Quoted:
It looks like Leupold is directly responding to the UH1's immanent release. If they aren't, then it damn sure is a coincidence that they look the same, and Leupold chopped the hell out of their LCO pricing.
Let's presume I like both reticles (dot/eo style), and that a hundred bucks or two either way doesn't matter.
Sell me the UH1 now that LCO's are in the $600's?
View Quote
There are going to be pros and cons of each and I think in the end you will just have to decide which one fits you best. Of course, my opinion is going to be biased in favor of the UH1, but I will try to be as objective as I can.
I have not done any durability testing of the LCO, so I can't really comment on that. We have extensively tested the UH1 and it is impressive how durable it is.
The LCO is slightly smaller and lighter and since it is an LED driven sight will have longer battery life.
I think some people will like the dial illumination control better than the push buttons of the UH1, but that will be personal preference. I think the LCO dial has nice clicks, although I think the dial is a tad small.
The LCO has a nice large window, especially for it's size. That being said, I have noticed that the image seems to have a lot of distortion to me, which I find distracting. In these type of red dots you basically have an LED reflecting off of a parabolic lens. That works fine for smaller apertures, but I think when you try to make a sight as short as the LCO, but with a window as large as the LCO, one of the trade-offs is image distortion.
It also has forward signature and doesn't include a QD mount.
Since the UH1 is a true holographic sight that is driven by a laser diode, instead of an LED, you will not get the same battery life. However, the advantage is that there is no parabolic or otherwise curved lens in the sight window, so you can have the large window with zero distortion.
I would also argue that the position of our buttons is better for ambi operation. The argument that people will use against them is that the placement isn't good for a magnifier. I think that's a valid concern, although we have found that they are still accessible with a magnifier. I think our button style and placement also makes the sight more streamlined with fewer potential snag hazards.
The other thing that I think the UH1 excels at is that, of all the sights we have tested, it has some of the lowest thermal drift and also maintains minimal parallax error with thermal change. That is not the case with many other sights we have tested. I'd rather not give out specific brand names and what their results are, because in most cases the sample size is only one unit, but the UH1 has given me the most confidence in that area of all the sights we have tested.
The UH1 includes a QD mount and has virtually zero forward signature.
The UH1 has the option of using a rechargeable battery and being charged on board the sight, which may be a nice feature for some users.
Hope that helps with your decision!