The Imperfect Perfex? Candid Camera Company’s 1940 Perfex Fifty-Five

[Hunter_Compton]

In the late 1930s, there were numerous attempts by American manufacturers to produce a rangefinder camera to compete with German imports the likes of Leica or Contax but at a much-reduced cost. The Argus C3 is perhaps the best well-known outgrowth of this trend, and the only model which was truly able to weather the post-war influx of cheaper imports. Other manufacturers whose were not able to sustain production in the post-war era either due to competition or poor management, included Clarus with their MS-35, Universal with their Mercury II and Perfex. Larger corporations like Kodak and Bell and Howell were able to survive, but their high-end American 35mm rangefinders were not sustainable in the post-war market.


During this short period immediately before and after the Second World War, American 35mm rangefinder production was at its most diverse. The Candid Camera Corporation based out of Chicago introduced their first 35mm rangefinder in 1938 in the form of the Perfex Speed Candid which was a very blocky and ungainly camera. The revised model 44 that superseded it in 1939 was both cosmetically and mechanically redesigned. The model 55 of 1940 was largely similar to the 44, but had an updated slow speed mechanism that is reported to be more reliable than its predecessor is.

On paper, the Perfex 55 has a list of features that is competitive with if not better than a Leica IIIc:


-Cloth Focal Plane Shutter B, 1 - 1/1250

-Internal M-Sync Flash with Hot Shoe

-Removable Back for Film Loading

-Film Advance Mechanism allows Cassette-to-Cassette Film Advance

-Wide Base (90mm) Split Image Rangefinder

-Interchangeable 38mm Screw Mount Lenses

-Integral Extinction Type Light Meter


My Perfex 55 was bought for the whopping sum of $9 from the auction site. It needed a full CLA, the leather replaced and has some pitting of the chrome. However, the shutter curtains were in good shape except for exactly two pinholes which were easily fixed with some black acrylic paint. I did require some assistance in reassembling the shutter gearing and am thankful to Rick Van Nooij for his input and Rick Oleson for his technical notes.


But how does the Perfex stand up to its claims? Well, the first thing you notice about the Perfex is its weight. With the Wollensak f/2.8 Velostigmat mounted and a roll of film loaded, the camera weighs in at a whopping 1.75 pounds or just short of 800 grams. It certainly has a solid feel to it due to its cast and machined alloy construction. In spite of the heavy weight, the camera actually feels really good in the hands. No weird hand-holding techniques or protrusions on this one. The shutter button looks to be oddly placed atop the shutter speed dial, but it doesn’t feel weird to place your index finger across the winding knob to actuate it. The shutter release is easy to depress and the shutter is quite quiet in operation with only a small “snick” at the end of its travel.

One of the evident ergonomic problems of the design apparent to me is that the left rangefinder window is so placed as so that your middle finger occludes it when you have your index finger on the shutter button. Not a huge problem, and I have found that it seems to work best if you focus on holding the camera with your left hand while moving the right to focus and depress the shutter.


The focusing helix is very smooth to operate. I have heard some malign the screw mount of the Perfex because it can unscrew when trying to focus using the grasping ring on the lens. All I can say is that I did not have a problem on my example, perhaps because I ensured that the focusing helix was properly cleaned and lubricated while the screw mount for the lens was clean and dry. There are some problems with having a screw mount where the lens rotates, but I did not find that setting the aperture was majorly inconvenient on the Perfex. There are 3 aperture scales set around the circumference of the lens so it is not necessary to turn the camera over to hunt for the scale depending on the focus distance.


Lenses on this camera are interchangeable in theory, but have an infinity adjustment and need to be adjusted to the body they are used on.


The view inside the viewfinder is…distinct. I had to admire the simplicity of the rangefinder when servicing it, it is only two mirrors and a pivoting arm, so it works very well considering how simple it is. That said, the view inside the viewfinder is different from most other rangefinders I have seen. In technical terms it is a split-mage rangefinder. However, the view you see is much closer to a co-incident image rangefinder in geometry as you still have a wide view of the scene around the rangefinder mirror in the Perfex.


Loading film is easy with a removable back as opposed to a bottom loader such as a Leica. I am not sure what purpose is served by having a removable film take up spool allowing the use of cassette-to-cassette film advance. Seeing that no 35mm was ever offered in this form that I am aware of, but it is a feature I suppose. The film rewind button on the front is convenient and easy to use.


Setting the shutter speed is a bit tricky. The knob has to be lifted and set into place before the film is wound on and the higher speed markings are very close together.


I found that the extinction light meter built-in to the camera to be less than useful. I was using a GE DW-68 meter for all of my shooting and found that trying to use the extinction meter and calculator on the back of my camera resulted in it suggesting 3-4 stops of overexposure on average. I later found out the speeds listed on the camera are Weston and not ASA, but this would not explain the difference in exposure suggestion. Perhaps the graduated ND filter in my meter strip has faded over time.


One other thing I should mention is that the design of the Perfex is not conducive to trying to squeeze extra shots on a roll. When you reach the end of the roll, the stop feels similar to when the advance stops automatically. The shutter will cock partially and can be released and the result is an underexposed frame that partially overlaps the previous frame.


The Wollensak 50mm f/2.8 Velostigmat lens was a very popular offering from Wollensak during this period. It is a simple triplet, but shows good edge sharpness at f/8 and smaller. At wider apertures, it shows swirly bokeh characteristic of this type of lens. Film was Kodak Tri-X 400 developed in HC-110B:

1/100 f/11:

1/100 f/11:

1/1250 f/4:

1/200 f/5.6:

1/100 f/5.6:

1/50 f/8:

So, is the Perfex an American Leica? No, of course not. However, I think that it is a still a half-decent camera in its own right and it did originally sell for much less than a Leica or Contax.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Very interesting summary. You did well with your Tri-X examples. My father bought a Perfex around 1940 or 1941. In his diary, he mentioned how he planned to buy one, but I did not see a follow-up note on what model or what he paid. He used it throughout the war until around 1947 or 1948, when it was stolen in a car burglery. He only had one lens as far as I know. In 1949, he replaced it with a Leica IIIC, which I am still using. Here is an example from Manhattan, taken on a Kodak Nitrate film stock. The date was about 1942.

 

[StepheKoontz]

I recently picked up a very clean Detrola 400, an american made rangefinder/leica copy. I became interested in finding one having seen it in a 1940 Sears camera catalog. I collect Sears Tower brand cameras and with some research discovered this is a super rare camera with only around 800 made. Many had issues with the rangefinder mirror becoming unglued in the summer heat and were returned, then they went out of business, so the number "in the wild" is probably much lower. I haven't shot any film with it yet but the sample I got does work and while not mint, is pretty clean. I can say my Leica IIIa is a MUCH nicer and smoother operating camera. It's not even in the same league quality wise but it is a nice looking design.

 

[GRHazelton]

Interesting that the Perfex used a 38mm lens mount, thus shutting a buyer out of using any contemporary Leica lenses - assuming the flange to film distance was the same. Thanks for the post and the user report.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

Interesting that the Perfex used a 38mm lens mount, thus shutting a buyer out of using any contemporary Leica lenses - assuming the flange to film distance was the same. Thanks for the post and the user report.

Pre-war, Leica may have held a patent on the 39mm x 26tpi lens mount. After WWII, 10s of Russian and Japanese companies used this mount, but pre-war, only E. Leitz?

 

[StepheKoontz]

Interesting that the Perfex used a 38mm lens mount, thus shutting a buyer out of using any contemporary Leica lenses - assuming the flange to film distance was the same. Thanks for the post and the user report.

The Dtrola also has a 38mm mount. Leica had patents on 39mm.

 

[Hunter_Compton]

The Detrola 400 definitely has the most similar looking handling to a Leica based on appearance, I have never handled one. There's actually one on eBay right now with about 4 hours left. I was bidding on it early on, but now it's up to $442, too rich for my blood.

As to the lens mount issue, this is something that comes up regularly when discussing American 35mm cameras. Perhaps this makes sense in a modern context where we can look upon the popularity of the 39mm screw mount in the 1950s, however in the late 1930s this was not the universal standard. It is true that prior to the outbreak of WWII Leitz did have a patent on the 39mm screw mount meaning that other manufacturers could not implement it without paying a royalty. However, there are also other factors at play, the Leitz 39mm mount was not yet an established standard, it was tainted with "european-ness" in an era of strong American nationalism. Additionally, American manufacturers were trying to offer cameras at a price point much lower than European imports, hence their target customers would have no reason to buy a camera at a lower price point and then buy a very expensive lens to go with it given the protectionist tariffs in place at the end of the Great Depression.

During WWII, when the US was at war with Germany, we could and did commandeer the intellectual property of enemy alien corporations, look into the history of the Kardon camera if you want to learn more. But also, all civilian manufacture was discontinued as the US transitioned to a wartime economy. So, unless a camera manufacturer had a government contract for cameras, they were producing something else.

At the end of the war, all German patents were voided and put into the public domain as part of war reparations. Hence, Leica no longer had a monopoly on the 39mm screw mount. However, a large number of the other pre-war reasons for avoiding it were still in place.

 

[John Koehrer]

Cassette -> cassette 35mm film = Agfa Rapid made to compete with 126 but 35mm.

 

[Ray Morgenweck]

I go back a bit further with the QRS, but I’ve been very curious about the optional lens offered for that camera. It was made by Graf Lens Co. in South Bend Infiana (the home of Studebaker). Graf also made lenses for the Perfex, an f 3.5 50mm. Any information on Graf?

 

[Hunter_Compton]

There's a limited amount of information on Graf that I can find, perhaps somebody else can contribute more than I can. The company started in the late teens, early twenties as the Graf Lens Company. They later transitioned to the Graf Optical Company, and at some point they were making lenses for Candid and other manufacturers. They offered a f/3.5 50mm Graf Perfex Anastigmat. Now, Graf was bought by Argus in 1936, so they could pursue domestic manufacture of lenses. I suspect most of the Graf lenses seen on Perfex 44 and 55 cameras are left over inventory from Perfex speed candid production as most of the pre-war Perfex 44 and 55 cameras are seen with a Perfex f/2.8 Scienar made by General Scientific, and almost all post-war cameras have Wollensak lenses. Of course, lenses could be changed after sale as well.

I don't know if any auxiliary lenses were actually produced for the Perfex, unlike, say Clarus. The limited availability if they do exist, and the fact that they would need to be fitted to the camera body in use means that interchangeable lenses is more in theory than in practice on a Perfex.

 

[Kth88]

Loading film is easy with a removable back as opposed to a bottom loader such as a Leica. I am not sure what purpose is served by having a removable film take up spool allowing the use of cassette-to-cassette film advance. Seeing that no 35mm was ever offered in this form that I am aware of, but it is a feature I suppose.

Fantastic post, thank you for sharing this! I love seeing that you're using the camera as well.

Just a quick note regarding the cassette-to-cassette film advance: this was actually extremely common in the 1930s, and for a short period of time was the only way that 35mm cameras were offered. Remember that any film in a cassette was still a very novel concept in the 1930s...before that all roll film required the previous roll's spool for take-up use, so the idea of using a receiving spool was the norm, not the exception. Rewinding a roll of film after completing the roll was still a novel concept as well. Virtually all 35mm cameras of the '30s allowed for cassette-to-cassette film transport, and in fact many required it as they were not supplied with rewind knobs. Most high-end 35mm cameras, such as the Contax, were capable of either cassette-to-cassette transport or rewinding film back into the original cassette.

John Koehrer above also correctly mentions that Agfa attempted to introduce a new cassette-to-cassette system in the 1960s as a competitor to Kodak's new self-contained 126 cassette system, but the Agfa approach never took off and was discontinued within a few years.

Great post, thanks again for sharing!