# On-Board Radio Transmitter?



## BadHorse (Mar 31, 2019)

The ST-E3 RT radio transmitter was released 7 years ago and no camera body has been released since with a built-in transmitter. I find this baffling. People have suggested that regional differences make it hard to get approval for the radio frequency bands used but I'm not sure I believe that because I haven't seen specialized versions of the transmitter or the flashes for different countries. I also find it inconsistent that bodies have had WiFi radios in them for quite a while without a problem.

It's hard not to be cynical and assume that it's merely good business to expect people to buy an expensive accessory if they want to get serious about off-camera flash.

What are the odds that the next bodies released end this trend and include an on-board radio transmitter for controlling flashes?


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 1, 2019)

There very definitely are special versions of the 600-EX-RT, they are called the 600-EX and don't have the radio and are specifically made for the markets where Canon couldn't/didn't want to get/go through the certification process.

Look at the cover of the manual, it is for the 600EX and 600EX-RT


----------



## BadHorse (Apr 1, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> There very definitely are special versions of the 600-EX-RT, they are called the 600-EX and don't have the radio and are specifically made for the markets where Canon couldn't/didn't want to get/go through the certification process.


That's interesting -- the 600EX isn't even mentioned on https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/list/cameras/flashes/flashes 

But still: if they can include a WiFi chip on the body why not a flash controller?


----------



## Del Paso (Apr 1, 2019)

Laws, in some (many) countries, are often immensely complex, in that they prohibit this, but allow that.
If an older law prohibits radio transmitting, a newer law could allow wifi...Not really logical, but a possibility in mostly communist countries.


----------



## LDS (Apr 1, 2019)

BadHorse said:


> It's hard not to be cynical and assume that it's merely good business to expect people to buy an expensive accessory if they want to get serious about off-camera flash.



While it is true Canon likes to make money from accessories (like many other companies), there are now enough third-party clones you don't really need to pay the Canon prices for off-camera flash setups.

Separate devices may have some advantages - i.e. a dedicated user interface that doesn't interfere with camera controls controlling exposure. Moreover, they could allow for better radio performance when flash units are far away.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 1, 2019)

For some countries, the WiFi bands are unliscenced provided the power is below a set amount. For others, not so......

If it costs you a couple hundred thousand ( or millions) to get certified to sell a product, is it worth it? m
Particularly when the added profit from those sales is less than the cost of certification......


----------



## Valvebounce (Apr 3, 2019)

Hi Folks.
Don’t forget there were also special versions of cameras normally having Wi-fi without the Wi-fi included, E.g. 6D N.

Cheers, Graham.


----------



## LDS (Apr 3, 2019)

Don Haines said:


> For some countries, the WiFi bands are unliscenced provided the power is below a set amount. For others, not so......



"Unlicensed" means that an operator doesn't need a government license to use (usually for transmission) a given frequency. It doesn't mean that the radio device doesn't need to be certified/approved - usually some kind of approval is required anyway to ensure the device use only permitted frequencies and is within allowed power limits, and is not a source of forbidden interference.

For simpler devices, it could be some paperwork only, for others it may require specific tests performed by certified authorities.

While there are some ITU rules/recommendations, there are still local ones that has to be followed. The ST-E3 use most of the 2.4Ghz band (2.405 - 2.475GHz)

On the Canon sites, Canon does specify where the product is approved (and under which regulations), i.e.:



http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/8/0300007528/01/600ex-st-e3-rt-c-cpx-004-en.pdf



The list misses state like Ukraine, Pakistan, Mexico, Brazil or Argentina, and the whole Africa, for example.

The WiFi transmitters are designed with different channels available both in the 2.4 and 5 GHz bands to comply with more local regulations. - but they are also more powerful transmitters (150m for the WFT-E7, for example, only 30 for the ST-E3).

Probably embedding a remote flash transmitter inside a camera would bring more issues - both legal and technical - for no additional revenues - it's simpler and more lucrative to put it into a flash unit or separate remote control.

BTW - do Nikon or Sony embed remote flash control in their cameras?


----------



## BadHorse (Apr 3, 2019)

Valvebounce said:


> Don’t forget there were also special versions of cameras normally having Wi-fi without the Wi-fi included, E.g. 6D N.


_Mind blown_.


----------

