New Nikon WR-T10 wireless remote controller listed at the FCC

This soon-to-be-released Nikon WR-T10 wireless remote controller appeared on the FCC website.

From the published manual, it seems that the WR-T10 can remotely trigger up to 64 separate cameras that can be grouped in 3 different channels. A separate adapter for each camera is required. This solution would work also with older cameras with a 10 pin adapter:

With a WR-R10 (transceiver) connected to the ten-pin remote or accessory terminal of your Nikon camera, photographs can be taken by remote control using a wireless WR-T10 (transmitter). The WR-A10 is a ten-pin remote terminal adapter for the WR-R10.


The following options are available with multiple WR-R10 units, each mounted on a separate camera.

  • Using a WR-T10 (Simultaneous Release): If the WR-R10 units are paired with and on the same channel as a WR-T10, the shutters on all cameras can be released simultaneously by pressing the WR-T10 shutter-release button all the way down.
  • Synchronizing Multiple Cameras (Synchronized Release): A WR-R10 mounted on a camera with ten-pin remote terminal can be used to control WR-R10 units on multiple remote cameras.


Multiple Channels

The remote cameras can be divided into up to three groups by selecting different channels for the cameras in each group after pairing and then changing the channel for the WR-T10 or master WR-R10 to control only the remote cameras on the selected channel.

Nikon WR-T10, WR-T10 and WR-A10 manual (direct link to PDF):

This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Paul

    It looks like it would be good for those building matrix camera rigs.
    Other applications?

    • iamlucky13

      Something with more control features than the lowly ML-L3 remote, and that works with higher end bodies would be nice, even short of the ability to control multiple cameras.

      And the fact that it uses RF instead of IR should give it better range and better directional coverage.

      It’s not clear what the function button does, and I’m only presuming the “CH” switch relates to the shooting mode, but it does appear to do more than the basic remote, but less than the MC-36 electronic cable release.

      This looks like an accessory that would be well worth $50.

      So any guesses as to whether Nikon will price for more or less than $250 (5 times what it’s probably worth to most users)?

    • DOH!


      If it’s “wireless” what’s that on the RHS??

      • Wille Koyte

        THeres aN adapter for that

  • brutto Caspius

    Looks kinda nice

  • Given the price of the Wi-Fi adapter for the D4, I anticipate this will cost at least as much as a 64 GB iPhone 5, perhaps more.

    Why, oh why, did Nikon NOT include Wi-Fi in the body of the D4 and D800 for wireless flash control and triggering, as well as camera control and triggering?

    We are starting to see this come in some forms from Canon vis-a-vis the 6D and 600EX

    • Sideswiped

      -Interference from all metal bodies
      -It hasn’t been a priority for pros
      -Better performance with an off camera device specialized for wifi transmission (ditto for GPS)
      -Less total cost of body for a marginal feature
      -More money in selling specialized off camera devices

      I’m sure we’ll see some wifi features in pro bodies in the future, but it just isn’t as big of a priority as it is on consumer bodies at this point in time.

      It’s also my understanding that the 600EX does not use wifi for it’s wireless flash transmission. It still requires a ST-E3-RT wireless transceiver.

      • Arkasai

        He does kind of have a point though. I see speed lights eventually gaining more sophisticated communication with the camera, each other, or even a smartphone.
        I think you will start to see more symbiotic relationships between devices in the future. You’re starting to see that with more companies releasing apps that tie your smartphone to your camera, for live view or uploading to facebook/twitter.
        Imagine your phone saving hundreds of flash profiles , with accurate measurements of where the light was, its angle, power, zoom, gel, etc for each light. It could even probe exif data for distance to subject, exposure settings, lens and focal length used. The sky is the limit.

        • Bondi Beach

          That is such a cool idea – flash synch via WiFi! Gadzooks – what a lovely network you could have – a controller with a whole load of connected devices (GPS [x 1 only!], flash, strobes, cameras, storage units, even remote controlled dollys, focussing aids, etc). Where can I get one?

          • iamlucky13

            True WiFi almost certainly has too much communcations overhead to be used for firing a flash. All the back and forth involved in the TCP/IP protocol that ensures a connection is established and that the data arrived intact takes too much time. You end up with 5-10 ms of lag, but even 1/250 shutter speeds mean your exposure is only 4 ms long.

            But what you could do is use WiFi to set the flash level for each group, and a open-loop, non-WiFi signal to actually fire everything.

            • Arkasai

              The power concerns are serious, especially for this type of equipment. But your suggestion is pretty feasible and it’s likely if some type of two way communication is implemented they may move away from the traditional AA battery bay and implement proprietary lithium batteries similar to the ones in cameras. I don’t really like that idea but it sounds like an eventuality.
              I even think something like a mini flash for smartphone use could catch on with say the instagram crowd. If it were the size of a USB thumb drive and had a compact camera xenon flash that could actually sync, people might buy it.

      • Alan

        WiFi probably isn’t the answer here, but Bluetooth might be. Going with a proprietary radio interface would help reduce transmission lags, but going with Bluetooth would allow the radio to be used for multiple purposes.

        I can’t see any reason the metal body would be prevent an inbuilt solution. It’s a design problem to be solved. My d800 has more holes in the housing than my Macbook Pro.

        The amount of money you get from aftermarket solutions is margin*volume, and I can’t imagine they’re selling many at those prices. Or if they are, they’re selling less lenses because of it. If they built the hardware into the camera, they could probably justify a small price bump to the camera body which would get leveraged across all camera sales.

        I’m sure someone at Nikon thinks they’ve run the numbers, and I haven’t, so I can’t get too critical. I’d love BT or WiFi in the camera and peripherals though. Even the IR system for flash control is far outdated by now.

    • Pat Mann

      I didn’t see any mention of wi-fi in this – it’s just a simple UHF radio remote as near as I can tell. Did I miss something? Other vendors have these available now for under $100, some well under, but I assume Nikon’s will be a bit more bulletproof – mine is OK, but not exactly built for rough treatment or knocking around in a camera bag. 20 meters – not a lot of range, but potentially very useful.

    • Pat Mann

      I didn’t see any mention of wi-fi in this – it’s just a simple UHF radio remote as near as I can tell. Did I miss something? Other vendors have these available now for under $100, some well under, but I assume Nikon’s will be a bit more bulletproof – mine is OK, but not exactly built for rough treatment or knocking around in a camera bag. 20 meters – not a lot of range, but potentially very useful.

      An improvement over 3rd-party releases in that it doesn’t take up the accessory shoe and have a separate cable connection to the device – it just fits right into the 10-pin adapter socket, or plugs directly into the GPS or other accessory socket.

    • chk

      Yes, the price will be unimaginably high for a thing like that (which in production may cost, barely, few bucks).

      I hate this kind of things..
      We are nikon, we offer you 6000$ of a camera, but obviously if you want wifi or gps or even a remote controller, you’ll have to buy hundreds $ of crap, wich will fit into specific plugs behind the sealed doors.. so your 6000$ camera will also lose it’s weather sealing..
      On the other hand, if we had put those things directly in the camera and the controller in the box, without loosing a $ (nor gaining a $), you’ll have to pay 10 bucks more on the final price (for things that maybe you won’t need) so we did it for you, dear customer.

    • G37x

      Because Nikon is like Apple, they introduce new features with the speed of turtle. Moreover why not continue or starting making money on freakin access? Regardless what they want, integrated GPS and wifi is just around the corner…

  • I found a link with the suggested MSRP.



    • The question is – what camera will Nikon release this wireless remote controller with?

      • JW

        Admin–is that rhetorical or do you have further info?

      • ben

        camera A looks like no nikon being sold right now

      • Darkslide

        The D400 obviously…!

        This could be quite a useful at 50$/€ – yeah, I’m allowed to dream aren’t I!!

      • Has to be a D5200, what with the recent reports of a discontinuation.

      • VJ

        Are such things usually released with a camera?
        If so, it seems a bit pro-level to justify a release together with a 5200… (just my 2c, or my hope, whatever)

      • D5200 likely.

        Nikon lately seems to have gotten into this habit of announcing a camera and also announcing an accessory (typically lens) that isn’t actually targeted at that camera. It’s almost this paternal thing where they reward one child and then think they have to do something to make sure the other children don’t think they’ve been forgotten about.

        However, you’re missing something: I doubt this is totally targeted as still use. It feels like a video accessory to me. So maybe we’re going to see the first Nikon video camera ;~).

        • iamlucky13

          What about it says video? Triggering groups and even remotes in general seem like a still camera thing to me.

          A couple misc observations:

          – The manual says it is compatible with any SLR with an accessory (USB?) port. So it should be compatible with the D5200. Despite what you said, I’d still find it really odd if they released it with the D5200.

          – According to the manual, you can control other cameras with just receivers (no transmitter) by connecting a receiver to a camera with a 10-pin terminal and pressing the shutter button on that camera. This indicates the receiver is two way capable. No indication, however, if the slaved cameras inherit the master camera’s shooting settings. I’d guess not.

          – The manual also seems to indicate the shutter button on the remote is two-stage, so you can pre-focus, then fire.

          – The Fn button on the remote will perform whatever function is assigned to the camera FN button, but only on the D4 and D800. Not the D600?

          – The link to the PDF manual on the FCC website now says “You are not authorized.” when I click on it.

          – The link labeled FCC website includes a “Short term confidentiality request” posted yesterday, but originally dated July 3. It requests 180 days of confidentiality for all photos and the users manual. It seems the FCC didn’t file the papers in the order Nikon intended.

          Undoubtedly this is a standard time length they chose, and the remote will be released in less than 180 days. No surprise there.

  • Texas

    Wireless when you look past the wires sticking out of it

  • uuuuuh lala

    Fake 😛

  • Beso

    Too little, too late. I will stick with my PocketWizards and ShutterBoss. Plus, I am sure this will be excessively overpriced. I love my Nikon gear (cameras/lenses) but when it comes to accessories, third party products are often better and much less expensive.

  • Chris Zeller

    Looks like another POS Rube Goldberg device like all the others. Why can’t they just integrate this stuff into the cameras? At least the D600 has an IR shutter release ML-L3 (cheap) with front AND REAR sensors. Thats all I need for wildlife ML Up shooting. If someone comes out with an app that creates a lightning trigger or more than 3 frame bracketing for HDR trigger I may consider getting the wireless adapter. Otherwise I’m good without attaching antennas to my camera strap or plug this thing into this other thing into this other thing solutions.

  • I don’t like how you have to take the lens off to mount the receiver on the ten pin port.

    • iamlucky13

      It only says to do that for film cameras, interestingly enough. Do some of them have tight clearance between the lens and 10-pin port that makes it hard to screw the collar down?

  • MashingTheGas

    I see wires.

  • Mac Rockwell

    I think Nikon is following steps of A$pple.
    Controlled leaks I mean to Say. But this would be nice to have.

  • DLS

    Is it just me? Who else sees wires coming out of a WIRELESS device???

    • BartyL

      It’s probably just you. I highly doubt anyone else has seen the red, black yellow and blue wires in any of the four images in which they appear.

  • vnomura

    Hmm…. What’s with the odd channel assignments. 5, 10, 15? Why not have only 1,2,3?

  • Tony

    To those wondering about a few things, here’s what you’ll find when you follow the links:

    The radio link technology is ZigBee.
    The Fn button performs whatever action is currently set for the camera’s Fn button.

  • peterw

    A remote to control flash, is needed separately, not? (the control through flash that Nikon offers with i-TTL is to slow).

    Strange that this thing is develloped separately, I rather like the (small) part that connects to the camera, but the remote control should be arranged with a smartphone or tablet-computer.

  • Julian

    I notice that the D800 does not have the small port indicated in the diagrams for this device – and so I conclude that all DSLRs older than the D800 will need the remote terminal adapter too. I somehow think that a 3rd party will be able to offer a similar / better solution for significantly lower prices. In my opinion really this kind of tech should be included into the basic body for all pro level cameras – I hate shooting with cables hanging out of the body that can easily get disconnected / snagged on something.

  • Tony

    WR-A10 is the 10-pin adapter as you see in the pictures. It’s odd that they make the receiver natively work with the D90 style cameras but you have to use an adapter for the top line of bodies. Well, maybe when you’re using 64 cameras, you might not get them all back after the shoot, so they’d better be cheap bodies?

    Cetecom (the label on the ruler) is the company that did the FCC acceptance testing for RF compliance. This isn’t a fake, those are real FCC documents in the links. The wires go to some sort of dongle that may have been part of the test apparatus. They’re pretty obviously temporary. Look at Nikon’s instruction sheet to see that there aren’t any cables associated with the actual products.

    ZigBee has a Bluetooth kind of range. I’m seeing 10-100 meters in various references. But there are router devices which could act as repeaters. That could slow down the timing of trigger commands though.

    There’s a lot of hobbyist access to ZigBees radios and the protocol. Check out the modules at sparkfun dot com to see what you can attach to an Arduino. Hacker’s paradise, that.

  • Joel

    When what we really need is a wireless TTL such as Canons. I’m not a Canon fanboy before you all jump on, I’m just a D800 user with multiple SB900s who struggles with triggering when in direct sunlight or when the flashes aren’t line of sight..

  • Hawkeye

    Finally! I can trigger all 64 of my D90s at once. What a relief. Now all I need is a camera bag that can hold ’em all…

  • I don’t have 3 banks of cameras, so I will have to pass on this gadget.

  • TFrizzle

    This is a smaller solution and you don’t need to remove the lens to install on the 10 pin. Likely much cheaper as well. Of course it controls 1 camera and doesn’t have the Fn button.

  • This makes more sense than their current 10 pin shutter remote since it doesn’t use the hot shoe. I ended buying a RFN-4s for my D800e. It works great, but receiver looks like a Barbie cell phone.

  • bigeater

    This seems like a product aimed at the industrial or university market where you might need to watch something from multiple angles at the same time—like destructive testing, or the behavior of dangerous animals, or a process underway like in a factory. It would also be cool for photojournalists, attaching 5 or 10 cameras around a race track so you could get all the angles from one location—but sadly that puts 5 or 10 photographers out of work. Hmmm….

  • It’s interesting isn’t it…

    You think about the technology out there at the moment, it doesn’t seem like it would be a hard thing to incorporate all of this new tech into pro DSLR bodies…

    Maybe a pro travel photog wants GPS built in. Maybe a photojournalist wants an LTE connection so he can transfer his JPG copies straight to his editor’s inbox. Maybe a studio photographer wants an ad-hoc wireless connection to his phone to control all his settings off camera while he sets his lights? Hi Res screens blah blah All of this tech can be found in a phone, a device much smaller than a DSLR, but for some reason they’re all playing stupid for the sake of making a killing in providing products that seem technologically behind the ball.

    And what about speedlights? surely it wouldn’t be hard to integrate a wireless system (INTO the DSLR) to trigger speedlights.

    Seriously. How hard is it to incorporate a wireless chip into the body of a DSLR to utilise these functions? Probably not hard at all, and the price tag for all of us is it were ever to come out? Probably $X0,000’s. I’m am wasting my money buying pocketwizards, wireless triggers, all of these stupid add-ons that require more and more batteries to recharge blah blah. The technology is there – camera companies are STALLING.

    Wireless technology is getting to a point where it IS a useable tech for pros. ESPECIALLY in today’s age where online content is king and print media is winding up. It’s about time camera companies stopped thinking about megapixels and started thinking about improving the practicality of a DSLR.

    Would you buy a D4 with built in wireless to trigger your studio lights, that also has a micro sim card with a constant LTE connection for you to email your editor instant photos you took from the Olympics? with a GPS location? I certainly would.

  • johnny

    I dig the F6 theyve got hooked up to it.

  • Clifford Martin

    I bought one of these packages from B&H for under $200. I got my hopes up when I saw one part of the three part system would plug directly into the port on the side of my D4 designed for the Wi-Fi adapter. Unfortunately it wouldn’t function that way so I was forced to plug this into the 10 pin port.

    I did some testing and it worked, provided I didn’t have live view on.

    I am a little miffed that I am having to use the 10 pin port for this and there is no pass through so I can daisy chain my GPS unit, which also uses the 10 pin port. IMHO Nikon should have made this work with one of the other ports on the D4 besides just the 10 pin port.

    Another comment is that the whole system is so physically small that it will be easy to lose the components when not installed on a camera. I’m going to have to find a small carry bag to keep it in for when not in use.

  • Back to top