Talk:Argus C3

Untitled
How do you open it and put film in it? There is a release on one end that allows the back to be removed. Film is inserted as in many 35mm cameras.

how much did it cost in 1943? this is REALLY important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.99.219.114 (talk) 03:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what it cost in '43, but in '53 the cost with case and flash was $69.50 K-111 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:23, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I bought one new at the local drugstore in February 1966 for $25. It was bare with no case or flash. I enjoyed it very much and took many nice pictures. I still have the C3 in 2010. I bought a case for it some 6 months later after the original purchase at a camera store. I replaced it with a Nikon F3 in 1986. —Preceding unsigned comment added by W8ye (talk • contribs) 03:28, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

A factory new Argus C3 was bought by my father in California for close to 90 USD in 1956 (and next year he bought a Nikon S2.)

While the enormus popularity of the Argus C3 model and its very prolonged production period are undisputed, the fact was that in those days a Japanese Nikon S series rangefinder camera (derived from the German Contax) was way more advanced and precise. People called the Argus C3 "the brick" because it is very heavy, square shaped and rudimentary; in Japan, it was called "the Lunchbox" for its comparatively large size and clumsy arrangement. When the Argus was still using a much slower f 1:3.5 "standard" lens, the Nikons were available with much faster f 1:1.4 or at least a very good quality f 1:2 50 mm lens, a bayonet mount, several interchangeable lenses with its accesory viewfinders and a much faster (1/1000 sec) shutter speed; and the rangefinder or telemeter was much much more precise that the too closely spaced components in the Argus rangefinder. The rapid frame advance lever permitted fast scenes to be covered, in comparison, the Argus is much slower. And the Nikons were not much more expensive than the Argus. In retrospective, is appears that the company philosophy was something like "if it still sells, why bother in advancing the design" mantra. Today companies that do not kept up their R&D are long gone, but advancing firms are still going strong. amclaussen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.100.180.19 (talk) 20:08, 10 May 2011 (UTC)