Might help to read to recognize the older stuff. Technology for glass quality and coatings has come a long way since 1950's. But looking through a higher end Hensoldt, probably from 1960's, can take your breathe away! For me, scopes are about their guts - tracking, holding zero, first. Then quality of view helps. Also, how you use a scope. I sight in, and then never touch the turrets until checking sighting in again. Some rifles and scope of mine have not been adjusted for 15 years - still right where I want them. But some shooters "twirl" turret adjustments for virtually every shot - that is putting different demand on the scope internal design. I do not use rifle scope as a spotting scope - I use binoculars for glassing. Scopes, to me, are a sighting instrument, first. To me, the fine optic qualities are very much secondary to the guts of the thing. It has to work reliably as a sight, first.
Weaver K, K 60 and the like are probably not sealed - will fog up with temperature changes. The earliest plain K probably does not even have a centered cross hair - cross hair moves within the view as you sight in rifle. But known to be very "tough" in their day - Finn Aargaard bought his second Win70 375 H&H in 1969 and installed a "new" Weaver K2.5 scope (to replace the plain "K" that came with it), in Weaver rings, which that rifle still wears to day. In his article "Adventures with the 375 H&H", he says he fired over 2,000 rounds with no issues. While the Weaver company was still in USA, they did numerous improvements - I have two or three that I think are Weaver's "best" - K4-1 and a K3-1, both with the word "micro-trac" on left side of the top turret.
Like many other things today, though, a "Weaver" made today in China, does not see to me to be the same as a Weaver K4-1 made in El-Paso. Same with Redfield. Same with Bushnells in general - I do have several with the Bausch and Lomb logo (B&L) made in Japan, and they seem just fine. Minimal personal experience with the scopes out of China or Philippines or Taiwan - seem to be "riding" on the reputation that the brand earned when their products were built elsewhere...
Redfield, today, is apparently a Leupold line - was not always that way. Father in law used a 4 power Redfield on 30-06 since 1970's on Vancouver Island (rain, wet, but no bitter cold) - still functions fine today.
Scopechief VI has held up well - I have a 4-12 - no complaints at all.
I have and have used a couple Tasco, made in Japan - 1.75-5 and 3-9 - have yet to have either "break" or fail, and we have been using the smaller one on a 30-06 since 1970's. Had read that there is no "Tasco" scope factory - they used jobbers and various suppliers to put together a scope as per specs of the buyer - so probably from $39.99 Walmart (I do not know that) to scopes for US Marine Corp (I do know that - they are the same as the SWFA scopes, also built by "Tasco" - built to meet a specific US Marine Corp specification)
To outfit yourself, probably want three functions - a scoped sight on your rifle, a glassing tool and a rangefinder (unless mostly "point blank" in bush). I use various scopes - most fixed power Leupolds - 3x, 4x and 6x on various rifles. I wear a Leupold RB-800 which is an 8x32 binocular with a built in laser rangefinder. My brother uses a Zeiss scope on his rifle, wears a Leica 10x binocular on his neck, and carries a Bushnell (?) rangefinder in his pocket. Choices will be different if you are driving around in pickup truck in flatland Southern Saskatchewan, slopping through bush and swamp in North East Saskatchewan, or climbing those "hills" in North West Alberta. Never hunted in Shield country in Ontario, but I imagine some combination of all of the above?
If you have never done so, it is unbelievable how much more there is to see in the bush, if you use even 7x or 8x binoculars - while in the bush! Try it!
