The lowly Argus C3 as a combat camera

[Dan Deary]

<p>I would like to recommend the new HBO documentary “Underfire: The Untold Story Of PFC. Tony Vaccaro.” It’s not for the faint of heart as some of the images are hard to take. The camera is discussed briefly in the beginning but the story is all about Tony Vaccaro as an infantryman in WWII who multi-tasked as a soldier with an M1 and a photographer with a small camera. He was never part of the Signal Corps; he did it on his own. He took about 3000 pictures! Who knew what that camera was capable of?</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>The Argi (plural of Argus for the afficionados) are really significant in the history of popular photography. Leica and Contax may have made 35mm possible for the elite$, but far more people were introduced to 35mm and Kodachrome slides through the Argus A, and even more so, the Argus C-3. One might even ask if Kodachrome was a commerical success because of these Argus products more than any others?</p>

<p>An interesting ebook on the "35mm for the Proletariat" can be downloaded at<br>

http://theargusa.com/Book.htm</p>

<p>Nostalgia for the "brick" is indulged at http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00XdN7</p>

[james_styles]

The Argus may have been popular in the U.S. but in Europe it was outsold by German made Kodaks . I am probably

going to upset a few folks but I find them a bit crude in design and manufacture, but at least they were cheap.

[Dan Deary]

<p>Yes the Argus C3 is crude, ugly and sometimes infuriating to use. German Kodaks are indeed a better camera. I have gone to a lot of garage sales, thrift stores and camera shows and when I inspect the C3's about 95% of the time they still work. Not sure the German Kodaks' could do the same. Bear in mind about 2 million of these were made over the course of roughly 30 years. It is a tough camera that can take a lot of abuse and that is one reason Tony Vaccaro chose this camera.</p>

[charles_stobbs3]

Kodak made several low budget 35mm cameras herein the USA. One, the Kodak 35RF ( -

http://kodak.3106.net/index.php?p=210&cam=1302 - )was even uglier than the Argus C3.

[ellis_vener_photography]

My father was an Army PFC AND used an Argus C-3 on Guadalcanal. He also made a crude enlarger out c-ration cans and the lens from binocular optics, and processing trays out of whatever he could find. Mixed his processing chemistry from dry components.

Were the images of Leica, Contax quality? No, but I am glad I have a few of the small prints that survived.

[john_wiegerink1]

<p>My Uncle shot with an old Argus C3 and when we would go visit as kids we would beg him to haul out the old slide projector and give us a show. My aunt would make a big bowl of popcorn and us kids would sit there in a trance. I wouldn't really call the Argus cameras crude. Maybe simple would be a better word. Simple doesn't mean the same as non-capable. Being from Michigan I have run across many Agfa cameras of different varities and they were all "spartan", but very usable. I will admit that they do vary as to optical on film performance. You get a good one and it will surprise you how good a cheap camera can be, but get a bad one and...................well, you understand. QC does and did vary.</p>

[Bill Bowes]

<p>This computer is madding!</p>

 

[Bill Bowes]

<p>My WWII Navy vet father was zapped back into active duty within days of the Korean War outbreak. One of his first PX buys was an Argus C-3, a "real" light meter and a dark yellow filter. Mom got the old Kodak Brownie when he was shipped out to Midway Island. We followed a year later and along with Gooney Birds, planes and other aspects of our life, were the subjects of untold B/W rolls. Later, and well into the 60's came slides. I even used the camera on occasions and believe it started my life long interest in photography. It took over 4 years to scan and put his surviving work into a family collection. How many other millions of GI's & civilians used Le Brick to record their lives? Aloha, Bill</p><div></div>

[rick_drawbridge]

<p>Member made some interesting comments on an Argus thread I facilitated back in 2013.<br>

http://www.photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00bH75?start=0</p>

[Rick_van_Nooij]

<p>The Cintar lens IS an Leitz Elmar copy. Nothing wrong with that. <br /><br />Shame a lot of Vaccaro's work was destroyed/damaged shortly after the War by flood water.</p>

[Dan Deary]

<p>The documentary shows many images were damaged( from a basement flood at the Signal Corps building in 1947) showing water streaks, salvageable enough to tell the story. If anything, it makes the images more haunting and believable. Vaccara worked for the Signal Corps after the war was over for 6 years.</p>

[Rick_van_Nooij]

<p>"Shots of War" and "Entering Germany" are both great books with a selection of his work.</p>