Kodak Scanza

Anyone tried the new $170 Kodak Scanza Scanner?

ttps://www.kodak.com/us/es/Consumer/Products/Accessories/scanza-film-scanner/default.htm

I agree with Karim. It doesn't look like a serious solution. - Why would such need to be stand alone? The built in camera unit snapping the film can't be overly great for that little money.

I bought similar "scanners" for cheap during sale out at my super market. (20 Euro or less was little enough to permit a backup unit) They depend on a connected laptop or PC but we all own such a device, right?

I don't want to get into a megapixels discussion. I have crappy P&Ss that claim to have a lot but don't hold up to my better big sensored cameras with nominally less. The few MP I get out of my pseudo scanners are probably still good enough for online needs or newspaper DTP.

Of course the Scanza could be just the right compromise. Let's hope for reviews within a couple of weeks.

"It does say it has a 20mb sensor."

- Not in so many words.

It says 14/22 megapixel 'resolution'.

To me, that says it's a 14 megapixel sensor that can be interpolated up to 22 Mp.

"They depend on a connected laptop or PC.."

- I don't think that's the case here. It clearly has a preview screen and built in control buttons. It's also stated that no software is needed on an attached PC.

Anyway, I tend to agree that you're not going to get much for 170 bucks. Basically a cheap digital compact with a close-up lens and light-box/filmholder attached.

It's good and bad at the same time.

Bad side: Very little adjustment can be done prescan. Whatever adjustments available is on the scanner.

Good side. It act as a card reader and thus no driver or software needed. It scans to JPEG and stores in its own memory. The computer just read the files. Can output directly to TV as to use as slide/neg projector.

For film, I'll pass. No ICE is a deal killer for me, and the fact that it doesn't "require" software makes me think you're probably on your own for whatever the scanner things is the best settings.

With that said, it mentions Super 8. If I can start a Super 8 move in it and have it spit out an MP4 or whatever, it would be worth it as I don't know of any other easy and economical solutions for that. In that particular case, I only care about it for viewing old family movies and not necessarily about getting "the best" out of it.

For film, I'll pass. No ICE is a deal killer for me, and the fact that it doesn't "require" software makes me think you're probably on your own for whatever the scanner things is the best settings.

 

With that said, it mentions Super 8. If I can start a Super 8 move in it and have it spit out an MP4 or whatever, it would be worth it as I don't know of any other easy and economical solutions for that. In that particular case, I only care about it for viewing old family movies and not necessarily about getting "the best" out of it.

Since Kodak will now scan your Super 8 movies when you send the film in for them to process would they offer the service for already processed film? That would be the best way to transfer those old Super 8 movies to digital.

So, back to the OP - has anyone actually used a Scanza?

May be you should try and tell us how you like it? I would try it if it does APS but it doesn't. Have a number of rolls of APS but I didn't buy the APS adapter when I bought my Minolta Dimag Dual Scan IV and now the adapter is expensive on Ebay.

May be you should try and tell us how you like it? I would try it if it does APS but it doesn't. Have a number of rolls of APS but I didn't buy the APS adapter when I bought my Minolta Dimag Dual Scan IV and now the adapter is expensive on Ebay.

Be tough, since I don't have one, and camera stores are few & far between here in Montana.

A 4 day old article: "

The product isn’t available yet, but a listing is live on Amazon, so sales should start soon."

Be tough, since I don't have one, and camera stores are few & far between here in Montana.

Make no difference where you live as I think it's only available on Amazon.

"With that said, it mentions Super 8. If I can start a Super 8 move in it and have it spit out an MP4 or whatever, it would be worth it...."

- I think that's an unreasonably high expectation for what's basically a de-constructed compact digital camera.

There's no automatic film transport by the look of the holders. So unless you want to align and scan 960 separate frames for each minute of movie, it's not really a practical proposition.

Yes, on the interpolation:

from the PetaPixel announcement (LINK)\

The film is scanned into 14-megapixel JPEG files. If you need higher resolution, the scanner can interpolate the images up to 22MP for you.

That's an uninterpolated square 3741 pixels on each side... "Not bad, but not good" as Old Man Parker said.

I read the "for consumers" as a flag that it is not for "professionals" - maybe fine for transferring images from film to on-line postings.

I also think it likely that you have to push the film through manually -- so it's not for doing a lot of images!

But it is cheap for what it is. :cool: