In the run-up to the launch of its new budget-focused Nothing Phone 3a collection, Nothing ran a video showing how its latest ‘Pro’ phone’s cameras compared well with the much more expensive iPhone 16 Pro.
And, while it was misleading in places – particularly comparing video capture from the iPhone’s ultrawide camera with the main camera from the Nothing Phone – it did get me thinking: what if it is as good?
I mean, I can’t imagine that it would be, but even if it’s close to being as good as a £1000 phone, that would make it incredibly good value. So, I pitted the Nothing Phone 3a Pro against the iPhone 16 Pro to put the challenge to the test.
Design
I think it’s safe to say that when it comes to design, there’s no way you’d ever confuse these phones for each other. In fact, it’s very unlikely you’d confuse the Nothing Phone 3a Pro for any other brand’s phone. Its eye-catching use of transparent glass, sitting on top of exposed screws, dots, lines and dimpled textures, means it’s a very unique look.
That’s only aided further by the Glyph LED lights on the back, which can be used for all manner of things. You can use them as a torch, or have them flash for notifications, or even pulse in time with any music or audio you have playing out of the speakers.
The iPhone 16 Pro does have an accessibility option that lets you flash the camera LED for notifications, but nothing anywhere near as complex. For some, it’s a gimmick, for others, it’s a unique feature that delights.
As for build materials, waterproofing and durability, this is where you start to see where the extra money goes on the more expensive phones. Nothing’s phone, for example, has a plastic frame, a Panda Glass surface and IP64 water and dust resistance.
That Panda Glass isn’t as scratch- or impact-resistant as the Ceramic Shield on the iPhone. And IP64 means it can cope with splashes or minor contact with water, but isn’t rated to survive submersion. iPhone’s been tested to survive down to 6 metres for up to half an hour. And it has a titanium frame, for added durability.
Stick a decent case and a glass screen protector on the Nothing Phone though, and a lot of those worries become null and void. After all, if your screen protector gets damaged, you can just replace it.
Cameras
Camera performance is arguably the most important part of this comparison, because the reason the 3a Pro exists alongside the 3a is that it has better cameras. Specifically, its third camera – the zoom lens – uses a periscope zoom layout to add a 3x zoom equivalent to the camera system.
On both the primary and ultra-wide cameras, the iPhone has the larger sensor. But while it does offer a greater 5x optical range, the sensor itself is smaller, and isn’t as pixel-rich.
Here’s the thing: if you’re shooting in good daylight, most phones now do a decent job of delivering good photos with rich colour, good detail and contrast levels. The first thing I noticed was more of a performance thing, in that the Nothing Phone, by comparison, lagged a bit between pressing the shutter button and capturing the photo.
The end results also appear more saturated, with much more vibrant greens and blues, particularly in landscapes. The iPhone’s results are a more muted and realistic-looking affair.
Nothing’s also generally seemed to have a wider dynamic range. The dark parts were darker, and more contrasty, and the brighter parts of the image were brighter, giving the pictures quite a vivid overall look. Textures weren’t as realistic or authentic-looking, but for a sub-£500 phone, the results are impressive, at least when looking at the primary camera results.
Ultrawide shots tend to fall away towards the edges and have quite ropey-looking detail and a little noise.
Similarly, with the zoom camera, the iPhone’s is stronger in that you can zoom further without losing detail.
Comparing 10x zoom and 25x zoom, neither is amazing. However, the iPhone does a better job of holding on to detail, where the Nothing Phone starts to over soften, smoothing out texture and getting into that oil painting look we’ve seen from zoom cameras over the past few years.
10x zoom
25x zoom
Still, looking at anything from 3x-6x zoom, you’d be hard-pushed to find any significant weakness in the images delivered by Nothing’s phone, even compared to the iPhone. There’s an argument to be made that the texture is a little rough and unnatural looking, with too much over-sharpening, softening and contrast.
iPhone delivers stronger results again, of course, but again, it more just points to the value for money you’re getting from Nothing. The fact that we’re splitting hairs over details in photos, and needing to look at photos on a 27-inch 5K display to notice details like that, shows that for sharing images and viewing them on smartphones, it’s more than good enough.
Even at night time, using their respective night modes, it was difficult to separate them. Neither ultrawide camera was particularly strong, but there was quite a big difference between the results from Nothing’s ultrawide and its other two cameras, in that it was always quite a lot darker.
The iPhone was more consistent here, but oftentimes because iPhone’s night mode only comes on when it decides it’s needed. The Nothing Phone was more consistent in this regard. In some scenes, it even drew in more light than the iPhone, arguably making the scene look a bit too bright, but impressive nonetheless.
The iPhone’s zoom was stronger again, but that’s no real surprise. I think what is a surprise is I’d happily use the Nothing phone in pretty much any condition and be relatively happy with the results.
Switching to shooting video, it shows similar weaknesses compared to the more expensive phone, perhaps even amplifies them to make it more obvious. Colours are a little off, over-saturated, and darker details look a bit crushed and rough. Similarly, the stabilisation when moving isn’t quite as effective as the iPhone’s.
Performance
As far as raw everyday performance goes, there’s no real contest between these phones. Because, of course, there isn’t.
Apple’s Pro-level chipsets are among the most powerful available and make light work of really demanding tasks, whether that’s on-device AI tasks, shooting high-quality video and audio, or churning through really demanding games and apps. Arguably, it’s in this area you’ll see the most significant differences between a mid-range phone and a top-of-the-line model.
I will say this, though; I’ve been perfectly happy using the Nothing Phone 3a as a daily phone.
For every day casual use that’s not particularly demanding – whether that’s browsing, doom scrolling, getting hooked in an endless feed of short videos, playing the odd casual game or what sapping with friends – you’re not going to notice all that much of a performance jump by spending £500 or so more.
But if practicality is your primary focus, the battery life on the Nothing Phone 3a Pro, generally speaking, seemed stronger than that of the iPhone. There wasn’t a huge amount in it, but the Nothing Phone isn’t far off being a two-day phone for me. I’m quite a light user, with rarely more than 3 hours of screen time a day though, so your mileage might vary.
Screen
Now, while there is a difference in display size, resolution and colours, the one big thing that stood out to me while I was out shooting photos and videos in bright conditions outdoors was that the display on the Nothing phone was pretty difficult to see. The iPhone’s screen was much brighter in contrast, making lining up shots and framing far easier.
The thing that stands out most when watching video side by side indoors is that the colours on the Nothing Phone are far more saturated in its default setting. This makes everything pop on screen, but not seem as natural or realistic as the colours or textures on the iPhone display.
Switch the display to the standard, less vibrant mode, and the differences aren’t as obvious. It’s still a little warm in places, but it’s not bad at all. It still has that sense at times that details and textures are a tiny bit off, looking a tiny bit grainy in places, but I could only see that if I looked pretty closely.
It is, of course, also larger. If you wanted a larger-screened iPhone, there’s always the iPhone 16 Pro Max, which would cost you even more, but also give you that longer-lasting battery too.
Software
What I like the most about Nothing’s phone, however, is the software. It’s got that right balance between being bloat-free and not just being very customisable, but easy to customise.
If I want to install and use a third-party icon pack to completely change the look of my Home Screen I can, just by tapping and holding the Home Screen, and choosing to use one of my downloaded icon packs.
For those curious, the one I’m using here is called Crispy. It’s on the Play Store, and it’s my absolute favourite.
But more than that, Nothing OS has some very useful and convenient widgets that are themed to match the retro minimalist software aesthetic. There’s a neat calendar widget with a page turning action when there’s a new day. The music widget, which you can tap to play and pause, and which shows album art, is also great. There’s even a Do Not Disturb toggle widget to quickly switch DND mode on.
Essential Space is pretty cool too. It’s effectively an AI-powered screenshots app, which can use the screen grabs you take with the Essential button to determine what’s in those pictures and even lets you record voice notes alongside them and set reminders. It’s great if you’re often forgetting stuff.
Verdict
In the end, clearly – I don’t think Nothing ever thought its Pro model was actually a like-for-like competitor to the iPhone 16 Pro. And we all knew that before comparing them in more detail.
That said, I think what this comparison shows is that mid-range phones are better than they have been in the past, to the point where they deliver a good enough experience to keep most people happy.
Beyond some lagginess in the camera, I’ve been perfectly happy to use the Nothing Phone 3a Pro as my daily phone, and while there are other phones of a similar price with more powerful processors, I think when it comes to overall experience, it strikes the right balance between software, camera performance and hardware design. It’s a great all-rounder.
When a company is laser-focused on the right parts of the phone experience, and pays attention to the small details even on a cheaper phone, it makes a difference. It’s certainly very different to most other fairly bland phones in its price range.
