Ricoh 300 Shutter Repair

farlymac

farlymac

PF McFarland
Local time
12:56 AM
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
7,657
Just got done overhauling one of these with a jammed shutter. It's really fun taking a camera that you have no technical literature for, and taking it apart the first time. Well, no, actually it's kind of nerve wracking. The fun part is when it's all back together and working again. I couldn't find much info on these, so either there aren't many around, or they aren't very popular. But it's a well built camera for what market it served, and brand new sold for $59.95 with a flash, and ERC (less than $37 without the flash and case). Their selling pitch was "It does everything the expensive cameras do, except empty your wallet". It was only manufactured for two years starting in 1958, as the 500 and 519 models overtook it, then the rangefinder market went kaput when Nikon came out with the F. It's a very nice looking camera, and I'll be shooting it as soon as the rain stops.

Here's the link to my Flickr page with the particulars:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7699588@N07/sets/72157628972840283/

And a couple photos:


Ricoh 300 Front by br1078phot, on Flickr


Charging Lever Ecentric 2 by br1078phot, on Flickr

I hope no one's upset with the gory shot of tools inside a camera's guts.

PF
 
I have one of these very nicely made cameras.
I've never gotten around to using it, so I'm curious to see your results.

Chris
 
Probably find out Tuesday, after I get the film back. I wasn't very sure about the rangefinder. It at the very least needs the vertical adjusted, and I couldn't trust the distance readings either. It's supposed to be warmer Monday, but most likely raining too.

PF
 
So I thought I'd resurrect this thread -- first, to thank Phil for it, since it was exactly what I needed for my own Ricoh 300. I was actually able to adjust the eccentric that's key to getting the shutter to charge correctly without removing the rangefinder assembly.

But second, I'm curious about how to collimate the lens. I was all set to load a film in the camera when I checked focus with a groundglass and found it's off. Anyone know how to do this on this camera? Phil?
 
I took the rangefinder off to make it easier to clean, and to see how everything was put together underneath.

I may have marked the point that it separated at, Nick. That's really important, as it bottoms out into the mount. If you put it back together using the wrong land in the threads, it will take a few tries to get it right. I also remember taking it out to a parking lot where I could set out some cones at various distances to check the rangefinder adjustment more closely. As long as you can get the rangefinder to agree with the markings on the focus scale at infinity (your target being more than 100ft/31m distant), everything else should be okay. You can also set the vertical while doing this, as you have to have the top off the camera anyway.

PF
 
Phil, as far as I can tell, there is only one point where the front lens group will thread in -- only one land in the threads. (Truth be told, I don't know why that would make a difference anyway, since it's a unit focusing lens rather than front group focusing.)

The chrome lens surround immediately behind the name ring (it has RIKEN engraved on it) seems to prevent threading the front lens group all the way home. In any event, you can't screw in the front group too far, because then it's too snug to enable the shutter speed ring to turn.

So right now the lens name ring and front lens group are hand tightened only, and focus at the film plane at f2.8 is definitely not the best. This simply doesn't seem like how Ricoh would have intended it. Maybe, possibly, depth of field at smaller apertures will cover the discrepancy -- and maybe the lack of sharpness I'm seeing at f2.8 through a ground glass is a function of the lens's limitations at full aperture? I'm dubious about both possibilities, though.

In any event, the rangefinder agrees with the markings on the focus scale at infinity -- RF is aligned both vertically and horizontally. So I've got that going for me!

Nick

farlymac said:
I took the rangefinder off to make it easier to clean, and to see how everything was put together underneath.

I may have marked the point that it separated at, Nick. That's really important, as it bottoms out into the mount. If you put it back together using the wrong land in the threads, it will take a few tries to get it right. I also remember taking it out to a parking lot where I could set out some cones at various distances to check the rangefinder adjustment more closely. As long as you can get the rangefinder to agree with the markings on the focus scale at infinity (your target being more than 100ft/31m distant), everything else should be okay. You can also set the vertical while doing this, as you have to have the top off the camera anyway.

PF
Click to expand...
 
Like I said, it's been a while since I worked on that camera, so the details are a bit fuzzy, Nick. But I'd think there is more than one landing for the element. As a habit, I always mark the separation point so that the lens will go back together the same way it came apart. You'd be surprised how small a variation will affect reassembly. You can always experiment to see if the front element has different entry spots until you are satisfied with the image.

At wide open, the image on your groundglass may not be the sharpest, but the idea is to get the least fuzzy image you can while setting infinity. If you say that the rangefinder agrees with the lens focus scale, then it should be okay. Likely, you won't be shooting at infinity wide open very much. I do know my shots with the Kodak Ektar 100 came out sharp enough, with being able to differentiate the stripes in a US flag at around 200 yards.

PF
 
Thanks, Phil, I followed your recommendation and tried to find any additional "entry points" for the thread on the front lens group, but was unsuccessful. (I still don't see how it would make a difference on a unit-focusing lens, though, but there are lots of things in optics that are beyond me.)

It's true that the RF image and the lens focusing scale agree. And hopefully that's all I need to worry about. But I also noticed that the image on the ground glass at ~12 feet (as noted on the lens focusing scale) became much sharper if I moved the focus ring to infinity -- not far on the lens focusing scale but a change of maybe 1-2mm in the lens extension.

So I'm rather stumped.
 
Hi Nick. Could it be that the lens focussing scale is not alligned properly? You may want to try to unscrew the grub screws a bit and see if you can turn it without the lens changing position. If that is possible then you might like to try and focus the lens (retighten the screws first) at 12 feet, using the ground glass, loosen the screws and turn the scale to 12 feet and retighten the screws again. If that works, the only thing left then will be a rangefinder calibration.
Hope this work!
Cheers,
Jan
 
Hi Jan, I'll take a look, but I don't think (even if I can shift the focusing scale on the lens) it will change the focus at the film plane. Thanks very much for the suggestion, however.

I am really puzzled by this. Of course, before I removed the lens front group I did not check the film plane focusing, so I don't have a "before" and "after" comparison.
 
An update, for those interested: I sorted the lens out. I spent a fair amount of time last evening trying to see whether there was another landing in the thread for the front lens group, but there was not.

However: I finally realized that I had been trying to install the front lens group and the name ring together, since the name ring threads onto the front lens group. The problem was that in doing so, if the chrome trim ring/fliter ring (engraved "Riken") has already been installed, then the lens front group will not thread all the way onto the shutter. I needed to install, in the following order: 1) front lens group, threaded as far onto the shutter as it will go; 2) the chrome ring; 3) the name ring. The name ring's flange overlaps the chrome ring (thus holding the chrome ring in place), but this flange prevents screwing the front lens group all the way. So all three must be installed separately.

"Dawn breaks over Marblehead," as we say in New England.

So all is good, and thanks again to Phil for his most helpful Flickr set. (If I'd read it more closely, I probably could have avoided this latest obstacle.) I do think I'll remove the escapement and clean it (an easy job, as Phil shows), since the speeds seem slow, but that may just be a function of older springs instead of accumulated grime.
 
Thanks, Phil. I went in and removed and flushed the escapement, but it made no difference that I can see. But I think at 1/50 and faster for handholding. Next step is to run film through it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom