主要用在FN SCAR 20S 7.62x51mm NATO上，間接用於Barrett M99A1 .50BMG上，也能配合HK MR762A1 7.62x51mm NATO和未來的SIG MCX SPEAR .277 Fury上，射擊距離1000-1500米遠距離。
預算$5000左右含稅，哪位能推薦個S&B PM II鏡子，怎麼選擇這麼多？TREMOR5怎麼樣？什麼時後有打折？有什麼門道省錢？謝了
目前看好這個，含稅$5000，怎麼樣：https://www.scopelist.com/Schmidt-Bende ... I5-H5.aspx
Schmidt Bender 6-36x56mm PM II High Performance US LPI TREMOR5 1/2 cm ccw MT II MTC LT/DT II+ ZC LT Riflescope 163-911-55F-I5-H5
Scope Weight: 33.16-35.1oz
Scope Length: 15.36 inches
Magnification Range: 6-36x
Scope Objective Lens Diameter: 56mm
Scope Tube Size / Mount 34mm
Elevation Adjustment 395cm/100m MT II MTC LT
Windage Adjustment ± 65cm/100m DT II+ ZC LT
Parallax Adjustment: 20 - infinity
Reticle Position: First Focal Plane
Reticle Details: TREMOR5
Field of View: 7.3–1.25m at 100m
Eye Relief: 3.54 inches
Illuminated Reticle: Yes
Finish: Black
Scope Turret Rotation Counter Clockwise (CCW)
Twilight Factor: 17.3 - 44.9
Item Condition: New
UPC 191992067086
MPN 163-911-55F-I5-H5
Product Type Shop All Scopes
Brand Shop All Schmidt Bender
Date First Available May 15, 2024
Last Updated July 15, 2025
Sale Price $4,629.99
1000米以上遠距離射擊，推薦個鏡子？
#4 Re: 1000米以上遠距離射擊，推薦個鏡子？
S&B沒有Pros全是Cons
Why Schmidt & Bender Scopes Are Rare in U.S. ELR Competition
Introduction & Summary
Schmidt & Bender (S&B) rifle scopes are renowned for optical quality and have a storied military following, yet they are a rare sight on the rifles of U.S. extreme long-range (ELR) competitors. In high-profile ELR matches, S&B usage is minimal compared to dominant brands like Nightforce, Vortex, Kahles, Tangent Theta, and newcomers such as Zero Compromise Optics (ZCO). A mix of factors explains this disparity: competition data show low adoption of S&B, and practical considerations like elevation travel, durability, weight, and reticle options often favor other scopes. Additionally, sponsorships, pricing, and cultural preferences (including “buy American” sentiments and customer service expectations) influence what optics U.S. ELR shooters choose. This report examines each of these factors in detail, drawing on competition reports, expert analysis, and community feedback to understand why S&B scopes are less common in the U.S. ELR scene.
ELR Competition Optics Usage Statistics
Data from Matches: Equipment surveys from U.S. ELR competitions reveal that Schmidt & Bender scopes make up only a tiny fraction of the optics in use. For example, at a major 2020 ELR match in Wyoming with over 100 competitors, Nightforce was by far the most popular scope brand (39% of shooters) – more than the next five brands combined. Kahles (14%) and Vortex (10%) were the second and third most common, followed by Tangent Theta (7%). By contrast, Schmidt & Bender did not even rank among the top five brands. In that survey, only about 2 shooters (≈2% of the field) were using S&B scopes. In fact, S&B was on par with niche or newer brands (like IOR, Bushnell, Leica) in terms of representation, meaning it was nearly absent from the firing line.
Most Popular Scopes among ~100 shooters at a 2020 U.S. ELR match – Nightforce dominates, while Schmidt & Bender is barely represented (only ~2 shooters). Color bars indicate finish placement (black=Top 10, etc.), showing top shooters gravitating to Nightforce, Tangent Theta, ZCO, etc., with virtually no S&B among them.
Trend in Precision Shooting: The low showing for S&B in ELR is consistent with its declining use in other U.S. long-range disciplines. In Precision Rifle Series (PRS) competitions (which are tactical long-range matches, though not ELR distances, they reflect similar optic preferences), S&B has plummeted in popularity. As of 2024, only 1% of top PRS/NRL shooters reported using a Schmidt & Bender – a steep drop from being the 4th most popular scope brand about five years prior. (By comparison, Nightforce, Vortex, Kahles, and Leupold each command far larger shares in PRS.) This decline in S&B usage underscores that U.S. competitors overall have gravitated to other optics, leaving S&B a very small niche.
In summary, the numbers tell the story: Schmidt & Bender scopes are seldom seen in U.S. ELR matches, whereas Nightforce scopes (often the ATACR series) and others dominate the firing line. The following sections explore why this is the case.
Comparing S&B to Other Popular ELR Optics
To understand S&B’s diminished role, it helps to compare its scopes against the other top choices for ELR shooters:
Nightforce (ATACR series): Nightforce is the benchmark in U.S. ELR competition optics. It was the clear favorite in the stats (nearly 40% usage), and for good reason. Nightforce ATACR scopes are known for robust durability, reliable tracking, and generous adjustment range – all critical for ELR. Top shooters trust Nightforce to hold zero and dial true even under heavy recoil or rough handling. For example, the Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 F1 was overwhelmingly the most popular single model in the Wyoming ELR match (chosen by ~60% of NF users). Nightforce scopes also benefit from strong U.S. presence: the company (though manufacturing some models abroad) is American, with a U.S. service center and a reputation for excellent customer support. In practice, many competitors consider Nightforce “bombproof” and a safe choice – even if its glass may not be quite as optically pristine as Schmidt & Bender’s. As one experienced shooter put it, “the Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 doesn’t have as good glass as the Schmidt…but it isn’t bad,” and it makes up for that with ruggedness and consistency. Notably, Nightforce invests heavily in the competition scene (they title-sponsor matches like the Nightforce ELR Steel Challenge and support many shooters), which further cements their popularity.
Vortex (Razor HD series): Vortex has captured a solid share of the ELR/long-range market (about 10% in the ELR match survey). The Razor HD Gen II and Gen III scopes offer good optical quality and durability at a more affordable price point than S&B. But the biggest Vortex selling point is value and support: Vortex’s top-tier scopes cost significantly less than S&B’s, and the company’s “VIP” lifetime warranty and customer service are legendary. Shooters know that if they somehow break a Vortex, the company will fix or replace it with no questions asked. Furthermore, Vortex aggressively courts the market with discounts – especially a 50% off program for military and law enforcement personnel. This means a $2,500 Razor Gen II effectively costs ~$1,250 for qualified buyers, an unbeatable deal that has undoubtedly put a lot of Vortex scopes on rifles. In the ELR competition realm, Vortex scopes have been capable – for instance, some top shooters do use them – but interestingly, data showed relatively fewer Vortex users among the highest finishers. (In that 2020 match, only 2 of the top 50 competitors ran Vortex, and none of the top 10, even though Vortex was 3rd in overall popularity.) This could be coincidence, but it suggests that while many shooters start with Vortex for its value, the very top competitors often gravitate to other “alpha-tier” scopes as they seek any possible edge. Nonetheless, Vortex remains extremely popular in the broader long-range community, whereas S&B – with its far higher cost and no equivalent discount programs – has comparatively few takers.
Kahles: Kahles (the Austrian “tactical” sister company of Swarovski) was the second most popular brand in the ELR match survey (14%). Kahles scopes like the K525i 5-25×56 are prized for their excellent optics and smart features. They offer rugged build quality similar to other European scopes, but unlike traditional hunting Swarovski scopes, Kahles models come with modern tactical reticles and user-friendly turrets. In fact, Kahles worked with top U.S. competitors (such as Shannon Kay) to develop reticles (e.g. SKMR series) that appeal to precision shooters. This willingness to cater to competitor preferences has helped Kahles gain a following. Kahles scopes are still expensive (on par with Nightforce), but notably less than S&B’s highest-end offerings. With strong performance and a push into the PRS/ELR market in recent years, Kahles secured a place as a top choice. It’s telling that Kahles surpassed Schmidt & Bender in popularity – something that might not have been true a decade ago – due to better alignment with what modern shooters want (reticles, features, price).
Tangent Theta (TT): Tangent Theta, a Canadian brand, represents the very high end of optics and is often mentioned in the same breath as (or above) S&B in terms of quality. In the Wyoming ELR match, TT scopes were 4th overall at 7% usage, but interestingly they were over-represented among the top finishers – the 1st and 5th place shooters were using Tangent Theta 5-25×56 scopes. This reflects TT’s reputation: these scopes are exceptional, with arguably class-leading mechanical precision (ultra-repeatable turrets, an ingenious tool-less zero-stop, etc.) and superb glass. Essentially, Tangent Theta took over where the premier “old school” European scopes (like Hensoldt and S&B PMII) left off, incorporating modern improvements. They are also extremely expensive (often slightly more than S&B). Despite minimal marketing, TT has a small but devoted following among those who demand the best. As one analysis noted, *“scopes like TT and ZCO really shine and leave behind some legacy brands like S&B – with things like precise zero stops, toolless re-zero, turret feel…worth paying for”*. In practice, Tangent Theta has stolen some of S&B’s former thunder in the ultra-premium segment by offering equal (or better) optical clarity with updated features and rock-solid mechanics. Shooters who might have bought an S&B in years past now often opt for a Tangent Theta if they can justify the price.
Zero Compromise Optic (ZCO): ZCO is a relatively new entrant (founded ~2018) that has rapidly become a top-tier name. As the name implies, Zero Compromise scopes aim to provide no weak points – combining top-level optics, robust mechanics, and modern features. The company is a collaboration between U.S. and Austrian designers (including ex-Nightforce and Kahles personnel). In competition, ZCO made a splash early: for example, a shooter running a ZCO 5-27×56 took 2nd place at the 2020 ELR match. By 2023/24, many elite PRS/NRL shooters also switched to ZCO. These scopes are direct competitors to S&B in price and quality – but they have the advantage of being brand new designs optimized for today’s shooters. A ZCO has features like advanced reticles (the MPCT series), super-repeatable turrets, and crystal-clear glass that rivals Tangent and S&B. Essentially, ZCO offers the prestige and performance of a European scope with the input of top U.S. shooters and modern engineering. This is very appealing in the precision community. So while ZCO hasn’t achieved mass market share yet (only a few percent of shooters overall in 2020), it is highly respected and was already represented among top finishers. Many shooters who “have S&B money” are now choosing ZCO instead – one forum user quipped, *“If you’re willing to spend S&B money, buy a ZCO… it’s what the cool kids are using”*.
March Optics: March is a Japanese brand known for ultra-high magnification scopes and innovative designs (for example, the March “Genesis” scopes offer an extreme elevation range for ELR). However, March scopes have a fairly limited presence in U.S. ELR competitions. They did not show up among the top 50 in the 2020 data, suggesting very few competitors were using them. March’s niche is somewhat different – they are popular in certain benchrest and F-class circles, and a few ELR shooters who prioritize absolute optical resolution or massive adjustment might use a March. In fact, some experts acknowledge that optically, March scopes are superb. One shooter who compared a March High Master side-by-side with a classic S&B PM II noted the March “crushed” the older S&B in image quality, remarking that “best Japanese glass >> best Euro glass” in that case. That implies March has achieved incredible clarity and could rival or exceed S&B’s vaunted optics. However, March scopes come with trade-offs: they are very expensive (often in the $3K–$5K range, with the Genesis ELR model costing even more) and not widely distributed in the U.S. The brand also historically offered somewhat unconventional reticles and less mainstream marketing. Thus, while March is respected by optics aficionados, the average ELR competitor in the U.S. is far more likely to pick a proven Nightforce or a supported brand than seek out a March. The limited sponsorship or exposure of March in U.S. matches means many shooters simply have little experience with them. In short, March produces some specialty ELR scopes (notably a 10-60× scope and others with huge elevation travel) that a handful of competitors might use for extreme distances, but they remain a rarity on the line compared to the more common options.
Leupold Mark 5HD: Although not mentioned in the question prompt, it’s worth noting Leupold’s contribution since it ties into the “American preference” theme. The Leupold Mark 5HD 5-25×56 or 7-35×56 scopes have become quite popular in PRS and also appear in some ELR contexts. Leupold (an American company) designed these scopes with direct feedback from U.S. shooters and military snipers, emphasizing a lightweight but durable package with excellent (if not class-leading) optics. The Mark 5HD’s strengths are its lighter weight (notably lighter than S&B/NF), very competitive price (around $2,000-$2,500 for 5-25×56), and some excellent reticle options (like the PR-2 MIL reticle developed with input from top competitors). While a Leupold Mark 5 may not have the absolute optical brilliance of an S&B, it is a “90% solution” at a fraction of the cost, which has led many shooters to adopt it. In fact, in PRS it became one of the most popular scopes because of this value proposition. The Mark 5’s presence in ELR is smaller (ELR shooters often prioritize heavy-duty scopes and massive elevation), but some do use it, especially for lighter ELR rigs or when aiming for a particular weight class. The key takeaway is that mid-priced scopes with strong feature sets have siphoned off many potential S&B customers. As one analysis noted, *“the Leupold Mark 5HD definitely doesn’t have the same optical clarity [as S&B], but is a huge value… It also has a really good reticle and all of the must-have features competitors are looking for”*. That combination of adequate performance and high value has made such scopes very common on firing lines where S&B’s premium scopes used to be more prevalent.
In summary, Schmidt & Bender today faces fierce competition on all sides. Brands like Nightforce and Vortex outcompete S&B on practicality, support, and price. Other high-end brands like Tangent Theta and ZCO beat or equal S&B on features and keep pace on optical performance. Even “mid-range” scopes like the Mark 5HD have eroded the market by offering good-enough performance at half the cost. Against this backdrop, S&B’s advantages (excellent glass and a long legacy) no longer translate to widespread adoption among modern ELR shooters. The next sections delve deeper into the specific technical and market factors behind this shift.
Feature Trade-offs: Elevation, Durability, Weight, Reticles
ELR shooting is extremely demanding on rifle scopes. Hitting targets at 1–2 miles (and beyond) requires dialing or holding enormous amounts of elevation, dealing with fierce recoil from big cartridges, and often making precise wind calls via the reticle. Small differences in scope features can become big advantages or disadvantages in this realm. Here is how Schmidt & Bender scopes compare on key features:
Elevation Travel: Perhaps the most critical feature for ELR is available elevation adjustment. ELR rifles often need 80–120+ MOA of “up” to get on target at 2 miles. If the scope doesn’t provide enough internal elevation, shooters must resort to canted rails, adjustable mounts, or prism attachments to reach those extreme drops. Schmidt & Bender’s flagship scopes have relatively limited internal elevation by ELR standards. For example, the popular S&B PM II 5-25×56 has about 26 mils of total elevation range in its double-turn turret (roughly 90 MOA). Not only is this total on the lower side compared to some competitors, but S&B’s double-turn design intentionally caps the usable elevation per revolution scheme: “You literally can’t dial more than 26 mils ‘above’ your zero with that turret”, notes Precision Rifle Blog, *“That is part of the design… so that you are always either on the first or second revolution, and there isn’t a third”*. This design choice simplifies turret use (preventing the shooter from accidentally getting lost on a third rev), but it also means the scope cannot utilize additional travel even if it has more mechanically – you must add an external incline to shift the zero. In practice, many ELR shooters using S&B have to employ adjustable scope bases (like the ERA-TAC or Ivey mounts) to get enough elevation for very long shots. Competing scopes often offer more internal travel: for instance, the Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 has about 100 MOA (~29 mil) total; the Leupold Mark 5HD 35mm tube models boast up to 35 mil (~120 MOA) of elevation; the new Vortex Razor Gen III 6-36×56 has around 36 mrad. Some specialized ELR scopes (like the March Genesis) even provide 400 MOA by design. While those extremes are niche, the trend is clear – more elevation is better in ELR, and S&B’s older designs didn’t prioritize maximum internal travel. Unless an S&B is paired with a steep 40–60 MOA rail, an ELR shooter might “dial through” its usable elevation before reaching 2-mile targets, then have to hold over (which is less precise). Many competitors would rather have a scope that gives them more headroom natively. This doesn’t make S&B unusable for ELR (plenty of military users dial and then hold with mil reticles), but it’s a mark against it when compared to, say, a Tangent Theta or ZCO that can both dial further and still include a zero-stop and clear turret markings. The bottom line is Schmidt & Bender’s turret philosophy, while elegant for tactical use, imposes a constraint for extreme range shooting that some other brands do not have.
Durability & Tracking Reliability: ELR rifles are typically heavy-recoiling (chambered in .375 CheyTac, .416 Barrett, .338 Lapua Improved, etc.), and competitors often fire dozens of rounds per match. A scope must endure this punishment and maintain zero and tracking integrity. Historically, S&B scopes are considered robust (they’ve been used on military sniper rifles and even the Barrett .50 BMG). However, in competition circles, there have been concerns about S&B’s ability to hold zero under stress. One former PRS champion recounted that he switched off S&B after experiencing a consistent 1 mil point-of-impact shift due to a minor fall or impact on his S&B PM II – essentially the scope lost zero after a bump. He found that unsettling (understandably, as a 1 mil shift at long range is huge), and noted that another top shooter had “already moved to a different scope” for similar reasons. While this is anecdotal, such stories carry weight among competitors. Once you lose confidence in a scope’s ruggedness or tracking, it’s hard to trust it again. By contrast, brands like Nightforce have built their reputation on never giving up zero – they are widely regarded as “tank tough.” Tangent Theta and ZCO also emphasize extreme mechanical reliability; these scopes have stainless steel or hardened components and are tested for repeated impact. Many shooters simply feel that these newer high-end scopes are less likely to fail than an older-design S&B. It’s worth noting that S&B’s designs (like the Double Turn turret) are decades old now – proven, but perhaps not incorporating newer shock-absorbing design improvements. Also, S&B scopes have more moving parts in some cases (the color-change rev indicator, etc.), which could be points of failure. None of this is to say S&B scopes are fragile – they are not – but the perception in the community is that S&B is no longer the reigning king of reliability. As PrecisionRifleBlog’s author (an accomplished shooter) summarized when explaining S&B’s decline: *“I heard at least one other credible story about an S&B losing zero from a mild side impact. That 1 mil shift…is why the two Schmidt scopes I still own aren’t on my competition rifles”*. Instead, he now runs Nightforce, TT, or ZCO, explicitly because he knows they’ll hold zero under rough conditions. For ELR shooters, who may have to haul their rifles across rugged terrain and cannot afford a shift mid-match, that confidence is paramount.
Weight & Form Factor: ELR rifles are often 25–40+ pounds, so the difference of a few ounces in a scope isn’t a huge issue for most (unlike, say, a hunter or tactical sniper carrying gear all day). Still, scope weight and size do matter somewhat – especially if balancing a rifle or staying within a class weight limit. Schmidt & Bender scopes are generally on par or slightly heavier than equivalent models from other brands. For instance, an S&B PM II 5-25×56 weighs around 2.5 lbs (40 oz). The Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 is about 2.3 lbs (37 oz). A Vortex Razor HD Gen II 4.5-27×56 is notoriously heavy ~48 oz (3 lbs), so S&B isn’t the heaviest by any means. The newer S&B 6-36×56 is roughly 38 oz, similar to ZCO’s 5-27×56 (~39 oz). Meanwhile, the Leupold Mark 5HD 5-25×56 is only ~30 oz. In ELR, many shooters actually add weight to their scope (via massive mounts or prism devices), so a heavy scope isn’t a deal-breaker. But if a shooter can save weight and not sacrifice performance, they might. The weight factor ties into S&B’s older design philosophy – they are built with thick maintubes and lots of glass/metal, which is durable but not svelte. Competing products like the Mark 5HD or even the Kahles K525i have shown it’s possible to shed weight while still maintaining robustness. In practice, weight is probably the least significant factor here, but it’s a small strike against S&B for those who desire a lighter rig. No one is avoiding S&B purely because it’s a few ounces heavier, but when combined with other drawbacks, it doesn’t offer any weight advantage to counterbalance them either.
Reticle Availability and Preferences: Reticles are a huge part of a scope’s suitability for competition. In ELR, shooters often prefer “tree” reticles or at least reticles with hold-off points, because they may need to hold for wind/elevation corrections quickly without dialing. They also demand reticles that are fine enough for precision but visible enough for spotter communication. This is an area where Schmidt & Bender lagged behind the competition for years. Historically, S&B offered a limited set of reticles, many of which were designed in the 1990s or early 2000s (P3, P4L fine, Mil-Dot, etc.). As advanced grid reticles (Horus designs like H59, Tremor3, etc.) gained popularity, S&B was slow to adopt them – they eventually offered H59 and Tremor3 in some models, but long after brands like Nightforce, Bushnell, and Vortex had embraced these options. Moreover, S&B never developed a widely-praised proprietary competition reticle of its own. Meanwhile, other companies were working directly with top shooters to create reticles that suit modern needs. Examples include the Kahles SKMR and SKMR3 (designed with Shannon Kay), Nightforce’s MIL-XT (a refined tree reticle popular in PRS), Vortex’s EBR-7C, Tangent Theta’s Gen2XR and newer Gen3XR grids, and the Leupold PR2 (developed with input from elite PRS shooters). These reticles tend to have clean central aiming points with finely graduated hold dots or hashes, and an intuitive tree for wind holds. S&B’s offerings, in contrast, were seen as either too basic or too cluttered. The famed S&B P4L reticle, for instance, has thick posts and lacks a lower “tree” – great for military use a decade ago, but not the top choice for today’s competitors. S&B did introduce the H2CMR and H59 in their catalog, but even then, competitors noted that many of S&B’s reticles feel outdated or not ideal. PrecisionRifleBlog commented that Schmidt & Bender *“hasn’t responded to some of the modern reticle designs like other manufacturers… The Leupold PR2-MIL is a good example of what guys are looking for… typically thinner and less cluttered than a lot of what Schmidt offers”*. In fact, the author of that analysis (who used to run S&B scopes) admitted that years ago he even considered paying for custom reticle plates in his Schmidt & Benders because the factory reticles weren’t to his liking. Simply put, S&B was behind the curve on reticles. Even as of 2023, S&B’s newer scopes like the 5-45×56 and 6-36×56 come with some improved reticle choices (they offer Tremor3, H59, Grid MK2 MOD, etc.), but by this time many shooters had already switched to brands that offered their preferred reticle earlier. In ELR in particular, some shooters prefer the simpler reticles for aiming precision (e.g., a fine crosshair with minimal clutter, since ELR often involves dialing and a spotter calling corrections), while others want a full grid to quickly spot misses and make corrections without dialing. S&B can do both in theory (they have simple reticles and Horus options), but the key is that S&B didn’t build a strong reputation in the competition community for having the “right” reticles when it mattered. Competitors gravitated to scopes that did – for example, the popularity of Kahles and Nightforce in PRS owes a lot to their reticle designs that competitors loved. At this point, it’s somewhat self-reinforcing: shooters don’t see many S&B scopes in use, so they also don’t see people running, say, an H2CMR reticle (one of S&B’s main offerings), so it never becomes “the reticle to have.” Instead, you hear people talking about the latest Mil-XT or PR2 or JTAC reticle, none of which S&B offers. This reticle mismatch definitely contributed to S&B falling out of favor among U.S. long-range shooters.
In summary, the feature trade-offs have not favored Schmidt & Bender for ELR. S&B scopes undeniably have phenomenal glass clarity – many shooters still acknowledge that looking through an S&B PM II is a joy, often cited as “second to none” optically. However, modern scopes are more than just glass. Competitors are willing to trade a tiny bit of optical perfection for better turrets, more travel, a better reticle, or more confidence in the scope’s toughness. As one shooter bluntly put it, *“If pure optical quality was all that mattered, we’d all be shooting March High Masters… But scopes are aiming devices, not spotting scopes. We pay the big money for precision turrets, toughness, ability to hold zero… those features separate the new scopes and leave behind some legacy brands like S&B.”*. This sentiment encapsulates why, feature-wise, many see S&B as a legacy design that hasn’t kept up with the evolving requirements of ELR competition.
Sponsorship and Influence on Adoption
Another major factor in the prevalence (or absence) of certain optics is the role of sponsorships and marketing within the shooting sports. In the U.S., companies that actively sponsor competitions or shooters tend to gain market share because their products are seen and used widely. Sponsorship trends have decidedly not favored Schmidt & Bender in the ELR world.
On one hand, brands like Nightforce, Vortex, Leupold, and others have heavily invested in the competitive shooting scene. Nightforce, for example, is the title sponsor of the Nightforce ELR Steel Challenge, one of the prominent ELR matches in the U.S., and has sponsored many PRS/NRL matches and competitors for years. Walk the line at an ELR event, and you’re likely to see Nightforce banners and several sponsored shooters using Nightforce scopes (often wearing Nightforce jerseys, if it’s PRS style). This visibility reinforces Nightforce’s dominance – even unsponsored shooters see that “everyone” is using these scopes, including the winners, and it builds trust that maybe I should use what the champs use. Vortex is also a huge sponsor in the precision realm; they sponsor matches and have a cadre of sponsored shooters. Vortex’s 50% discount for military/LE (mentioned earlier) also functions as a kind of sponsorship – it drastically lowers the entry barrier for a large swath of shooters, essentially seeding the market with their optics. Leupold actively sponsors many tactical and precision rifle matches and works with top shooters on product development (the Army Marksmanship Unit and others use Leupold). Kahles has the “Kahles Cup” and other match sponsorships, and even smaller brands like Bushnell and Burris have had sponsored shooters or prize table presence.
Schmidt & Bender, in contrast, has a very limited sponsorship footprint in the U.S. They do not title-sponsor major matches, nor do they maintain a large team of sponsored shooters on the PRS circuit. This is partly a strategic choice – S&B’s primary market historically has been military/LE and European hunting, not civilian competition. Additionally, their budget for marketing in the U.S. precision scene seems modest. The result is that Schmidt & Bender is rarely seen on prize tables or in sponsorship listings, which means fewer top shooters have an incentive to use them. In the precision rifle community, it’s an open discussion that certain brands are more engaged. As one competitive shooter commented, *“the precision rifle community [is supported by some brands] far more than Schmidt & Bender… and we notice that.”* Shooters appreciate companies that support their sport – it creates goodwill and, frankly, often comes with product discounts or free gear for those top shooters. S&B’s lack of outreach means if a shooter wants to use an S&B, they’re almost certainly paying full price out-of-pocket (whereas a Nightforce or Vortex sponsor deal might provide a scope or two for free or at cost). Given S&B’s very high prices, this is a deterrent for many competitors.
Even beyond direct sponsorship, brand presence and community engagement matter. U.S. shooters tend to hear about new products at competitions, on forums, podcasts, and social media where fellow competitors and influencers talk about what works. Nightforce and Vortex have dedicated staff interacting with the community and addressing competitor needs. For example, Nightforce has been known to respond to feedback (the development of the MIL-XT reticle and improving turret designs came from user input). Kahles worked with PRS shooters to get their K525i’s ergonomics right (like left-side windage options, etc.). Schmidt & Bender, being a more traditional company, has not been as visible in these channels. They don’t have as much of a social media push or forum presence in the U.S. competition scene. This could give the impression that S&B is “out of touch” or at least not actively supporting the sport.
Now, it’s worth noting that not all top shooters are sponsored, and many will choose the gear they truly believe gives them the best chance to win (because prize money and personal pride are on the line). In the 2020 ELR match data, the majority of shooters – including the winner – were likely unsponsored amateurs or semi-pros who simply bought what worked for them. The fourth-place finisher (who authored the PRB report) explicitly said he had no sponsors and bought his Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 with his own money because he felt it was the best for him. So, sponsorship isn’t everything; if S&B truly outperformed all others, one might expect some top shooters to use them regardless. But the fact that even independent shooters aren’t choosing S&B in significant numbers indicates that performance and features (as discussed earlier) weigh heavily. Sponsorship then adds a reinforcing effect – the brands that are already a bit better for the game also happen to be the ones investing in the shooters, which further tilts the field in their favor.
In PRS (the precision rifle sport analogous to 3-gun but for long range), this effect is even more pronounced. Companies like Vortex and Nightforce have entire teams and side competitions (e.g., the Vortex Team Sniper Challenge, the Nightforce PRS Championship etc.). Schmidt & Bender has been virtually absent from PRS sponsor rolls. One could argue that PRS is not their target market, but PRS/NRL and ELR have overlapping communities and often the same shooters. So a shooter who uses, say, a Kahles or Nightforce in PRS is likely to also use it for ELR matches, sticking with what they know. In that sense, S&B’s lack of presence in the broader competitive scene indirectly hurts its adoption in ELR as well.
Finally, consider new entrants like Tangent Theta and ZCO. These brands became popular without large-scale sponsorship programs (Tangent Theta barely sponsors anyone or any match, yet 7% of ELR shooters were using them, and in PRS a decent handful use TT purely by choice). What they did have, however, was a compelling product that elite shooters raved about – essentially word of mouth sponsorship. Tangent’s and ZCO’s quality spoke for itself, and some well-respected shooters began championing them on forums and in interviews. In a way, their products “sponsored” themselves by winning matches or impressing people. S&B could theoretically benefit from this too if a top competitor chose an S&B and won big, but that hasn’t really happened in recent years. The last time S&B was the ubiquitous choice of champions was perhaps a decade ago when U.S. military sniper competitions saw many Accuracy International rifles topped with S&B PM II scopes. But in the civilian ELR/PRS world, it’s been a while since an S&B was in the winner’s circle with everyone talking about it.
To sum up, sponsorship and marketing dynamics in the U.S. have strongly favored S&B’s competitors. Nightforce and others have flooded the field (literally) with their optics through support programs, whereas S&B has remained largely hands-off. The precision community notices and tends to rally around brands that support the sport. This has surely contributed to fewer people trying or sticking with Schmidt & Bender, accelerating its decline in popularity among U.S. shooters.
Cost and Availability in the U.S. Market
The practical aspects of cost, pricing, and availability are another piece of the puzzle. Simply put, Schmidt & Bender scopes are among the most expensive on the market, and their distribution and service network in the U.S. is relatively limited. This contrasts with some competitor brands that either cost less or are easier to buy and maintain in the U.S.
High Price Point: S&B scopes have premium price tags that can give even hardcore enthusiasts pause. For many years, a Schmidt & Bender PM II 5-25×56 was around a $3,000+ purchase. Newer S&B models have pushed well above that. The long-awaited PM II 5-45×56 (with its enormous zoom range) debuted with an MSRP around $6,800–$7,200 in the U.S. – an almost stratospheric price for a single scope. Even the somewhat more modest PM II 6-36×56, introduced in 2022 to target PRS/ELR shooters, costs about $5,000. These prices are significantly higher than most of the competition. For comparison: a Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 runs about $3,600; a Kahles K525i about $3,000; a Vortex Razor Gen III 6-36×56 about $3,000; a Leupold Mark 5HD 7-35×56 ~$2,500. At the extreme high end, Tangent Theta 5-25×56’s are about $5,000 (similar to S&B’s 6-36), and ZCO 5-27×56 around $4,200–$4,500. So S&B is at the very top of the price spectrum, effectively tied with or above Tangent Theta as the costliest option.
Crucially, as we’ve explored, those other scopes often offer more modern features for the same or less money. That makes S&B a tough sell. It’s one thing if S&B were clearly superior to a $3,500 Nightforce – many would pay a premium for a big edge – but if it’s not clearly superior in usage, spending an extra $1,500+ is hard to justify. One precision rifle blogger put it wryly: *“For a current U.S. buyer, S&B is about as high as you can spend. A US purchase of a ZCO is more ‘economical’ (lol).”* In other words, S&B is basically the most expensive choice, and you can actually save money by going to an equally elite brand like ZCO or TT which might even be better in some ways. For budget-conscious competitors (and that’s most of them, since ELR shooting is already very expensive with the rifles, ammo, travel, etc.), S&B’s price alone is a deterrent. They look at the field and see plenty of people winning with scopes that cost half as much, and it becomes obvious where the value lies.
Discounts and Resale: Moreover, S&B historically hasn’t been part of the major discount programs. We mentioned Vortex’s 50% mil/LE program – S&B has nothing comparable publicly. Some military snipers might get S&Bs through unit purchase, but for civilian competitors, there’s no widespread pro deal. Nightforce and Kahles do offer select competitor pricing (for example, PRS members sometimes get a modest discount on certain brands). S&B being a German import means less flexibility on pricing. Additionally, when the time comes to upgrade or change equipment, resale value can factor in. S&B scopes do hold their value reasonably (there’s always some market for them), but the pool of buyers is smaller. A used Nightforce or Vortex will often get snapped up quickly in forums or classifieds, whereas a $5000 scope like S&B might take longer to find the right buyer. This can make people wary of tying up so much money in an S&B scope.
Availability and Distribution: Being a European manufacturer, Schmidt & Bender relies on a few U.S. distributors (like EuroOptic, Mile High Shooting, and sometimes opticsplanet, etc.) to sell their scopes stateside. Inventory can be sporadic; popular models or particular reticle combos might be back-ordered for long periods. In contrast, American companies (Nightforce is U.S.-based, Leupold is U.S., Vortex is U.S. (though scopes made overseas), etc.) have a more constant supply line within the country. It’s generally easier for a shooter to get their hands on a Nightforce – most large gun stores and online retailers carry them. If something is out of stock, Nightforce can ship more relatively quickly. For S&B, there have been times when certain models were hard to come by unless you imported privately or waited for a batch to come in. Limited availability means fewer new S&B scopes in circulation and less free marketing by sheer presence.
Service and Warranty: Availability isn’t just about buying the scope, but also servicing it. Here, S&B’s small U.S. footprint has historically been a disadvantage. If an S&B scope needed repair or adjustment, often it had to be sent to an authorized service center (there is one in the U.S., but major issues might even be sent back to Germany). This can introduce long wait times. By contrast, if a Nightforce has an issue, it goes to Nightforce’s U.S. facility in Idaho for relatively quick turnaround. Vortex’s famously fast warranty service is U.S.-based. Leupold, being U.S. made, often can fix or replace a scope in a week or two. The convenience and peace of mind of domestic service is a big deal for competitors – especially if an issue crops up right before a match. Many feel safer investing in a scope knowing that if something goes wrong, it can be resolved stateside without a ton of hassle. S&B’s service isn’t known to be poor, but it’s just not as accessible. And S&B’s warranty policy was long seen as notably worse: for many years, S&B only offered a 1-year limited warranty on its scopes, which is shockingly short given the price of the product. (In Europe, short warranties were standard, but U.S. consumers have come to expect lifetime warranties on high-end optics.) This policy made some Americans downright allergic to the idea of spending $3000+ on something with virtually no long-term guarantee. In recent years, presumably under competitive pressure, S&B extended their warranty (reports are that S&B USA now offers a 2-year warranty with a 10-year service period on new scopes, which is better but still not close to “forever” like many rivals). As PrecisionRifleBlog noted, *“a couple of years ago Schmidt & Bender only offered a 1-year warranty on their $3,000+ scopes… Vortex pushed the whole industry out of that [limited warranty mindset] with their customer-first warranty”*. So S&B was essentially shamed into improving warranty coverage, but by the time they did, companies like Vortex had already captured the loyalty of many shooters by treating them so well.
Long-Term Cost of Ownership: When you factor in initial price, needed accessories (like an adjustable mount due to elevation limits), and potential downtime for service, the effective cost of running an S&B can be higher than running another scope. For example, an ELR shooter with an S&B PM II might decide they need a $400 ERA-TAC adjustable base to get the most out of it (as PRB’s author did, partly for his S&B scopes). That’s an additional cost not every scope requires. If something goes wrong out of warranty, an S&B repair could be costly, whereas Vortex would do it free. Over years of competition, these things add up.
In essence, from a market standpoint, Schmidt & Bender is a premium product with premium costs and just average support in the U.S. The competition offers either premium product with better support (Nightforce, TT, ZCO) or slightly lower-tier product with vastly better pricing and still good support (Vortex, Leupold). It’s easy to see why a rational consumer, even a hardcore ELR shooter, might opt for the latter options. Unless money is truly no object, S&B doesn’t obviously justify its extra cost for the majority of users. And those few for whom money is no object might actually prefer something like a Tangent Theta for the reasons discussed. Thus S&B gets squeezed out of the equation for many buyers.
Community Culture and Preferences
Lastly, it’s important to consider the cultural factors and feedback loops in the shooting community that influence scope choices. The U.S. long-range shooting community has its own tastes and biases, which can either boost or hinder a brand like Schmidt & Bender.
“Buy American” Sentiment: There is a segment of shooters who intentionally support American-made or American-based companies. Whether out of patriotism, perceived quality, or the desire to easily communicate with the manufacturer, these folks will often lean towards Nightforce (U.S. company, many scopes made in USA or Japan), Leupold (made in USA), Vortex (American company, though scopes made in Asia), or U.S.-designed products like ZCO (partial U.S. roots) over a fully European import. Schmidt & Bender, being a German manufacturer with a lower U.S. profile, doesn’t benefit from any “home team” advantage. In some cases, shooters might avoid non-U.S. optics simply because of a (not always accurate) perception that American companies handle customer needs better. While top competitors are usually very pragmatic (they’ll use whatever gives results, regardless of origin), among the broader community “Buy American” is definitely a thing. This ethos also ties into pride in supporting companies that, as mentioned, support the shooter back. An average ELR enthusiast might say: “Why would I send $5k to Germany for a scope when I can support an Idaho company (NF) or an Oregon company (Leupold) and get as good a result?” That’s a common refrain on forums and Facebook groups.
Customer Service Expectations: American consumers in this market have been somewhat “spoiled” by exceptional customer service from companies like Vortex, Leupold, and Nightforce. If you drop your Nightforce off a cliff or bust your Vortex’s erector by overtorquing, you’ll likely get it fixed or replaced under warranty without much fuss. People now expect that kind of no-questions-asked service for an expensive scope. S&B’s old 1-year warranty felt out of line with that expectation, and even with an improved warranty, there’s perhaps less confidence that S&B would be as lenient or fast. Indeed, some shooters have shared stories of slow turnarounds or difficulties in getting certain issues resolved (this can vary case by case). The broader point is, the U.S. community values being taken care of by the manufacturer, and if they’ve had great experiences with one brand’s service, they tend to stick to that brand. It fosters brand loyalty that S&B hasn’t had the chance to build in the same way due to their prior policies.
Community Feedback Loop: Once a notion takes hold in the community – such as “S&B scopes are outdated” or “S&B won’t fix your scope if it breaks” – it can be hard to shake, even if the company improves products or policies. The internet is full of discussions where people echo the points we’ve covered: limited reticles, high cost, not worth it vs. NF or TT, etc. For instance, on forums like Sniper’s Hide and in Reddit threads, you’ll find comments along the lines of *“Schmidt’s fallen out of favor… poor reticle choices and high price point”*, or shooters noting that they personally switched away from S&B because other scopes offered more value or reliability. These firsthand accounts carry a lot of weight for prospective buyers. If an up-and-coming ELR shooter asks, “What scope should I get?” the answers are typically dominated by brands like Nightforce, Vortex, Kahles, etc., with S&B rarely mentioned except perhaps by someone who has military experience with one. The collective wisdom (rightly or wrongly) steers people away from Schmidt & Bender for ELR applications in the U.S.
Familiarity and Training: Many U.S. shooters have also trained with certain optics due to the prevalence mentioned. For example, a competitor might start with a Vortex Viper, then upgrade to a Razor, then to a Nightforce – because those were common progression steps and each had familiar Mil-based reticles and similar turret styles. S&B’s user interface (like the single-turn vs double-turn turret with color indicators) is a bit different. If few people use S&B, then few people teach others how to use S&Bs or swap gear with S&Bs, and so on. The training community (in civilian long-range classes and such) often uses what’s popular – again Nightforce, Vortex, etc. If you attend a class, odds are the instructor has long experience with those and can show you how to set the zero-stop on your Nightforce or walk you through your Kahles’s subtensions. But if you showed up with an S&B PM II, you might actually be the odd one and on your own to figure out certain quirks. This lack of institutional knowledge spreading about S&B (compared to, say, the rich knowledge base on a Nightforce’s ideal torque settings or common failure points, etc.) can make people shy to be the “guinea pig” using one.
Psychological Aspect – Trust and Confidence: Finally, shooting at extreme distances is as much a mental game as a technical one. Competitors need absolute confidence in their equipment so they can focus on reading wind and executing shots. If there’s a seed of doubt like “I’m not sure if my scope’s clicks are true” or “hopefully the zero held after that bump,” it can affect performance. The community at large currently places a lot of trust in certain brands – Nightforce, for example, has a near-legendary status for tracking reliability; Tangent Theta and ZCO are spoken of with reverence for their precision. In recent discussions, S&B unfortunately is sometimes spoken of with nostalgia (“they were great in their time”) or criticism (“they haven’t kept up”). That undercuts confidence. A shooter is unlikely to spend top dollar on a scope that their peers are lukewarm about. And if they already have one and they read about someone else’s scope losing zero or having less-than-expected adjustment range, it plants doubt in their mind too. On the flip side, there’s almost a herd immunity effect: if everyone around you has a Nightforce and reports zero problems, you collectively bolster each other’s confidence that your gear is not the limiting factor. In such an environment, S&B becomes an outlier choice – and few are willing to take an expensive risk on an outlier that the community doesn’t overwhelmingly endorse for competition use.
To put it succinctly, the cultural momentum in the U.S. is against Schmidt & Bender for ELR. It’s not personal or political – it’s simply that the brand doesn’t fit the mold of what this community currently prizes, and the community’s own feedback loop continues to reinforce that. Shooters in the U.S. ELR scene tend to prefer what’s proven, popular, well-supported, and perceived as a good value or a competitive edge. At the moment, S&B is seen as providing neither a cost advantage, nor a feature advantage, nor a support advantage – so it has faded into semi-obscurity among competitors despite its illustrious reputation elsewhere.
Technical and Logistical Disadvantages for U.S. ELR
Bringing the discussion full circle, we can list the key disadvantages or challenges Schmidt & Bender scopes face for U.S. ELR applications, as identified through competition reports and expert/enthusiast analysis:
Limited Elevation for ELR Needs: As discussed, S&B’s turret designs (e.g. double-turn 26 mrad) can constrain the available on-board elevation adjustment. In ELR, where extreme “come-ups” are required, this is a tactical disadvantage unless the shooter adds external incline. Competing scopes often allow dialing more elevation or come with higher total ranges, reducing the hassle for the shooter.
Older Reticle Selection: Until very recently, S&B did not offer many of the reticles favored by modern long-range shooters (like refined hold-over grids or extremely clean competition reticles). Their legacy reticles were either too cluttered or too sparse for many tastes. While S&B has added some new reticles, they are still viewed as behind on this front. Shooters may not find their preferred reticle in an S&B, pushing them to other brands that have exactly what they want.
Lack of a Zero-Stop on Some Models: One specific feature issue – older S&B PM II scopes did not have a true zero-stop (they had a sort of stop in the double-turn but not as straightforward as modern implementations). The newer DT II+ turret does include a zero-stop, but by the time it was introduced, just about every other competitor’s scope had long had easy zero-stop systems. It’s a small thing, but when switching between multiple distances in a stage (common in ELR competitions), a reliable zero-stop is important for speed and avoiding mistakes. S&B finally caught up here, but early on this was a knock against them compared to Nightforce or Kahles which had zero-stops.
Warranty & Service Concerns: The historically short warranty (1 year) and the need to possibly send scopes overseas for service are definite negatives in the U.S. ELR context. Even if the scopes function well, just knowing that your $5k optic has effectively no lifetime support (beyond what you can pay for) reduces the appeal. Competitors prefer a “safety net” for their expensive gear, which brands like Vortex and Nightforce provide more readily.
Cost/Benefit Imbalance: S&B scopes ask for a lot of money, but in the ELR game they aren’t delivering a correspondingly huge advantage in hit probability or convenience. In fact, one could argue they deliver less functionality in some respects (as we’ve enumerated). From a technical perspective, an ideal ELR scope might be one with maximum internal adjustment, repeatable turrets, a useful reticle, reasonable weight, and rugged construction – all at a price that lets the shooter also afford the custom rifle, match fees, reloading components, travel, etc. S&B’s contribution to that equation is questionable: you pay more, and you may get stellar optics and a trusted name, but you sacrifice other criteria.
Slow Innovation Cycle: Technically, S&B has not released as many new models tailored to this market as others have. For years, the 5-25×56 PM II was the staple. The 3-20×50 was more for tactical field use. Only recently did they introduce higher magnification scopes (like 5-45×56 and 6-36×56) to answer competitors’ offerings. By the time they did, other brands had already iterated a couple of times (Vortex went through Gen I, Gen II Razors, now Gen III; Nightforce expanded from NXS to several ATACR models; new players like ZCO emerged). So in the technical race, S&B was not leading – they were playing catch-up. As one shooter observed, S&B is a “very traditional company” that *“hasn’t updated its coating tech much in 20 years”*, implying that even their famous glass could be improved with more modern engineering if they invested in it. The lack of rapid innovation meant that by the time S&B had a 6-36×56 scope in 2022, shooters already had multiple proven choices in that spec range from other brands. Thus, S&B didn’t bring anything new to the table except the name and price tag.
Smaller User Base for Feedback: From a logistical standpoint, having few S&B users in ELR means there’s less community knowledge on how to optimize them for ELR. For instance, understanding how to properly mount with extra cant, or which mounts work best with the saddle turret, etc., comes mostly from experience. With Nightforce or Vortex, there are well-trodden paths and many users to ask for advice. With S&B, an ELR shooter might be trailblazing or reliant on sparse info. This can be a minor hurdle but is a factor in a high-stakes environment – people tend to go with the herd for things like this, ironically, because it’s perceived as safer.
In fairness, none of these disadvantages mean that S&B scopes “can’t do the job.” They certainly can be and have been used successfully to hit targets at extreme ranges. S&B scopes still feature top-notch lenses, durable construction, and precise adjustments. A skilled team could win a match with an S&B just as they could with any other quality scope, assuming they know their dope and their equipment. However, when shooters are evaluating what gives them the best odds of success and the most convenience getting there, S&B’s downsides stack up enough that most opt for a different tool.
Conclusion
Schmidt & Bender rifle scopes, once almost synonymous with elite long-range shooting, have become uncommon in U.S. extreme long-range competitions due to a convergence of factors. Objective data from recent competitions shows S&B with a vanishingly small market share among U.S. ELR shooters (on the order of 1–2%), and this is not a coincidence. Competitors have gravitated towards scopes that offer more practical advantages for the game: greater elevation travel, cutting-edge reticles, proven durability, and strong domestic support networks. Brands like Nightforce, Kahles, Vortex, Tangent Theta, Zero Compromise, and others have capitalized on those needs – either by innovating technologically or by investing in the shooting community (often both). In contrast, Schmidt & Bender’s offerings remained rooted in an earlier paradigm of long-range shooting.
When comparing features, S&B’s legendary optical clarity and military pedigree couldn’t overcome the modern requirements of ELR competition: shooters wanted more dialable range, better turret ergonomics, and reticles geared to quick correction and wind holds – areas where other scopes pulled ahead. Furthermore, the economic and cultural landscape favored S&B’s rivals. S&B’s very high prices and erstwhile short warranty looked out of place next to competitors offering reliability guarantees and lower-cost options (or huge discounts for those in the community). And as American shooters saw their peers and role models winning matches with other brands (often U.S.-backed brands), a feedback loop formed that reinforced the preference for those optics.
In essence, Schmidt & Bender scopes became a solution without a problem in the U.S. ELR scene – an excellent but very expensive optic that didn’t clearly outperform the alternatives that everyone else was using. As one precision rifle expert observed, *“scopes are aiming devices… we pay for what helps us aim and hit, and that’s where [newer scopes] leave behind legacy brands like S&B”*. Until and unless Schmidt & Bender makes a concerted effort to tailor their products and support to the specific desires of the U.S. ELR competitor (and perhaps engage more in the community), it’s likely to remain a rarity on the firing line.
For now, U.S. extreme long-range shooters tend to choose scopes that instill confidence through widespread use and demonstrable success. Unfortunately for Schmidt & Bender, the community’s confidence – as reflected in competition usage, forum discussions, and expert commentary – has largely shifted to other brands. Thus, while S&B scopes are without doubt high-quality instruments, the combination of technical trade-offs, sponsorship dynamics, cost factors, and cultural preferences has made them a less common choice among the current generation of U.S. ELR competitors.
Sources: Competition equipment reports and statistics from PrecisionRifleBlog; expert analysis on scope features and trends; and community insights from forums and reviews, all of which consistently highlight the reasons above. These converging lines of evidence explain why you’ll seldom see a Schmidt & Bender on the winner’s rifle at a U.S. ELR match, despite the brand’s illustrious reputation in other arenas.
Why Schmidt & Bender Scopes Are Rare in U.S. ELR Competition
Introduction & Summary
Schmidt & Bender (S&B) rifle scopes are renowned for optical quality and have a storied military following, yet they are a rare sight on the rifles of U.S. extreme long-range (ELR) competitors. In high-profile ELR matches, S&B usage is minimal compared to dominant brands like Nightforce, Vortex, Kahles, Tangent Theta, and newcomers such as Zero Compromise Optics (ZCO). A mix of factors explains this disparity: competition data show low adoption of S&B, and practical considerations like elevation travel, durability, weight, and reticle options often favor other scopes. Additionally, sponsorships, pricing, and cultural preferences (including “buy American” sentiments and customer service expectations) influence what optics U.S. ELR shooters choose. This report examines each of these factors in detail, drawing on competition reports, expert analysis, and community feedback to understand why S&B scopes are less common in the U.S. ELR scene.
ELR Competition Optics Usage Statistics
Data from Matches: Equipment surveys from U.S. ELR competitions reveal that Schmidt & Bender scopes make up only a tiny fraction of the optics in use. For example, at a major 2020 ELR match in Wyoming with over 100 competitors, Nightforce was by far the most popular scope brand (39% of shooters) – more than the next five brands combined. Kahles (14%) and Vortex (10%) were the second and third most common, followed by Tangent Theta (7%). By contrast, Schmidt & Bender did not even rank among the top five brands. In that survey, only about 2 shooters (≈2% of the field) were using S&B scopes. In fact, S&B was on par with niche or newer brands (like IOR, Bushnell, Leica) in terms of representation, meaning it was nearly absent from the firing line.
Most Popular Scopes among ~100 shooters at a 2020 U.S. ELR match – Nightforce dominates, while Schmidt & Bender is barely represented (only ~2 shooters). Color bars indicate finish placement (black=Top 10, etc.), showing top shooters gravitating to Nightforce, Tangent Theta, ZCO, etc., with virtually no S&B among them.
Trend in Precision Shooting: The low showing for S&B in ELR is consistent with its declining use in other U.S. long-range disciplines. In Precision Rifle Series (PRS) competitions (which are tactical long-range matches, though not ELR distances, they reflect similar optic preferences), S&B has plummeted in popularity. As of 2024, only 1% of top PRS/NRL shooters reported using a Schmidt & Bender – a steep drop from being the 4th most popular scope brand about five years prior. (By comparison, Nightforce, Vortex, Kahles, and Leupold each command far larger shares in PRS.) This decline in S&B usage underscores that U.S. competitors overall have gravitated to other optics, leaving S&B a very small niche.
In summary, the numbers tell the story: Schmidt & Bender scopes are seldom seen in U.S. ELR matches, whereas Nightforce scopes (often the ATACR series) and others dominate the firing line. The following sections explore why this is the case.
Comparing S&B to Other Popular ELR Optics
To understand S&B’s diminished role, it helps to compare its scopes against the other top choices for ELR shooters:
Nightforce (ATACR series): Nightforce is the benchmark in U.S. ELR competition optics. It was the clear favorite in the stats (nearly 40% usage), and for good reason. Nightforce ATACR scopes are known for robust durability, reliable tracking, and generous adjustment range – all critical for ELR. Top shooters trust Nightforce to hold zero and dial true even under heavy recoil or rough handling. For example, the Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 F1 was overwhelmingly the most popular single model in the Wyoming ELR match (chosen by ~60% of NF users). Nightforce scopes also benefit from strong U.S. presence: the company (though manufacturing some models abroad) is American, with a U.S. service center and a reputation for excellent customer support. In practice, many competitors consider Nightforce “bombproof” and a safe choice – even if its glass may not be quite as optically pristine as Schmidt & Bender’s. As one experienced shooter put it, “the Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 doesn’t have as good glass as the Schmidt…but it isn’t bad,” and it makes up for that with ruggedness and consistency. Notably, Nightforce invests heavily in the competition scene (they title-sponsor matches like the Nightforce ELR Steel Challenge and support many shooters), which further cements their popularity.
Vortex (Razor HD series): Vortex has captured a solid share of the ELR/long-range market (about 10% in the ELR match survey). The Razor HD Gen II and Gen III scopes offer good optical quality and durability at a more affordable price point than S&B. But the biggest Vortex selling point is value and support: Vortex’s top-tier scopes cost significantly less than S&B’s, and the company’s “VIP” lifetime warranty and customer service are legendary. Shooters know that if they somehow break a Vortex, the company will fix or replace it with no questions asked. Furthermore, Vortex aggressively courts the market with discounts – especially a 50% off program for military and law enforcement personnel. This means a $2,500 Razor Gen II effectively costs ~$1,250 for qualified buyers, an unbeatable deal that has undoubtedly put a lot of Vortex scopes on rifles. In the ELR competition realm, Vortex scopes have been capable – for instance, some top shooters do use them – but interestingly, data showed relatively fewer Vortex users among the highest finishers. (In that 2020 match, only 2 of the top 50 competitors ran Vortex, and none of the top 10, even though Vortex was 3rd in overall popularity.) This could be coincidence, but it suggests that while many shooters start with Vortex for its value, the very top competitors often gravitate to other “alpha-tier” scopes as they seek any possible edge. Nonetheless, Vortex remains extremely popular in the broader long-range community, whereas S&B – with its far higher cost and no equivalent discount programs – has comparatively few takers.
Kahles: Kahles (the Austrian “tactical” sister company of Swarovski) was the second most popular brand in the ELR match survey (14%). Kahles scopes like the K525i 5-25×56 are prized for their excellent optics and smart features. They offer rugged build quality similar to other European scopes, but unlike traditional hunting Swarovski scopes, Kahles models come with modern tactical reticles and user-friendly turrets. In fact, Kahles worked with top U.S. competitors (such as Shannon Kay) to develop reticles (e.g. SKMR series) that appeal to precision shooters. This willingness to cater to competitor preferences has helped Kahles gain a following. Kahles scopes are still expensive (on par with Nightforce), but notably less than S&B’s highest-end offerings. With strong performance and a push into the PRS/ELR market in recent years, Kahles secured a place as a top choice. It’s telling that Kahles surpassed Schmidt & Bender in popularity – something that might not have been true a decade ago – due to better alignment with what modern shooters want (reticles, features, price).
Tangent Theta (TT): Tangent Theta, a Canadian brand, represents the very high end of optics and is often mentioned in the same breath as (or above) S&B in terms of quality. In the Wyoming ELR match, TT scopes were 4th overall at 7% usage, but interestingly they were over-represented among the top finishers – the 1st and 5th place shooters were using Tangent Theta 5-25×56 scopes. This reflects TT’s reputation: these scopes are exceptional, with arguably class-leading mechanical precision (ultra-repeatable turrets, an ingenious tool-less zero-stop, etc.) and superb glass. Essentially, Tangent Theta took over where the premier “old school” European scopes (like Hensoldt and S&B PMII) left off, incorporating modern improvements. They are also extremely expensive (often slightly more than S&B). Despite minimal marketing, TT has a small but devoted following among those who demand the best. As one analysis noted, *“scopes like TT and ZCO really shine and leave behind some legacy brands like S&B – with things like precise zero stops, toolless re-zero, turret feel…worth paying for”*. In practice, Tangent Theta has stolen some of S&B’s former thunder in the ultra-premium segment by offering equal (or better) optical clarity with updated features and rock-solid mechanics. Shooters who might have bought an S&B in years past now often opt for a Tangent Theta if they can justify the price.
Zero Compromise Optic (ZCO): ZCO is a relatively new entrant (founded ~2018) that has rapidly become a top-tier name. As the name implies, Zero Compromise scopes aim to provide no weak points – combining top-level optics, robust mechanics, and modern features. The company is a collaboration between U.S. and Austrian designers (including ex-Nightforce and Kahles personnel). In competition, ZCO made a splash early: for example, a shooter running a ZCO 5-27×56 took 2nd place at the 2020 ELR match. By 2023/24, many elite PRS/NRL shooters also switched to ZCO. These scopes are direct competitors to S&B in price and quality – but they have the advantage of being brand new designs optimized for today’s shooters. A ZCO has features like advanced reticles (the MPCT series), super-repeatable turrets, and crystal-clear glass that rivals Tangent and S&B. Essentially, ZCO offers the prestige and performance of a European scope with the input of top U.S. shooters and modern engineering. This is very appealing in the precision community. So while ZCO hasn’t achieved mass market share yet (only a few percent of shooters overall in 2020), it is highly respected and was already represented among top finishers. Many shooters who “have S&B money” are now choosing ZCO instead – one forum user quipped, *“If you’re willing to spend S&B money, buy a ZCO… it’s what the cool kids are using”*.
March Optics: March is a Japanese brand known for ultra-high magnification scopes and innovative designs (for example, the March “Genesis” scopes offer an extreme elevation range for ELR). However, March scopes have a fairly limited presence in U.S. ELR competitions. They did not show up among the top 50 in the 2020 data, suggesting very few competitors were using them. March’s niche is somewhat different – they are popular in certain benchrest and F-class circles, and a few ELR shooters who prioritize absolute optical resolution or massive adjustment might use a March. In fact, some experts acknowledge that optically, March scopes are superb. One shooter who compared a March High Master side-by-side with a classic S&B PM II noted the March “crushed” the older S&B in image quality, remarking that “best Japanese glass >> best Euro glass” in that case. That implies March has achieved incredible clarity and could rival or exceed S&B’s vaunted optics. However, March scopes come with trade-offs: they are very expensive (often in the $3K–$5K range, with the Genesis ELR model costing even more) and not widely distributed in the U.S. The brand also historically offered somewhat unconventional reticles and less mainstream marketing. Thus, while March is respected by optics aficionados, the average ELR competitor in the U.S. is far more likely to pick a proven Nightforce or a supported brand than seek out a March. The limited sponsorship or exposure of March in U.S. matches means many shooters simply have little experience with them. In short, March produces some specialty ELR scopes (notably a 10-60× scope and others with huge elevation travel) that a handful of competitors might use for extreme distances, but they remain a rarity on the line compared to the more common options.
Leupold Mark 5HD: Although not mentioned in the question prompt, it’s worth noting Leupold’s contribution since it ties into the “American preference” theme. The Leupold Mark 5HD 5-25×56 or 7-35×56 scopes have become quite popular in PRS and also appear in some ELR contexts. Leupold (an American company) designed these scopes with direct feedback from U.S. shooters and military snipers, emphasizing a lightweight but durable package with excellent (if not class-leading) optics. The Mark 5HD’s strengths are its lighter weight (notably lighter than S&B/NF), very competitive price (around $2,000-$2,500 for 5-25×56), and some excellent reticle options (like the PR-2 MIL reticle developed with input from top competitors). While a Leupold Mark 5 may not have the absolute optical brilliance of an S&B, it is a “90% solution” at a fraction of the cost, which has led many shooters to adopt it. In fact, in PRS it became one of the most popular scopes because of this value proposition. The Mark 5’s presence in ELR is smaller (ELR shooters often prioritize heavy-duty scopes and massive elevation), but some do use it, especially for lighter ELR rigs or when aiming for a particular weight class. The key takeaway is that mid-priced scopes with strong feature sets have siphoned off many potential S&B customers. As one analysis noted, *“the Leupold Mark 5HD definitely doesn’t have the same optical clarity [as S&B], but is a huge value… It also has a really good reticle and all of the must-have features competitors are looking for”*. That combination of adequate performance and high value has made such scopes very common on firing lines where S&B’s premium scopes used to be more prevalent.
In summary, Schmidt & Bender today faces fierce competition on all sides. Brands like Nightforce and Vortex outcompete S&B on practicality, support, and price. Other high-end brands like Tangent Theta and ZCO beat or equal S&B on features and keep pace on optical performance. Even “mid-range” scopes like the Mark 5HD have eroded the market by offering good-enough performance at half the cost. Against this backdrop, S&B’s advantages (excellent glass and a long legacy) no longer translate to widespread adoption among modern ELR shooters. The next sections delve deeper into the specific technical and market factors behind this shift.
Feature Trade-offs: Elevation, Durability, Weight, Reticles
ELR shooting is extremely demanding on rifle scopes. Hitting targets at 1–2 miles (and beyond) requires dialing or holding enormous amounts of elevation, dealing with fierce recoil from big cartridges, and often making precise wind calls via the reticle. Small differences in scope features can become big advantages or disadvantages in this realm. Here is how Schmidt & Bender scopes compare on key features:
Elevation Travel: Perhaps the most critical feature for ELR is available elevation adjustment. ELR rifles often need 80–120+ MOA of “up” to get on target at 2 miles. If the scope doesn’t provide enough internal elevation, shooters must resort to canted rails, adjustable mounts, or prism attachments to reach those extreme drops. Schmidt & Bender’s flagship scopes have relatively limited internal elevation by ELR standards. For example, the popular S&B PM II 5-25×56 has about 26 mils of total elevation range in its double-turn turret (roughly 90 MOA). Not only is this total on the lower side compared to some competitors, but S&B’s double-turn design intentionally caps the usable elevation per revolution scheme: “You literally can’t dial more than 26 mils ‘above’ your zero with that turret”, notes Precision Rifle Blog, *“That is part of the design… so that you are always either on the first or second revolution, and there isn’t a third”*. This design choice simplifies turret use (preventing the shooter from accidentally getting lost on a third rev), but it also means the scope cannot utilize additional travel even if it has more mechanically – you must add an external incline to shift the zero. In practice, many ELR shooters using S&B have to employ adjustable scope bases (like the ERA-TAC or Ivey mounts) to get enough elevation for very long shots. Competing scopes often offer more internal travel: for instance, the Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 has about 100 MOA (~29 mil) total; the Leupold Mark 5HD 35mm tube models boast up to 35 mil (~120 MOA) of elevation; the new Vortex Razor Gen III 6-36×56 has around 36 mrad. Some specialized ELR scopes (like the March Genesis) even provide 400 MOA by design. While those extremes are niche, the trend is clear – more elevation is better in ELR, and S&B’s older designs didn’t prioritize maximum internal travel. Unless an S&B is paired with a steep 40–60 MOA rail, an ELR shooter might “dial through” its usable elevation before reaching 2-mile targets, then have to hold over (which is less precise). Many competitors would rather have a scope that gives them more headroom natively. This doesn’t make S&B unusable for ELR (plenty of military users dial and then hold with mil reticles), but it’s a mark against it when compared to, say, a Tangent Theta or ZCO that can both dial further and still include a zero-stop and clear turret markings. The bottom line is Schmidt & Bender’s turret philosophy, while elegant for tactical use, imposes a constraint for extreme range shooting that some other brands do not have.
Durability & Tracking Reliability: ELR rifles are typically heavy-recoiling (chambered in .375 CheyTac, .416 Barrett, .338 Lapua Improved, etc.), and competitors often fire dozens of rounds per match. A scope must endure this punishment and maintain zero and tracking integrity. Historically, S&B scopes are considered robust (they’ve been used on military sniper rifles and even the Barrett .50 BMG). However, in competition circles, there have been concerns about S&B’s ability to hold zero under stress. One former PRS champion recounted that he switched off S&B after experiencing a consistent 1 mil point-of-impact shift due to a minor fall or impact on his S&B PM II – essentially the scope lost zero after a bump. He found that unsettling (understandably, as a 1 mil shift at long range is huge), and noted that another top shooter had “already moved to a different scope” for similar reasons. While this is anecdotal, such stories carry weight among competitors. Once you lose confidence in a scope’s ruggedness or tracking, it’s hard to trust it again. By contrast, brands like Nightforce have built their reputation on never giving up zero – they are widely regarded as “tank tough.” Tangent Theta and ZCO also emphasize extreme mechanical reliability; these scopes have stainless steel or hardened components and are tested for repeated impact. Many shooters simply feel that these newer high-end scopes are less likely to fail than an older-design S&B. It’s worth noting that S&B’s designs (like the Double Turn turret) are decades old now – proven, but perhaps not incorporating newer shock-absorbing design improvements. Also, S&B scopes have more moving parts in some cases (the color-change rev indicator, etc.), which could be points of failure. None of this is to say S&B scopes are fragile – they are not – but the perception in the community is that S&B is no longer the reigning king of reliability. As PrecisionRifleBlog’s author (an accomplished shooter) summarized when explaining S&B’s decline: *“I heard at least one other credible story about an S&B losing zero from a mild side impact. That 1 mil shift…is why the two Schmidt scopes I still own aren’t on my competition rifles”*. Instead, he now runs Nightforce, TT, or ZCO, explicitly because he knows they’ll hold zero under rough conditions. For ELR shooters, who may have to haul their rifles across rugged terrain and cannot afford a shift mid-match, that confidence is paramount.
Weight & Form Factor: ELR rifles are often 25–40+ pounds, so the difference of a few ounces in a scope isn’t a huge issue for most (unlike, say, a hunter or tactical sniper carrying gear all day). Still, scope weight and size do matter somewhat – especially if balancing a rifle or staying within a class weight limit. Schmidt & Bender scopes are generally on par or slightly heavier than equivalent models from other brands. For instance, an S&B PM II 5-25×56 weighs around 2.5 lbs (40 oz). The Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 is about 2.3 lbs (37 oz). A Vortex Razor HD Gen II 4.5-27×56 is notoriously heavy ~48 oz (3 lbs), so S&B isn’t the heaviest by any means. The newer S&B 6-36×56 is roughly 38 oz, similar to ZCO’s 5-27×56 (~39 oz). Meanwhile, the Leupold Mark 5HD 5-25×56 is only ~30 oz. In ELR, many shooters actually add weight to their scope (via massive mounts or prism devices), so a heavy scope isn’t a deal-breaker. But if a shooter can save weight and not sacrifice performance, they might. The weight factor ties into S&B’s older design philosophy – they are built with thick maintubes and lots of glass/metal, which is durable but not svelte. Competing products like the Mark 5HD or even the Kahles K525i have shown it’s possible to shed weight while still maintaining robustness. In practice, weight is probably the least significant factor here, but it’s a small strike against S&B for those who desire a lighter rig. No one is avoiding S&B purely because it’s a few ounces heavier, but when combined with other drawbacks, it doesn’t offer any weight advantage to counterbalance them either.
Reticle Availability and Preferences: Reticles are a huge part of a scope’s suitability for competition. In ELR, shooters often prefer “tree” reticles or at least reticles with hold-off points, because they may need to hold for wind/elevation corrections quickly without dialing. They also demand reticles that are fine enough for precision but visible enough for spotter communication. This is an area where Schmidt & Bender lagged behind the competition for years. Historically, S&B offered a limited set of reticles, many of which were designed in the 1990s or early 2000s (P3, P4L fine, Mil-Dot, etc.). As advanced grid reticles (Horus designs like H59, Tremor3, etc.) gained popularity, S&B was slow to adopt them – they eventually offered H59 and Tremor3 in some models, but long after brands like Nightforce, Bushnell, and Vortex had embraced these options. Moreover, S&B never developed a widely-praised proprietary competition reticle of its own. Meanwhile, other companies were working directly with top shooters to create reticles that suit modern needs. Examples include the Kahles SKMR and SKMR3 (designed with Shannon Kay), Nightforce’s MIL-XT (a refined tree reticle popular in PRS), Vortex’s EBR-7C, Tangent Theta’s Gen2XR and newer Gen3XR grids, and the Leupold PR2 (developed with input from elite PRS shooters). These reticles tend to have clean central aiming points with finely graduated hold dots or hashes, and an intuitive tree for wind holds. S&B’s offerings, in contrast, were seen as either too basic or too cluttered. The famed S&B P4L reticle, for instance, has thick posts and lacks a lower “tree” – great for military use a decade ago, but not the top choice for today’s competitors. S&B did introduce the H2CMR and H59 in their catalog, but even then, competitors noted that many of S&B’s reticles feel outdated or not ideal. PrecisionRifleBlog commented that Schmidt & Bender *“hasn’t responded to some of the modern reticle designs like other manufacturers… The Leupold PR2-MIL is a good example of what guys are looking for… typically thinner and less cluttered than a lot of what Schmidt offers”*. In fact, the author of that analysis (who used to run S&B scopes) admitted that years ago he even considered paying for custom reticle plates in his Schmidt & Benders because the factory reticles weren’t to his liking. Simply put, S&B was behind the curve on reticles. Even as of 2023, S&B’s newer scopes like the 5-45×56 and 6-36×56 come with some improved reticle choices (they offer Tremor3, H59, Grid MK2 MOD, etc.), but by this time many shooters had already switched to brands that offered their preferred reticle earlier. In ELR in particular, some shooters prefer the simpler reticles for aiming precision (e.g., a fine crosshair with minimal clutter, since ELR often involves dialing and a spotter calling corrections), while others want a full grid to quickly spot misses and make corrections without dialing. S&B can do both in theory (they have simple reticles and Horus options), but the key is that S&B didn’t build a strong reputation in the competition community for having the “right” reticles when it mattered. Competitors gravitated to scopes that did – for example, the popularity of Kahles and Nightforce in PRS owes a lot to their reticle designs that competitors loved. At this point, it’s somewhat self-reinforcing: shooters don’t see many S&B scopes in use, so they also don’t see people running, say, an H2CMR reticle (one of S&B’s main offerings), so it never becomes “the reticle to have.” Instead, you hear people talking about the latest Mil-XT or PR2 or JTAC reticle, none of which S&B offers. This reticle mismatch definitely contributed to S&B falling out of favor among U.S. long-range shooters.
In summary, the feature trade-offs have not favored Schmidt & Bender for ELR. S&B scopes undeniably have phenomenal glass clarity – many shooters still acknowledge that looking through an S&B PM II is a joy, often cited as “second to none” optically. However, modern scopes are more than just glass. Competitors are willing to trade a tiny bit of optical perfection for better turrets, more travel, a better reticle, or more confidence in the scope’s toughness. As one shooter bluntly put it, *“If pure optical quality was all that mattered, we’d all be shooting March High Masters… But scopes are aiming devices, not spotting scopes. We pay the big money for precision turrets, toughness, ability to hold zero… those features separate the new scopes and leave behind some legacy brands like S&B.”*. This sentiment encapsulates why, feature-wise, many see S&B as a legacy design that hasn’t kept up with the evolving requirements of ELR competition.
Sponsorship and Influence on Adoption
Another major factor in the prevalence (or absence) of certain optics is the role of sponsorships and marketing within the shooting sports. In the U.S., companies that actively sponsor competitions or shooters tend to gain market share because their products are seen and used widely. Sponsorship trends have decidedly not favored Schmidt & Bender in the ELR world.
On one hand, brands like Nightforce, Vortex, Leupold, and others have heavily invested in the competitive shooting scene. Nightforce, for example, is the title sponsor of the Nightforce ELR Steel Challenge, one of the prominent ELR matches in the U.S., and has sponsored many PRS/NRL matches and competitors for years. Walk the line at an ELR event, and you’re likely to see Nightforce banners and several sponsored shooters using Nightforce scopes (often wearing Nightforce jerseys, if it’s PRS style). This visibility reinforces Nightforce’s dominance – even unsponsored shooters see that “everyone” is using these scopes, including the winners, and it builds trust that maybe I should use what the champs use. Vortex is also a huge sponsor in the precision realm; they sponsor matches and have a cadre of sponsored shooters. Vortex’s 50% discount for military/LE (mentioned earlier) also functions as a kind of sponsorship – it drastically lowers the entry barrier for a large swath of shooters, essentially seeding the market with their optics. Leupold actively sponsors many tactical and precision rifle matches and works with top shooters on product development (the Army Marksmanship Unit and others use Leupold). Kahles has the “Kahles Cup” and other match sponsorships, and even smaller brands like Bushnell and Burris have had sponsored shooters or prize table presence.
Schmidt & Bender, in contrast, has a very limited sponsorship footprint in the U.S. They do not title-sponsor major matches, nor do they maintain a large team of sponsored shooters on the PRS circuit. This is partly a strategic choice – S&B’s primary market historically has been military/LE and European hunting, not civilian competition. Additionally, their budget for marketing in the U.S. precision scene seems modest. The result is that Schmidt & Bender is rarely seen on prize tables or in sponsorship listings, which means fewer top shooters have an incentive to use them. In the precision rifle community, it’s an open discussion that certain brands are more engaged. As one competitive shooter commented, *“the precision rifle community [is supported by some brands] far more than Schmidt & Bender… and we notice that.”* Shooters appreciate companies that support their sport – it creates goodwill and, frankly, often comes with product discounts or free gear for those top shooters. S&B’s lack of outreach means if a shooter wants to use an S&B, they’re almost certainly paying full price out-of-pocket (whereas a Nightforce or Vortex sponsor deal might provide a scope or two for free or at cost). Given S&B’s very high prices, this is a deterrent for many competitors.
Even beyond direct sponsorship, brand presence and community engagement matter. U.S. shooters tend to hear about new products at competitions, on forums, podcasts, and social media where fellow competitors and influencers talk about what works. Nightforce and Vortex have dedicated staff interacting with the community and addressing competitor needs. For example, Nightforce has been known to respond to feedback (the development of the MIL-XT reticle and improving turret designs came from user input). Kahles worked with PRS shooters to get their K525i’s ergonomics right (like left-side windage options, etc.). Schmidt & Bender, being a more traditional company, has not been as visible in these channels. They don’t have as much of a social media push or forum presence in the U.S. competition scene. This could give the impression that S&B is “out of touch” or at least not actively supporting the sport.
Now, it’s worth noting that not all top shooters are sponsored, and many will choose the gear they truly believe gives them the best chance to win (because prize money and personal pride are on the line). In the 2020 ELR match data, the majority of shooters – including the winner – were likely unsponsored amateurs or semi-pros who simply bought what worked for them. The fourth-place finisher (who authored the PRB report) explicitly said he had no sponsors and bought his Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 with his own money because he felt it was the best for him. So, sponsorship isn’t everything; if S&B truly outperformed all others, one might expect some top shooters to use them regardless. But the fact that even independent shooters aren’t choosing S&B in significant numbers indicates that performance and features (as discussed earlier) weigh heavily. Sponsorship then adds a reinforcing effect – the brands that are already a bit better for the game also happen to be the ones investing in the shooters, which further tilts the field in their favor.
In PRS (the precision rifle sport analogous to 3-gun but for long range), this effect is even more pronounced. Companies like Vortex and Nightforce have entire teams and side competitions (e.g., the Vortex Team Sniper Challenge, the Nightforce PRS Championship etc.). Schmidt & Bender has been virtually absent from PRS sponsor rolls. One could argue that PRS is not their target market, but PRS/NRL and ELR have overlapping communities and often the same shooters. So a shooter who uses, say, a Kahles or Nightforce in PRS is likely to also use it for ELR matches, sticking with what they know. In that sense, S&B’s lack of presence in the broader competitive scene indirectly hurts its adoption in ELR as well.
Finally, consider new entrants like Tangent Theta and ZCO. These brands became popular without large-scale sponsorship programs (Tangent Theta barely sponsors anyone or any match, yet 7% of ELR shooters were using them, and in PRS a decent handful use TT purely by choice). What they did have, however, was a compelling product that elite shooters raved about – essentially word of mouth sponsorship. Tangent’s and ZCO’s quality spoke for itself, and some well-respected shooters began championing them on forums and in interviews. In a way, their products “sponsored” themselves by winning matches or impressing people. S&B could theoretically benefit from this too if a top competitor chose an S&B and won big, but that hasn’t really happened in recent years. The last time S&B was the ubiquitous choice of champions was perhaps a decade ago when U.S. military sniper competitions saw many Accuracy International rifles topped with S&B PM II scopes. But in the civilian ELR/PRS world, it’s been a while since an S&B was in the winner’s circle with everyone talking about it.
To sum up, sponsorship and marketing dynamics in the U.S. have strongly favored S&B’s competitors. Nightforce and others have flooded the field (literally) with their optics through support programs, whereas S&B has remained largely hands-off. The precision community notices and tends to rally around brands that support the sport. This has surely contributed to fewer people trying or sticking with Schmidt & Bender, accelerating its decline in popularity among U.S. shooters.
Cost and Availability in the U.S. Market
The practical aspects of cost, pricing, and availability are another piece of the puzzle. Simply put, Schmidt & Bender scopes are among the most expensive on the market, and their distribution and service network in the U.S. is relatively limited. This contrasts with some competitor brands that either cost less or are easier to buy and maintain in the U.S.
High Price Point: S&B scopes have premium price tags that can give even hardcore enthusiasts pause. For many years, a Schmidt & Bender PM II 5-25×56 was around a $3,000+ purchase. Newer S&B models have pushed well above that. The long-awaited PM II 5-45×56 (with its enormous zoom range) debuted with an MSRP around $6,800–$7,200 in the U.S. – an almost stratospheric price for a single scope. Even the somewhat more modest PM II 6-36×56, introduced in 2022 to target PRS/ELR shooters, costs about $5,000. These prices are significantly higher than most of the competition. For comparison: a Nightforce ATACR 7-35×56 runs about $3,600; a Kahles K525i about $3,000; a Vortex Razor Gen III 6-36×56 about $3,000; a Leupold Mark 5HD 7-35×56 ~$2,500. At the extreme high end, Tangent Theta 5-25×56’s are about $5,000 (similar to S&B’s 6-36), and ZCO 5-27×56 around $4,200–$4,500. So S&B is at the very top of the price spectrum, effectively tied with or above Tangent Theta as the costliest option.
Crucially, as we’ve explored, those other scopes often offer more modern features for the same or less money. That makes S&B a tough sell. It’s one thing if S&B were clearly superior to a $3,500 Nightforce – many would pay a premium for a big edge – but if it’s not clearly superior in usage, spending an extra $1,500+ is hard to justify. One precision rifle blogger put it wryly: *“For a current U.S. buyer, S&B is about as high as you can spend. A US purchase of a ZCO is more ‘economical’ (lol).”* In other words, S&B is basically the most expensive choice, and you can actually save money by going to an equally elite brand like ZCO or TT which might even be better in some ways. For budget-conscious competitors (and that’s most of them, since ELR shooting is already very expensive with the rifles, ammo, travel, etc.), S&B’s price alone is a deterrent. They look at the field and see plenty of people winning with scopes that cost half as much, and it becomes obvious where the value lies.
Discounts and Resale: Moreover, S&B historically hasn’t been part of the major discount programs. We mentioned Vortex’s 50% mil/LE program – S&B has nothing comparable publicly. Some military snipers might get S&Bs through unit purchase, but for civilian competitors, there’s no widespread pro deal. Nightforce and Kahles do offer select competitor pricing (for example, PRS members sometimes get a modest discount on certain brands). S&B being a German import means less flexibility on pricing. Additionally, when the time comes to upgrade or change equipment, resale value can factor in. S&B scopes do hold their value reasonably (there’s always some market for them), but the pool of buyers is smaller. A used Nightforce or Vortex will often get snapped up quickly in forums or classifieds, whereas a $5000 scope like S&B might take longer to find the right buyer. This can make people wary of tying up so much money in an S&B scope.
Availability and Distribution: Being a European manufacturer, Schmidt & Bender relies on a few U.S. distributors (like EuroOptic, Mile High Shooting, and sometimes opticsplanet, etc.) to sell their scopes stateside. Inventory can be sporadic; popular models or particular reticle combos might be back-ordered for long periods. In contrast, American companies (Nightforce is U.S.-based, Leupold is U.S., Vortex is U.S. (though scopes made overseas), etc.) have a more constant supply line within the country. It’s generally easier for a shooter to get their hands on a Nightforce – most large gun stores and online retailers carry them. If something is out of stock, Nightforce can ship more relatively quickly. For S&B, there have been times when certain models were hard to come by unless you imported privately or waited for a batch to come in. Limited availability means fewer new S&B scopes in circulation and less free marketing by sheer presence.
Service and Warranty: Availability isn’t just about buying the scope, but also servicing it. Here, S&B’s small U.S. footprint has historically been a disadvantage. If an S&B scope needed repair or adjustment, often it had to be sent to an authorized service center (there is one in the U.S., but major issues might even be sent back to Germany). This can introduce long wait times. By contrast, if a Nightforce has an issue, it goes to Nightforce’s U.S. facility in Idaho for relatively quick turnaround. Vortex’s famously fast warranty service is U.S.-based. Leupold, being U.S. made, often can fix or replace a scope in a week or two. The convenience and peace of mind of domestic service is a big deal for competitors – especially if an issue crops up right before a match. Many feel safer investing in a scope knowing that if something goes wrong, it can be resolved stateside without a ton of hassle. S&B’s service isn’t known to be poor, but it’s just not as accessible. And S&B’s warranty policy was long seen as notably worse: for many years, S&B only offered a 1-year limited warranty on its scopes, which is shockingly short given the price of the product. (In Europe, short warranties were standard, but U.S. consumers have come to expect lifetime warranties on high-end optics.) This policy made some Americans downright allergic to the idea of spending $3000+ on something with virtually no long-term guarantee. In recent years, presumably under competitive pressure, S&B extended their warranty (reports are that S&B USA now offers a 2-year warranty with a 10-year service period on new scopes, which is better but still not close to “forever” like many rivals). As PrecisionRifleBlog noted, *“a couple of years ago Schmidt & Bender only offered a 1-year warranty on their $3,000+ scopes… Vortex pushed the whole industry out of that [limited warranty mindset] with their customer-first warranty”*. So S&B was essentially shamed into improving warranty coverage, but by the time they did, companies like Vortex had already captured the loyalty of many shooters by treating them so well.
Long-Term Cost of Ownership: When you factor in initial price, needed accessories (like an adjustable mount due to elevation limits), and potential downtime for service, the effective cost of running an S&B can be higher than running another scope. For example, an ELR shooter with an S&B PM II might decide they need a $400 ERA-TAC adjustable base to get the most out of it (as PRB’s author did, partly for his S&B scopes). That’s an additional cost not every scope requires. If something goes wrong out of warranty, an S&B repair could be costly, whereas Vortex would do it free. Over years of competition, these things add up.
In essence, from a market standpoint, Schmidt & Bender is a premium product with premium costs and just average support in the U.S. The competition offers either premium product with better support (Nightforce, TT, ZCO) or slightly lower-tier product with vastly better pricing and still good support (Vortex, Leupold). It’s easy to see why a rational consumer, even a hardcore ELR shooter, might opt for the latter options. Unless money is truly no object, S&B doesn’t obviously justify its extra cost for the majority of users. And those few for whom money is no object might actually prefer something like a Tangent Theta for the reasons discussed. Thus S&B gets squeezed out of the equation for many buyers.
Community Culture and Preferences
Lastly, it’s important to consider the cultural factors and feedback loops in the shooting community that influence scope choices. The U.S. long-range shooting community has its own tastes and biases, which can either boost or hinder a brand like Schmidt & Bender.
“Buy American” Sentiment: There is a segment of shooters who intentionally support American-made or American-based companies. Whether out of patriotism, perceived quality, or the desire to easily communicate with the manufacturer, these folks will often lean towards Nightforce (U.S. company, many scopes made in USA or Japan), Leupold (made in USA), Vortex (American company, though scopes made in Asia), or U.S.-designed products like ZCO (partial U.S. roots) over a fully European import. Schmidt & Bender, being a German manufacturer with a lower U.S. profile, doesn’t benefit from any “home team” advantage. In some cases, shooters might avoid non-U.S. optics simply because of a (not always accurate) perception that American companies handle customer needs better. While top competitors are usually very pragmatic (they’ll use whatever gives results, regardless of origin), among the broader community “Buy American” is definitely a thing. This ethos also ties into pride in supporting companies that, as mentioned, support the shooter back. An average ELR enthusiast might say: “Why would I send $5k to Germany for a scope when I can support an Idaho company (NF) or an Oregon company (Leupold) and get as good a result?” That’s a common refrain on forums and Facebook groups.
Customer Service Expectations: American consumers in this market have been somewhat “spoiled” by exceptional customer service from companies like Vortex, Leupold, and Nightforce. If you drop your Nightforce off a cliff or bust your Vortex’s erector by overtorquing, you’ll likely get it fixed or replaced under warranty without much fuss. People now expect that kind of no-questions-asked service for an expensive scope. S&B’s old 1-year warranty felt out of line with that expectation, and even with an improved warranty, there’s perhaps less confidence that S&B would be as lenient or fast. Indeed, some shooters have shared stories of slow turnarounds or difficulties in getting certain issues resolved (this can vary case by case). The broader point is, the U.S. community values being taken care of by the manufacturer, and if they’ve had great experiences with one brand’s service, they tend to stick to that brand. It fosters brand loyalty that S&B hasn’t had the chance to build in the same way due to their prior policies.
Community Feedback Loop: Once a notion takes hold in the community – such as “S&B scopes are outdated” or “S&B won’t fix your scope if it breaks” – it can be hard to shake, even if the company improves products or policies. The internet is full of discussions where people echo the points we’ve covered: limited reticles, high cost, not worth it vs. NF or TT, etc. For instance, on forums like Sniper’s Hide and in Reddit threads, you’ll find comments along the lines of *“Schmidt’s fallen out of favor… poor reticle choices and high price point”*, or shooters noting that they personally switched away from S&B because other scopes offered more value or reliability. These firsthand accounts carry a lot of weight for prospective buyers. If an up-and-coming ELR shooter asks, “What scope should I get?” the answers are typically dominated by brands like Nightforce, Vortex, Kahles, etc., with S&B rarely mentioned except perhaps by someone who has military experience with one. The collective wisdom (rightly or wrongly) steers people away from Schmidt & Bender for ELR applications in the U.S.
Familiarity and Training: Many U.S. shooters have also trained with certain optics due to the prevalence mentioned. For example, a competitor might start with a Vortex Viper, then upgrade to a Razor, then to a Nightforce – because those were common progression steps and each had familiar Mil-based reticles and similar turret styles. S&B’s user interface (like the single-turn vs double-turn turret with color indicators) is a bit different. If few people use S&B, then few people teach others how to use S&Bs or swap gear with S&Bs, and so on. The training community (in civilian long-range classes and such) often uses what’s popular – again Nightforce, Vortex, etc. If you attend a class, odds are the instructor has long experience with those and can show you how to set the zero-stop on your Nightforce or walk you through your Kahles’s subtensions. But if you showed up with an S&B PM II, you might actually be the odd one and on your own to figure out certain quirks. This lack of institutional knowledge spreading about S&B (compared to, say, the rich knowledge base on a Nightforce’s ideal torque settings or common failure points, etc.) can make people shy to be the “guinea pig” using one.
Psychological Aspect – Trust and Confidence: Finally, shooting at extreme distances is as much a mental game as a technical one. Competitors need absolute confidence in their equipment so they can focus on reading wind and executing shots. If there’s a seed of doubt like “I’m not sure if my scope’s clicks are true” or “hopefully the zero held after that bump,” it can affect performance. The community at large currently places a lot of trust in certain brands – Nightforce, for example, has a near-legendary status for tracking reliability; Tangent Theta and ZCO are spoken of with reverence for their precision. In recent discussions, S&B unfortunately is sometimes spoken of with nostalgia (“they were great in their time”) or criticism (“they haven’t kept up”). That undercuts confidence. A shooter is unlikely to spend top dollar on a scope that their peers are lukewarm about. And if they already have one and they read about someone else’s scope losing zero or having less-than-expected adjustment range, it plants doubt in their mind too. On the flip side, there’s almost a herd immunity effect: if everyone around you has a Nightforce and reports zero problems, you collectively bolster each other’s confidence that your gear is not the limiting factor. In such an environment, S&B becomes an outlier choice – and few are willing to take an expensive risk on an outlier that the community doesn’t overwhelmingly endorse for competition use.
To put it succinctly, the cultural momentum in the U.S. is against Schmidt & Bender for ELR. It’s not personal or political – it’s simply that the brand doesn’t fit the mold of what this community currently prizes, and the community’s own feedback loop continues to reinforce that. Shooters in the U.S. ELR scene tend to prefer what’s proven, popular, well-supported, and perceived as a good value or a competitive edge. At the moment, S&B is seen as providing neither a cost advantage, nor a feature advantage, nor a support advantage – so it has faded into semi-obscurity among competitors despite its illustrious reputation elsewhere.
Technical and Logistical Disadvantages for U.S. ELR
Bringing the discussion full circle, we can list the key disadvantages or challenges Schmidt & Bender scopes face for U.S. ELR applications, as identified through competition reports and expert/enthusiast analysis:
Limited Elevation for ELR Needs: As discussed, S&B’s turret designs (e.g. double-turn 26 mrad) can constrain the available on-board elevation adjustment. In ELR, where extreme “come-ups” are required, this is a tactical disadvantage unless the shooter adds external incline. Competing scopes often allow dialing more elevation or come with higher total ranges, reducing the hassle for the shooter.
Older Reticle Selection: Until very recently, S&B did not offer many of the reticles favored by modern long-range shooters (like refined hold-over grids or extremely clean competition reticles). Their legacy reticles were either too cluttered or too sparse for many tastes. While S&B has added some new reticles, they are still viewed as behind on this front. Shooters may not find their preferred reticle in an S&B, pushing them to other brands that have exactly what they want.
Lack of a Zero-Stop on Some Models: One specific feature issue – older S&B PM II scopes did not have a true zero-stop (they had a sort of stop in the double-turn but not as straightforward as modern implementations). The newer DT II+ turret does include a zero-stop, but by the time it was introduced, just about every other competitor’s scope had long had easy zero-stop systems. It’s a small thing, but when switching between multiple distances in a stage (common in ELR competitions), a reliable zero-stop is important for speed and avoiding mistakes. S&B finally caught up here, but early on this was a knock against them compared to Nightforce or Kahles which had zero-stops.
Warranty & Service Concerns: The historically short warranty (1 year) and the need to possibly send scopes overseas for service are definite negatives in the U.S. ELR context. Even if the scopes function well, just knowing that your $5k optic has effectively no lifetime support (beyond what you can pay for) reduces the appeal. Competitors prefer a “safety net” for their expensive gear, which brands like Vortex and Nightforce provide more readily.
Cost/Benefit Imbalance: S&B scopes ask for a lot of money, but in the ELR game they aren’t delivering a correspondingly huge advantage in hit probability or convenience. In fact, one could argue they deliver less functionality in some respects (as we’ve enumerated). From a technical perspective, an ideal ELR scope might be one with maximum internal adjustment, repeatable turrets, a useful reticle, reasonable weight, and rugged construction – all at a price that lets the shooter also afford the custom rifle, match fees, reloading components, travel, etc. S&B’s contribution to that equation is questionable: you pay more, and you may get stellar optics and a trusted name, but you sacrifice other criteria.
Slow Innovation Cycle: Technically, S&B has not released as many new models tailored to this market as others have. For years, the 5-25×56 PM II was the staple. The 3-20×50 was more for tactical field use. Only recently did they introduce higher magnification scopes (like 5-45×56 and 6-36×56) to answer competitors’ offerings. By the time they did, other brands had already iterated a couple of times (Vortex went through Gen I, Gen II Razors, now Gen III; Nightforce expanded from NXS to several ATACR models; new players like ZCO emerged). So in the technical race, S&B was not leading – they were playing catch-up. As one shooter observed, S&B is a “very traditional company” that *“hasn’t updated its coating tech much in 20 years”*, implying that even their famous glass could be improved with more modern engineering if they invested in it. The lack of rapid innovation meant that by the time S&B had a 6-36×56 scope in 2022, shooters already had multiple proven choices in that spec range from other brands. Thus, S&B didn’t bring anything new to the table except the name and price tag.
Smaller User Base for Feedback: From a logistical standpoint, having few S&B users in ELR means there’s less community knowledge on how to optimize them for ELR. For instance, understanding how to properly mount with extra cant, or which mounts work best with the saddle turret, etc., comes mostly from experience. With Nightforce or Vortex, there are well-trodden paths and many users to ask for advice. With S&B, an ELR shooter might be trailblazing or reliant on sparse info. This can be a minor hurdle but is a factor in a high-stakes environment – people tend to go with the herd for things like this, ironically, because it’s perceived as safer.
In fairness, none of these disadvantages mean that S&B scopes “can’t do the job.” They certainly can be and have been used successfully to hit targets at extreme ranges. S&B scopes still feature top-notch lenses, durable construction, and precise adjustments. A skilled team could win a match with an S&B just as they could with any other quality scope, assuming they know their dope and their equipment. However, when shooters are evaluating what gives them the best odds of success and the most convenience getting there, S&B’s downsides stack up enough that most opt for a different tool.
Conclusion
Schmidt & Bender rifle scopes, once almost synonymous with elite long-range shooting, have become uncommon in U.S. extreme long-range competitions due to a convergence of factors. Objective data from recent competitions shows S&B with a vanishingly small market share among U.S. ELR shooters (on the order of 1–2%), and this is not a coincidence. Competitors have gravitated towards scopes that offer more practical advantages for the game: greater elevation travel, cutting-edge reticles, proven durability, and strong domestic support networks. Brands like Nightforce, Kahles, Vortex, Tangent Theta, Zero Compromise, and others have capitalized on those needs – either by innovating technologically or by investing in the shooting community (often both). In contrast, Schmidt & Bender’s offerings remained rooted in an earlier paradigm of long-range shooting.
When comparing features, S&B’s legendary optical clarity and military pedigree couldn’t overcome the modern requirements of ELR competition: shooters wanted more dialable range, better turret ergonomics, and reticles geared to quick correction and wind holds – areas where other scopes pulled ahead. Furthermore, the economic and cultural landscape favored S&B’s rivals. S&B’s very high prices and erstwhile short warranty looked out of place next to competitors offering reliability guarantees and lower-cost options (or huge discounts for those in the community). And as American shooters saw their peers and role models winning matches with other brands (often U.S.-backed brands), a feedback loop formed that reinforced the preference for those optics.
In essence, Schmidt & Bender scopes became a solution without a problem in the U.S. ELR scene – an excellent but very expensive optic that didn’t clearly outperform the alternatives that everyone else was using. As one precision rifle expert observed, *“scopes are aiming devices… we pay for what helps us aim and hit, and that’s where [newer scopes] leave behind legacy brands like S&B”*. Until and unless Schmidt & Bender makes a concerted effort to tailor their products and support to the specific desires of the U.S. ELR competitor (and perhaps engage more in the community), it’s likely to remain a rarity on the firing line.
For now, U.S. extreme long-range shooters tend to choose scopes that instill confidence through widespread use and demonstrable success. Unfortunately for Schmidt & Bender, the community’s confidence – as reflected in competition usage, forum discussions, and expert commentary – has largely shifted to other brands. Thus, while S&B scopes are without doubt high-quality instruments, the combination of technical trade-offs, sponsorship dynamics, cost factors, and cultural preferences has made them a less common choice among the current generation of U.S. ELR competitors.
Sources: Competition equipment reports and statistics from PrecisionRifleBlog; expert analysis on scope features and trends; and community insights from forums and reviews, all of which consistently highlight the reasons above. These converging lines of evidence explain why you’ll seldom see a Schmidt & Bender on the winner’s rifle at a U.S. ELR match, despite the brand’s illustrious reputation in other arenas.
#5 Re: 1000米以上遠距離射擊，推薦個鏡子？
感覺搞ELR的都不在乎終端彈道學嗎？難道用鉛頭子彈能輕輕碰到鐵靶就是勝利？不考慮鎢芯穿甲彈或者穿甲燃燒曳光彈？還有更新的脫殼穩翼穿甲彈？這個視頻推薦的都是什麼亂七八糟的子彈和口徑？連mount都有假貨。
上次由 magagop 在 2025年 7月 20日 15:27 修改。
#6 Re: 1000米以上遠距離射擊，推薦個鏡子？
S&B 6-36x56居然有專利糾紛，2026年到期，大坑怪不得打折，這麼好的客觀評價視頻居然沒幾個人看：
上次由 magagop 在 2025年 7月 19日 12:07 修改。
#9 Re: 1000米以上遠距離射擊，推薦個鏡子？
這才是最「合適」的turret設計，左側windage應該是趨勢，可惜不是S&B也沒有Tremor5。。。打比賽的不喜歡Tremor5，因為太亂了，影響觀察，軍隊標準就是Tremor3，只有Tremor Reticles能做到不同scope廠家用同樣的標準，Tremor5就是最新的集大成者，是剛需。。。
#10 Re: 1000米以上遠距離射擊，推薦個鏡子？
2000米ELR在各種光電儀器輔助下，步槍火控系統會越來越簡單和普及，價格很快跌入$3000以內，槍口初速測量 + 激光測距 + 彈道計算 + 光學鏡頭 + 衛星定位 + 衛星通信。。。甚至集成反狙擊手聲納，再配合熱成像無人機、VR眼鏡和遠程無線通信，步槍火控系統甚至可以給各個步兵班的單兵協調各自的目標和協同發現敵人位置，無人機可以加裝Acoustic camera和LEP在低空幾百米處迅速發現和照亮敵人陣地，反狙擊手任務不再困難。。。以前精度遠射非常無聊而且門檻很高，未來人人都是神射手，最大的瓶頸不再是人，而是電池容量：
#11 Re: 1000米以上遠距離射擊，推薦個鏡子？
奇怪的知識又增加了：鑑於無人機和夜視儀的普及和大美麗法案通過，看來Titanium flow-through suppressor不是一個好東西，必須買Inconel的消音器。。。