I was just looking at it this morning and went and downloaded the user manual from Leica's site. One minor limitation is that it will only express holdover corrections in cm or inches, rather than MOA or mils. I thought for those using mils it could be simplified if you're willing to switch to meters. The only math when using cm and mils is that you'd have to divide by the distance to get the number of clicks. For example, if I zero @ 100 meters then I found there's a ballistic profile that fits my load really closely (out of the 12 available). If I range a target @ 400 meters, then I'd divide the 93.5 cm drop by 4 and get 23 1/10th mil clicks up. Of course the math gets worse with distances like 425 meters.
Then the question is how much can you fudge the math and still be close. If I quickly take the 110.5 cm drop and call it 110 instead and divide that by 4 I'm going to end up with 27.5. If, in the heat of the moment I round up instead of down, I'll be off by 7.5 cm or 3 inches. At that distance I could probably live with that (and the animal will not). So I wouldn't rule this rangefinder out because of this limitation.
It also interests me that it apparently has a both an inclinometer and a barometer built in. However, in practice I don't think I'd find much application for these. First of all, if you zero @ 100, there's no need to note what range conditions are at the time because the differences are so minute. Secondly, only a few hunters I know ever take high angle shots (mostly on mountain goats, sometimes on elk). The farther out the shot is (where you'd be likely to use a rangefinder), the shallower angles tend to become.
As far as atmospheric pressure is concerned, there's no shot I'd ever take on a live animal where it would matter much. In my experience, pressure doesn't even vary that much where I hunt and even if you look at extremes in a ballistics calculator, you'll see that @ 500 meters the difference is just a few cm or inches.
I should mention that if I bit the bullet on this one it would be to replace a Swaro and none of these features are enough to persuade me. However, it weighs half as much and may, being newer, acquire targets faster. The Swaro has a bigger objective so it can more easily be used as a monocular on light, fast hunts. It also has ranged out to 1980 yards for me, which means it has been almost effortless to range on targets less than 600 yards.