Personally, I think the new T5Xi optic represents a whole lot of things that so many of us have been seeking for a VERY long time:
1) American designed and built
2) German Glass
3) An awesome reticle
4) A compact and low profile package that doesn't sacrifice features we all like
5) A very good price-point for a scope of this caliber
This is all great stuff,for a great price. So what could a marksmen do with a S&B scope that he couldn't do with this ? Is it just some additional Bells and Whistles ? Reticle differences be a reason to spend 2x more ?
Well, if you ask ten shooters this question, you'll probably get ten different answers. I currently own and use a Schmidt and Bender scope, and I've been thinking of adding the new Steiner to my collection for a .308 Win rifle that I've been thinking of fielding in some competitions. Here's my take on answering your question:
1) Schmidt and Bender has absolutely phenomenally clear glass. It's always placed either at, or very close to the top of the heap when it comes to optical clarity. But, there's an issue of diminishing returns when you get to optics of this level. The glass is super clear on the S&B, but you pay a lot more to get a little more clarity at that level. Is it worth it? I think that's an issue for the end user to decide. But, Steiner glass is still pretty F-ing good, and I would say that it definitely falls into a top tier scope category. It's just anecdotal opinions on my part, but I'd say that S&B is the clearest I've looked through, US Optics and Steiner are the next best, and NightForce is a ways behind those two. But, I won't claim I've shot every scope out there, either.
2) How much are you willing to pay for a name? Schmidt and Bender has a long standing reputation as being one of the best riflescopes on the market. This isn't to suggest that others aren't up to snuff, but S&B has a reputation for making only very high-end riflescopes. They also import all of their riflescopes from an expensive first-world country. Steiner has a really good reputation, but probably doesn't have quite the allure and sex appeal that is conjured up when people talk of S&B. As such, you're paying for a name to some extent when you buy a S&B scope instead of a Steiner scope. When I say this I mean that you're probably paying an additional *something* for the S&B name, even when you factor out any other differences between the scopes. They're great scopes, but so are Steiner scopes. Steiner might charge you $2K for a great scope, and S&B will probably charge you $3.5K. Both will get the job done. Think of it this way: if you go to Tiffany and Co to buy an engagement ring you are going to pay more for the same size/grade of diamond than you would if you went to Blue Nile, Inc. You can get the same product, but the name carries a price in that world, just as it does in our world of shooting.
3) Feature sets are an individual preference issue. It's hard to say which is better or worse, as that's something that each end user will decide for themselves. We actually discussed feature sets quite a bit while I was at the Steiner facility yesterday, and I'll unequivocally say that they put a lot of thought into which features went into the T5Xi scope. There are always tradeoffs, and I discussed a few of these trade-offs with Martin while I was there. For example, I have the MTC turrets on my S&B (it's a feature where every tenth click — the actual mil numbers — have a heavier and harder click than the other clicks). It's a feature that I like, as it aids me in counting my adjustments when I'm working fast. But, a lot of people hate this feature (including a couple of notable shooters I've seen comment in this thread already). So, a manufacturer has to decide if they want to include such a feature in a scope. In the case of the T5Xi, I believe the decision to not include such a feature was based on the premiss that a shooter who likes this feature would probably still buy a scope even if it lacked it, while a shooter who disliked the feature would probably avoid buying a scope if it had a feature they hated. Personally, I think that's a smart business decision on the part of Steiner, because it fits well with my personal opinion on such a feature: I'd still buy a scope without MTC turrets, but I know some folks who absolutely wouldn't buy a scope with that feature. Plus, by only offering the turret in the one design they are saving on manufacturing and R&D costs, which saves you some money at the cash register.
Anyway, whether a feature like that is beneficial is (again) something only an end user can answer. Anyone who has used an MTC turret on a S&B scope can tell you that you'll often overshoot your number if you're trying to dial to something like 3.9 or 4.1 mils (the heavy click causes you to overshoot the next light click). But, it's very easy to find the whole numbers with that system. See what I mean about tradeoffs?
Another feature set difference that someone might note when comparing the Steiner T5Xi to a S&B is the lack of a locking turret on the Steiner. I have locking turrets on my S&B, and I thought they were cool when I bought it. I've never touched the locking turret feature on the scope except when I'm required to do so for zeroing. So much for that! But, some users may want such feature. Personally, I'd go without the locking turrets if they cost even $20 more. If you're looking at a S&B vs a Steiner on the basis of locking turrets, you'll pay a lot more than that!
This list can go on and on, but it's really up to a user to decide how they value each of these "options" or "features"
4) Reticle choices. Think of reticles as copyrighted intellectual property. You really can't copy someone's original reticle design while it's covered under these laws, and every company has their own offerings. As such, if you want an H2CMR reticle, you need to buy a S&B. If you want the new reticle that's being offered on the Steiner (can't recall its name), you'll need to buy a Steiner. I see some advantages to the H2CMR reticle I have on my S&B, but I also see some advantages to the new Steiner reticle. I'd call it a wash in this category, and one that will once again come down to user preference. For whatever it's worth, I'd love to have the mil numbers on my reticle that are shown on the Steiner reticle.
5) Competition is a lot of this! S&B set a bar for other companies, and a lot of good companies are starting to rise to the challenge. As such, the user has more choices today than they've ever had, and we're in a great position now where we're starting to be overwhelmed with great offerings from a variety of companies. Schmidt and Bender seems to have taken the approach of saying "we're the 800 lb gorilla, and we're not changing our prices", while other companies are starting to innovate and build great scopes that they are willing to offer for less money. In doing so they are starting to capture a bit more market share.
Bottom Line?
I don't regret owning my Schmidt and Bender. It's a beautiful scope that has worked really well for me. However, my next scope purchase is probably going to be a Steiner. I still need to shoot one to say for sure, but I'm pretty darn confident in saying that it will perform precisely as advertised.
Why will I buy a Steiner next?
First, I can't see that I'm going to gain another $1,500-1,700 in benefit from the Schmidt and Bender. I imagine that I would do just as well in a competition using either scope, and wouldn't feel handicapped in the least by buying a Steiner. As I already mentioned, the Steiner has its own set of valuable features, just as the S&B has its own. The glass quality on a S&B could probably be described as "phenomenal", and the glass quality on the Steiner could probably be described as "excellent". Unless you used the two scopes exactly side by side, with both optics being precisely adjusted for your own eye, I'm not sure that you could tell a difference in glass quality. Remember, they're both using very high quality German-produced glass. I'd like to see a blind taste test between the two scopes just for curiosity. I imagine the S&B is a little bit better in the optical department, but not $1,700 better for my needs!
Furthermore, I'd probably buy the Steiner because I know that they really stand behind their product (not the 2-year limited warranty offered on my $3.5K scope), they seem like good people that built the scope from a shooter's perspective, and they are building them right here in Colorado (or, more importantly, here in the USA).
NOTE:
I've actually labored over this answer quite a bit for you. I think the reason it's so hard to answer this question is because I'm really having a hard time in finding faults that would bother me in either optic. They both give me the "wow" factor, and they're both sexy as can be in my opinion. Either Martin or Brendon can confirm that I played with that T5Xi for quite a bit of time yesterday
So, all else being equal, I'd probably buy the scope that costs a heck of a lot less, and put that money towards a good Spuhr mount and some ammo! It's not that Schmidt and Bender has lost its quality, it's just that others have caught up over the years. And, it's not as if anyone is knocking Steiner in any way by giving it a head-to-head comparison with a S&B. Personally, I'd really like to run them both side-by-side one of these days, just to be able to give you a more thorough answer to this question.
In the mean time, suffice it to say that I was impressed with the product that Steiner came up with, I was impressed with the employees who work there, and I was happy to hear that their scope was designed in the United States, is being built here in the states, but is still pulling in the best raw materials they can get to make the scope.
I've added a couple of pictures showing the raw stock that is used to make the scopes, along with a portion of the assembly that is taking place in a "clean room" at their facility. To take this picture I had to put on clothing that made me look like a lunch lady working in an Ebola zone.
