KODAK SCANZA Digital Film & Slide Scanner - Converts 35mm, 126, 110, Super 8 & 8mm Film Negatives & Slides to JPEG - Includes Large Tilt-Up 3.5" LCD, Easy-Load Film Inserts, Adapters & More

I purchased the Kodak Scanza with the expectation of getting better quality images from my Slides and Negatives than I did with my Wolverine Titan. br>br>1) The unit isn't actually made by Kodak, which surprised me. It is simply branded as Kodak, as stated on page 35 of the manual: "Kodak does not manufacture, warranty, or support this product. Authorized KODAK Brand Licensee, C A Marketing, Inc. is a company that specializes in marketing and public relations ”. As a result, this product was neither designed nor manufactured by Kodak; it simply bore the Kodak name! 2) It is advertised as a 22-megapixel camera, but it actually has a 14-megapixel sensor that is software-enhanced or interpolated to 22-megapixels. "Sensor 14MP CMOS, resolution 14MP/22MP interpolated," according to page 31 of the manual. br>br>3) In comparison to the Wolverine, the display screen is small (the Kodak screen is 3. The Wolverine is 4 feet tall, while the X-Men are 5 feet tall. 3" display with a much sharper image. Check them out side by side. Image from the side. br>br>4) The fonts on the screen menu are very small and unusable. br>br>5) The screen contains the operating buttons. The machine will tilt every time you press a button, so you'll need two hands to scan: one to hold the machine and the other to push the buttons! br>br>6) Now it's time to look at the output files. Kodak images have a bluish tint to them and are faded. In conclusion, I thought I was getting a better machine than the Wolverine based on the images shown. br>br>In conclusion, I thought I was getting a better machine than the Wolverine based on the images shown. I'm sticking with my tried-and-true Wolverine Titan. I've known about Wolverine machines for over a decade, and they have a better-designed product.

Leland Atkins

| Dec 06, 2021

one of high quality SETTING THE STAGE: I'm a professional photographer who also runs a photo scanning and restoration business on the side. To date, I have not been able to locate any 35mm slide/negative scanners that were both affordable and capable of producing high-quality scans in a timely manner. scans of high quality You can still find high-quality ones if you look hard enough. Quality scans are costly ($6500 for a Nikon 8000), come with clunky software, and, most importantly, take several minutes to complete. It's nearly impossible to scan hundreds (or even thousands) of slides that way, especially when you have to feed them one by one by hand. br>This Kodak Scanza is similar to a few others on the market (particularly the Wolverine F2D), but since I already have a high-resolution scanner, I decided against it. I decided to give this high-speed Kodak/Alaris print scanner a try. It's essentially a cheap digital camera with scanning capabilities, but it's the concept I've been waiting for. Now, if they could make a higher-quality version of this for a reasonable price, I'd be all over it. For the time being, this one might suffice in terms of producing mediocre consumer-oriented products. I'd like to see a better version with a sharper lens and at least a slight increase in resolution. Even better, one with an automatic feed that scans a batch of slides while you work on something else. (The SlideSnap can do that, but it relies on vintage, used Kodak projectors and can set you back more than $4,000 for the entire setup. ) The Advantages:br>br>The Advantages:br>br>The Advantages:br>br>The Advantages:b
- Does a decent job scanning slides and negatives, but it's not up to professional standards. quality.
- 1-minute quick scans (digital capture) It took 2 seconds.
- The Pros: It is affordable. br>br>The Cons: It is expensive. br>br>The Cons: It is expensive. br>br
- Plastic construction for a low price. I'm not sure how long some of the adapters will last because they feel like they'll break when you try to open them. br>- Despite the fact that scanning hundreds or thousands of slides is quick per scan, you may not want to do so because you must manually feed them.
- Images aren't particularly sharp, but they should be able to print up to 8x10 size from a sharp original slide or negative. br>- They don't specify the number of dpi/ppi, but at 14mb, I estimate it to be around 3000. This isn't bad, but keep in mind that the pixels aren't particularly sharp. I wouldn't use the built-in interpolation to get to the 22mb size because the quality and sharpness suffers significantly. It's best if you do it yourself. If necessary, adjust the size.

Fox Garrett

| Apr 27, 2021

I've never written a review for any. Wow, I'm not sure what to say. This new Kodak product is fantastic. I have never written a review for a product before, but I feel compelled to do so for this one. At first, I was hesitant to buy this product because it seemed cheap, and I had my doubts. I was completely taken aback. Negative and slide scanning is a simple and painless process. I've used higher-end scanners before, and the process was always arduous. After scanning and uploading my images to my computer, I'm getting results that are comparable to the medium resolution scans I was getting at professional labs in LA. Which costs around $25 if purchased in this manner. Each roll costs $0. 00. Anyone shooting 35mm slide or negative film will save a lot of money with this. Simply scan your film after processing it. This product was used to scan a 45-year-old BW negative from an old shoe box, as well as a new slide from 2017.

Artemis Galloway

| Nov 09, 2021

The product is merely adequate. It doesn't look good on my 40" LED TV, and the first unit had a broken HDMI cord or a faulty scanner socket. For a low-cost built-in 14/22 MP camera/scanner, the scans were adequate. The scanning area, which is illuminated, quickly becomes filthy. All of these problems are solvable. If you're only doing a dozen or so slides, you might want to take a look at it. However, I needed to scan more than 2000 slides. The slide carrier, which is supposed to allow the user to insert a slide, push it with the next slide, and so on, was horribly designed. Each slide would catch on the edge of the holder if it wasn't perfectly flat, requiring the holder to be removed, the jammed slide to be removed, and the process to be restarted. After about a dozen failed attempts, I gave up and returned the scanner to Amazon. I got a replacement that had a good HDMI socket and cord, but the slide carrier problem still exists. I was hoping for more from a Kodak product. I returned the second unit and am planning to archive my media using an external slide scanning service.

Colin Dickerson

| Mar 21, 2021