Brand 17 question

[Bernard Kelly]

Yes, I did. No luck there, either. Doesn't move.

[Kinografx]

Hi-

My Brand 17 is similar, except there is a large diameter thumbscrew on mine where there doesn't seem to be one on yours- The large screw loosens to rotate the back, then tightens up against that stubby bare screw to hold the back in place.

Hope that helps a little?

[Merg Ross]

Hi-

My Brand 17 is similar, except there is a large diameter thumbscrew on mine where there doesn't seem to be one on yours- The large screw loosens to rotate the back, then tightens up against that stubby bare screw to hold the back in place.

Hope that helps a little?

Bingo! I think that's the answer. I believe there is a spring on that stub for tightening.

[Bernard Kelly]

Bingo, indeed, Yes, that does help a lot, in that we now know the principle that should be at work. And I do have such a thumbscrew. It was in the box, but I didn't know what it was for. So the problem now is that the stub is stuck in the locked position. The thumbscrew has no effect on it. The spring itself is springy, so dirt doesn' t seem to be the cause. Any suggestions for loosening up the stub?

[CedarMesaPhoto]

I have one that has that same arrangement (sorry, just now saw the thread). I had to take all the knobs off of the camera and put a small dab of machine oil on all of the threads. I think the aluminum, or magnesium, whatever they used, gets corroded over time and locks the threads down. I put a small drop of oil on the detent plunger and now it works much better. It still hurts my finger to pull that plunger down sometimes, though, so it is not exactly a perfect set-up. If I used in the field much I would either carry a small needle-nose plier, or use a car key to pop it downward. Chris

[Bernard Kelly]

Thanks, Chris -- and thanks to all who've contributed to this thread so far; you've been very helpful.

The threads on mine are generally okay. The stub/plunger perhaps just didn't get enough use and settled in place. I'll try the machine oil.

[Merg Ross]

Thanks, Chris -- and thanks to all who've contributed to this thread so far; you've been very helpful.

The threads on mine are generally okay. The stub/plunger perhaps just didn't get enough use and settled in place. I'll try the machine oil.

Your next post will be, "success"! (I hope)

The advantage of reversing the standards would be a benefit for precise focusing. I had never seen the Brand 17 in its present configuration (until now). Just a thought. Good luck!
Merg

[Bernard Kelly]

Thanks, Merg. If this thread has taught me anything at all, it's that I don't know enough about my own camera. Reversing the standards is on my list of things to do.

[Bernard Kelly]

Still not getting anywhere with the revolving back, but I thought I'd post these, if only for Merg's sake.

I reversed the standards; it was much simpler to do than I expected. It does look better. And I can see how much easier it is to fine focus from the rear than the front. I take it that the distance scale works with the little white dot below it. Seems pretty accurate so far.

[Merg Ross]

Still not getting anywhere with the revolving back, but I thought I'd post these, if only for Merg's sake.

I reversed the standards; it was much simpler to do than I expected. It does look better. And I can see how much easier it is to fine focus from the rear than the front. I take it that the distance scale works with the little white dot below it. Seems pretty accurate so far.

Thanks Bernard, I appreciate the update. Yes, rear focus should make life easier. I am not familiar with the distance scale, either a slightly different model or perhaps an accessory.
The camera looks quite clean considering its age. Now, you need to get the back working. Maybe post a separate thread; there are machinists who frequent this site that might have an idea of how to free up the stub.