The Kodak Reels Film Digitizer is a basic consumer level 8mm film digitizer. It does the job well, but it is a slow process.. If like me, I no longer have a working 8mm projector. You cannot buy a new one and a used one cost almost as much as this digitizer. In the days of 8mm film everything video was analog. In today’s digital world we have become accustom to 4K big screen TVs and video with tack sharp pictures and great color. Analog TVs were fuzzy, small, and with a lot of interference artifacts like snow. 8mm home movies weren’t any better. Now add 40 to 70 years of age to an 8mm film, with fading dyes, and you have even less quality, not to mention every time that movie was run through a projector it may have incurred some level of scratching. What I’m trying to say is, even the best professional conversion still will result in an inferior product by today's digital standard. For me the Kodak Reels Digitizer does what I need, producing a digital result no worse than the actual film itself, based on the films condition. I’m quite pleased with the results.
The operation of the machine is simple, but I found some minor issues. The USB port is solely used for copying the SD Card files to your computer if you do not have an SD Card Slot on the computer. You cannot record directly to your computer. The recorded video is defaulted at 20 frames per second. 8mm is 16 FPS and Super 8mm is at 18FPS. This for some can make the film look like the movement is fast. Most video viewers like MS Media Player can be set to play the film at a slower rate. You can also use a film editor to edit the MP4 file to a slower rate if you prefer.
One reviewer said the default mp4 file will not play on a TV via thumb drive because the mp4 file is not H264 format. The default file is an “H264 MPEG-4 AVC” file which will play on any capable TV. The issue is the advertised pixel size. Kodak says the output mp4 is 1080p. However, all my files are larger at 1296p (1728 x 1296). Because of this, an HDTV (1080p) cannot play a larger resolution file at 1296p and will not automatically reduce the image. My 1080p TV just says the file is not compatible. So, I tried it in my UHDTV (4K) and it can play a 1296p mp4 without issue. Again, the file can be edited down to a lower resolution so it can work on a 1080p TV.
The take-up arm/reel is the only powered reel. So, to rewind you have to actually pull both the reels off and switch them to rewind. Also, rewind is very slow compared to a projector. This process is even more cumbersome with Super 8 because the spindles and the supplied take-up reel are 8mm and you have to use the supplied Super 8 adapters. That means you have to take off an adapter and switch it with the reel. Not hard, just a pain in the a$$.
You are supplied with a cleaning cloth to wipe the film path/lens area. After running several films through, I noticed a fixed dark spot in the lit areas of my film while recording. The lighted area below the film is recessed and if like me, you have fat fingers, there is no way you will get a cleaning cloth to effectively wipe the area of dust or dirt. I found using a lens cleaning brush with a blower bulb works best. I clean the area, lower the film lid without locking it, so I can see the blank lit screen to tell if I have removed all the debris. The record rate is slow, only about 2 frames a second. It takes about 30 min to record a 50 ft reel and about 3 hrs. to record a 300 ft reel. The thing is, you really need to monitor the recording in case of any mishaps, like film hanging (taped splices), or actual film breaking. I had one break on me (Old and brittle). Luckily, I was monitoring and it broke after it passed the recording area and continued to advance, so I was able to let it continue to record and just (not the fault of the digitizer) held the film until I had a long enough piece, I could wrap on the take-up reel and let it continue.
Sharpness, Brightness, and Tint are subjective. I found .5 to 1 below default for sharpness, brightness at default, and tint about 1 below default to work for my films. The biggest take away is sharpness adds more noise and with a moving picture you may find less is more for viewing.
So far, I have run about 4,300 feet of film though this digitizer (equal to eighty seven 50ft reels). The machine seems to be holding up well and I have had no serious issues with it. Its performance is slow, but produces a product of no worse quality than the actual film. Someone mentioned this digitizer will damage your films. I have had no experience like this. All my films are in the same condition after recording as the were before recording, except the old broken one.
I have no regrets spending the money on this digitizer and have captured memories I have long forgotten. Although the quality of my film has deteriorated over the years (some more than others) I still have a viewable video that is worth the effort and the cost of the digitizer.

There are a few things you need to remember when using this - first off, you're processing old film - could be up to 70 yr old. It could be dirty, mouldy, brittle. My first suggestion is, clean the film! Yes it would be nice if it had a couple of features like focus. You can adjust the tone a bit but remember every time you stop and start, a new file is created - that's a pain. We're use to High Def. This ain't high def. The only complaint I have is the the pin that advances the film slips and consequently stops the film - real pain because now you have to baby sit it. If anyone has a solution to that, I would appreciate your feedback

after digitizing about 40 reels, the control panel got flaky/intermittent and is now completely inoperative. The digitizer no longer works. it powers up but you don't hear that power up check of the motors and the control panel is completely unresponsive. I still have ~60 reels to go by September 1 - please help!

I've had this scanner a little over a month now and so far it is working well. I like the large screen, easy to use interface and that the scanner captures more of the frame area than another brand's scanner. The scanner's gate also seems to handle splices better than the competing scanner. I also like that the scanner uses a higher density sensor to capture the scans. I can see slightly finer detail in the picture from the Kodak scanner than the competing scanner. My only complaint is that compression artifacts are visible in the scanned image. These can mostly be removed through a free app known as Handbrake (Mac/PC). I also found, for threading purposes, that sliding the film through the gate works better than arching the film and sliding it under the tabs. Also, under-exposing by a half stop (or one - step) yields a more pleasing and more accurate picture than using the 0 default setting which can blow out high contrast images. Since the scanner's rewind function is painfully slow, I recommend (and use) a separate pair of film rewinds to rewind the film. The build quality of the Kodak REELS scanner seems good but we'll see how well it holds up after I've scanned two dozen 400' reels of film, if I get that far.

The automatic Exposure and White Balance control is a pain. The exposure cannot handle white skies and tends to oszillate. The White Balance produces unnecessary color changes within one clip. A kind of "freeze" function for exposure and white balance could save a lot of time correcting these effects with a video software.