Hi
@Joshuajosh, welcome to the Slide.
Form's advice above is good advice. He's not trying to hassle you; he's trying to steer you away from crap and to something that works.
Scopes from brands like Leupold, Zeiss, and Vortex have a lot of marketing behind them, but usually have fundamental construction issues.
The 'but my brand x scope has been fine' posts often reference a sample of one, and limited testing.
Form has samples of dozens, and a well-documented series of reliability tests.
The SWFAs don't have fancy marketing - they don't need it, as they're not sold through dealers, and they have a hard time keeping up with demand as it is.
They also don't have a lot of features you don't need.
What they do have is reliability, which, if you're expecting to make ethical kills at 500, you need.
After a reliable scope, it's rock solid scope mounting, then training and practice. Check out Form's posts about each of these also.
Use the money you saved on the scope to invest in ammo.
Stick around - lots of knowledgeable people here, who'll be happy to help. Just be aware that there'll also be a broad range of opinions, confirmation bias, and purchase justification.
Read enough to get a sense of where everyone is coming from, what experience they have, what level of (repeatable) skill they have, and how they test their gear.
I'm relatively new to all this too ... but through judicious reading here, and training, I took the now-almost-hackneyed 'Rockslide Special' - Tikka 223, SWFA 3-9 in Sportmatch mounts, and 77gr ammo - and recently came second in a local club match. Granted, it was only to 200 m, and not a particularly high level of competitor - but it was mostly people who'd been shooting for years, and thought they knew what they were doing.
Point being: this combination works ... but it's the time training that matters.