The Nikon version is significantly more expensive. The loss of the little MLL3 wireless remote was my biggest complaint when switching to the D200. I guess a more advanced camera just can't be controlled with a simple IR remote that costs $20
----- This is my Nikon. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
This one has 3 pieces (2 pieces look identical to the B&H photo in the link above), a wired remote with a pin socket, a receiver that plugs into the wired remote, and a wireless transmitter. It works as a wired or wireless remote. I just got it a couple days ago and tested it. It works, except it does not do a bulb exposure (starts the bulb exposure but doesn't stop it). Not as well built as Nikon stuff (I have an MC20) but a fraction of the cost.
Yes, my unit looks like the Adorama. Regardless of where you sourced your quote, *my* unit won't complete a bulb shot. I haven't had a chance to email the seller about that. Not a huge deal to me because I can do it with the wired remote and don't have a pressing neeed for wireless bulb exposures.
LOL... maybe you need to talk to GI about a replacement.
I was just posting what was on the site... I didn't know you had the exact same remote. I thought maybe this was a newer/different one or something. It was mainly a post to show there is an alternative to the Nikon and how much Adorama & B&H is over charging for the same thing.
Not sure if it is the same model but I have an Adidt R3 Wireless remote for my D200 which was considerably cheaper than the Nikon equivalent (looks cheaper but does a great job at least to 50 metres - rated to 100metres). And I've just checked it out on bulb - pressing the remote's button opens the shutter and releasing the button closes the shutter. You determine how long you want the shutter open.