In my article “Connecting the RM-WR1 to the OM-1 and OM-1 Mark II”, a reader pointed out to me that the RM-WR1 is not compatible with the OM-5 Mark II. An OM-5 Mark II buyer will have to buy an RM-WR2 instead. This made me curious, and I did a little research on the net. During my research, I kept asking myself what the reason could be that the RM-WR1 can no longer be connected wirelessly to cameras newer than the OM-1 Mark II (official compatibility). From the outside, both remote triggers are identical except for the product name and the different housing color.
Differences in the interior
I discovered that the two differ in the supported Bluetooth protocol during my research. The RM-WR1 supports Bluetooth 5.0 BLE, while the RM-WR2 supports Bluetooth 5.2 BLE. These two standards differ in essence and protocols. This also explains the different ranges of 5m (RM-WR1) and 10m (RM-WR2). In addition to the greater range, Bluetooth 5.2 BLE also offers better energy efficiency because the transmission power can be adjusted depending on the signal strength. The battery life should, therefore, be better.
| Dvice | Bluetooth-Version | protocol details |
|---|---|---|
| RM-WR1 | Bluetooth 5.0 BLE | – Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) – Single-Stream-connection – Basic ATT/GATT Protocols |
| RM-WR2 | Bluetooth 5.2 BLE | – Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) – Enhanced Attribute Protocol (EATT) – LE Power Control (LEPC) – Isochronous Channels (ISOC) |
However, I have not found any information about this in the technical data. Since Bluetooth 5.2 is backward compatible with Bluetooth 5.0, these differences cannot explain why the RM-WR1 is no longer supported by cameras newer than the OM-1 Mark II.
Differences in the camera hardware
The hardware of the remote trigger cannot be the reason; the reason lies in the camera hardware. However, there is no reason why the OM-1 Mark II still supports the RM-WR1, but the OM-3 does not. Both have Bluetooth 4.2 on board. Only the OM-5 Mark II is equipped with Bluetooth 5.2. The question is whether the specified range of the RM-WR2 of 10m can be achieved. With the OM-1 Mark II and the OM-3, the RM-WR2 will only be able to use the protocols of the Bluetooth 4.2 standard. Here is a small overview of the Bluetooth standards used by the respective camera.
| Camera | Bluetooth Standard |
|---|---|
| OM-1 / OM-1 Mark II | 4.2 Low Energy |
| OM-3 | 4.2 Low Energy |
| OM-5 | 4.2 Low Energy |
| OM-5 Mark II | 5.2 Low Energy |
It cannot, therefore, be due to the Bluetooth protocol used by the camera that it no longer supports the RM-WR1. Especially as the Bluetooth standards are always downwards compatible.
Reasons
I can only speculate about why the RM-WR1 no longer supports wireless cameras from the OM-3 onwards. Obviously, it cannot be due to the Bluetooth standard used. It is possible that OM Digitalsolution uses the Bluetooth standard, but still sends its own protocols via the connection, which are not yet available in the RM-WR1. As the RM-WR1 does not offer an update option, OM Digitalsolutions must update the RM-WR1 in the service department if that were even possible. The camera firmware, on the other hand, can be easily updated. This was probably done as part of one of the last updates. For me, this is the realistic option. Unfortunately, there is very little information about this.
If you have any further information, please let us know in the comments. I’m happy about the swarm knowledge.