Other/Uncategorized Corfield Periflex of the 1950s

Other Screw mount bodies/lenses
Why dopey? the idea was a low-cost second body for screw Leica users, at a time when import controls made new Leicas prohibitive and second-hand ones were incredibly expensive. The periscope was a LOT cheaper to build than a coupled rangefinder, and an ingenious idea: the very opposite of dopey, I'd say.

Focusing was very accurate, but difficult, because the mirror wasn't in the centre of the image. The same principle was used in the Peckham Wray.

I've not seen Sir Kenneth for a few years but I'm pretty sure he's still alive, in his early 80s (he was born in 1924). He's a genius, and I always enjoy talking to him.

Cheers,

Roger
 
Commercially dopey,

Commercially dopey,

if I'd been Sir Ken I'd have opted for a rangefinder. Of course the periscope was the feature that drew me to the Corfield-the urge to have something "different":)The same motivation for buying a Finetta 99 ,a Robot and a Minox I guess!
 
cinedux said:
if I'd been Sir Ken I'd have opted for a rangefinder
Click to expand...

You'd have chosen a vastly more complicated, expensive and hard-to-engineer solution? For a low-cost second body?

I do not wish to appear rude, but who is the bigger dope, you or Ken?

Cheers,

R.
 
A periscope?!? You know, I have been (deeply) into photography for over 10 years, am mightily interested in (photgraphic) history, know a fair bit about it as well... but I had NEVER heard about this camera before.

I googled a bit, very intersting stuff!
 
i only live about 3 miles from where they were made in Wolverhampton, they were a fantastic design and are still a great camera. Sir Ken should be honoured by his hometown, but unfortunately Wolverhampton council doesnt seem too proud of any of its historic companies including the Sunbeam car company!
 
Dopey in the nicest way?

Dopey in the nicest way?

Don't want to get bogged down on this one Roger.I'm certainly not critisising Sir K.I guess I was using the Periflex as a primary camera(the way it sold in NZ) and the sprung periscope and need to advance shutter and film seperately probably seemed a bit labour intensive.So...I moved on to a Finetta 99, the spring motor of which advanced film unevenly so you got semi double exposures at times. I concluded the 99 was another ,odd(?) idea! But now I love these old beasties and really enjoy fiddling the knobs.:)
 
cinedux said:
Don't want to get bogged down on this one Roger.I'm certainly not critisising Sir K.I guess I was using the Periflex as a primary camera(the way it sold in NZ) and the sprung periscope and need to advance shutter and film seperately probably seemed a bit labour intensive.So...I moved on to a Finetta 99, the spring motor of which advanced film unevenly so you got semi double exposures at times. I concluded the 99 was another ,odd(?) idea! But now I love these old beasties and really enjoy fiddling the knobs.:)
Click to expand...
Finetta 99? You REALLY ARE a masochist!

Is that the one with the pinched-wire lens mount? Or was that another Finetta?

Cheers,

R.
 
I keep getting diverted onto other ideas - maybe another feature of senility, but I have a Periflex 2 and always mean to do some checking on the focus of my Leica lenses using 'that periscope feature'.
My Periflex takes a bit of winding on and as a result I don't use. It's not the lightest of cameras to heft around but its certainly a conversation piece and fascinating to engineer friends.
Not sure that's really a good reason to hang onto it but .... it makes a good contrast to the Werra camera produced at about the same time!
 
I hate to say it but I had one first time around and was irritated by the periscope. I could never find what I wanted to find and focus on. Probably because of the small angle of view. Perhaps a spot marked on the view-finder would have made a vast improvement.

On the other hand, once focused it took very nice pictures and the lens was excellent, from memory.

Regards, David
 
I had a Periflex (used) while at University in the UK in the early sixties. I shot several commercial jobs (record covers) with it, and while it was kind of a funky process to focus, the Wray lens, a Lumax f1.9, was very good and would focus to less than 2 feet.

In a fit of nostalgia I recently acquired a Periflex Gold Star in perfect working order - and I see now how very solidly built they were. I am presently running a film through it...

Bill
 
I bought a Periflex 'Gold Star' in 1960 as my first 'good' camera (I'd previously used a Kodak model 'D' box camera). I had just completed my first year at university and it took me nearly two months of hard graft during the summer vacation, as a packer in the Boots warehouse in Heywood, at 2/8d an hour, to pay for it - it cost £45 including the ERC IIRC, and, as was traditional at the time, the Manchester shopkeeper threw a 20 exposure roll of Agfacolor into the deal.

The periscope focussing was automated (it lowered as you wound on and was raised automatically as the shutter was released) on this model, and worked well. I took some good photos with this camera - especially using the then-new 160 ASA High Speed Ektachrome. It came with a 50mm f2.4 Lumax lens which I replaced with a Leitz 50mm f1.5 Summarit about a year later when these were being remaindered at around £50 each because the Summilux had appeared...

I eventually sold the Gold Star (with its original lens) in late 1961 to help finance the purchase of a Leica M2 body - the balance of the cost being my combined Christmas and 21st birthday present for that year... I bought the M2 from Dollands on Deansgate in Manchester, and that time I got a 36 exposure Kodachrome...

I'd be happy to use a Periflex Gold Star, 2A or 3A again just for old time's sake - they handled well and their only real foible was that the gap between frames increased as you got towards the end of a roll due to the mechanics of the wind-on system. The shutter was also suspect for long-term use, being prone to 'tapering' at the higher speeds - which is, I believe, why the Gold Star only went up to 1/300 sec.

The later Periflexes, incidentally, including the Gold Star, were made in Northern Ireland (I think in Ballymena) a move made about 1959, when the Corfield company was looking to expand and needed bigger premises - there was probably a government grant involved as well, as inducement to move to an area of high unemployment. Unfortunately, the Government also relaxed the import regulations on cameras about 1960 and small companies like Corfield were swept away by the rising tide of Nikons, Canons and Pentaxes...
 
Last edited:
Periflex 3b

Periflex 3b

I was in London at the end of last week and browsed a number of camera shops.

London Camera Exchange, in the Strand, had a nice-looking Periflex 3b in their second-hand display, complete with its original 50mm f2.4 Lumax. There was also a Sun 135mm lens as part of the 'kit'.

They were asking £299

I was tempted, but...!
 
larchen said:
i only live about 3 miles from where they were made in Wolverhampton, they were a fantastic design and are still a great camera. Sir Ken should be honoured by his hometown, but unfortunately Wolverhampton council doesnt seem too proud of any of its historic companies including the Sunbeam car company!
Click to expand...
I live even closer than you then! No, the council aren't too hot on these things. There are some tributes to local personalities and industry, Sunbeam included, on the railway station overbridge, if you've ever seen them...there are also some decorations near to St John's retail park, in a similar theme.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom