. (circa 1966)</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>Good old flat head screws, now that's American for ya. These along with the Kodak Signet 80, were the last American interchangeable lens rangefinder cameras ever made. Nice pics, Rick. Party's Over and Textures get my vote. Thanks for the good write up!</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p><strong>Richard</strong>, it's a quite distinctive sound that the shutter makes, I'd agree, somewhere between a snap and a click, but not too obtrusive. Thanks, <strong>Louis, </strong>I'd love a Signet outfit (I seem to recall you have a nice collection), but I'd have to import one. They're practically unknown in my part of the world; very few quality US cameras seem to have their way down under. Thanks for the additional information, <strong>Dave G</strong>; I touched on the subject of later Argus cameras in a 2009 post.</p>

<p><a href="00S5BC">http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00S5BC</a></p>

[bwbob]

<p>Rick, I would like to compliment you on your informative discussion of the C44. More importantly, at least to me, was the beautiful simplicity of you images each of which can tell a story. Very much enjoy your posts. Bob Rene</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Thanks <strong>Robert</strong>, comments such as yours make the effort worthwhile. I suspect we share a similiar eye for a pic!</p>

[john carter]

<p>Good write-up on the Argus C-44, thanks.</p>

[samuel_langerhans]

<p>I want to also thank you for the write up and beautiful shots. I actually have a C44 on it's way via the 'bay from a reputable seller I have dealt with in the past with great success. Do you guys not have access to ebay's USA website? I can easily navigate to the AUS. version of the site to find things from down under from time to time. The cameras are not rare and easy to find when I check.<br>

By the way, <a href="http://www.ebay.jp">www.ebay.jp</a> will take you to ebay's global website where your search will land items from everywhere. I hope I'm not breaking any photonet rules by posting the website.<br>

I tend to think that the Argus line is one of those things that may be trash-talked now, but will become favorites in the future. They are well made, remain affordable (for now), and from what I've seen, take very nice photos. It's refreshing to see someone praise the name instead of just bashing like the rest of the photo-elite. I not saying that it's just as good as a super high end camera, but IMO much of the Argus line deserves more than it gets. Thanks again!</p>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Thanks <strong>Paul</strong>, appreciation is always appreciated! I'd agree with your musings on the Argus line; I've subsequently acquired a couple more Argus cameras, including a very nice Argoflex, and I like the heft and build quality. And yes, I feel it's very important to keep an open mind on the attributes (or otherwise) of the cameras from our past, and not just regurgitate the opinions of the web gurus...</p>

<p>I do shop globally through Ebay, but freight costs to New Zealand make many less valuable items un-viable. US sellers seem to be particularly demanding in this respect, (and we won't even talk about Canada), with a camera such as the C44 often being quoted at around $45 freight. Odd, when I can send stuff to the US for half that!</p>

[bob_grosh]

<p>I have several C4's and C-44r's.<br>

I love them for their heft. No worry about camera shake. All that mass just doesn't shake easily.<br>

I wouldn't say the shutter is noisy, instead, I'd say it has the sound of authority. You definitely know it operated. I've even gotten used to the sound it makes at each speed. As soon as I snap the shot, I know if I messed up and set the wrong speed because I can hear the difference between 1/50th and 1/100th. On thanksgiving day the whole family gathered at Cracker Barrel. I took out my C44r with the Argus 5 inch polished flash attachment and inserted a Press 25 flashbulb. As soon as I stood up a waitress noticed the big bulb and asked if that was a "real" flash bulb. I thought she might object to me setting it off in the crowded restaurant, but instead she asked a dozen questions and admired the camera. I had to explain when it was made, where I got it, where to get film , where to process it, and what to use to scan the slides. Once I explained that an 80 dollar wolverine scanner produced 22 megapixel digital images she was happy and I finally snapped a photo of our group. Those old Argus cameras aren't some piece of plastic junk like most modern cameras. The second you hand one to someone, they recognize it's the Mercedes of cameras.<br>

Nearly every time you take a flash picture in a crowd, you aren't just taking a snapshot, you are holding an event. I've even gotten applause after the bulb fires.</p>