I say this as a photographer who has already purchased an iPhone 12 Pro Max:
If you're taking a tripod and an iPhone tripod camera mount with you... why not just take a camera camera (struck: "real camera") without a space-constrained sensor/lens?
The weight savings are very, very nice when you're doing long or technical hikes. The full-frame body and two lenses I hike with weigh almost 6lbs. That's not even including the filters and sturdy tripod designed for holding a "real" camera. By comparison, a good phone tripod and mount clock in at about 1.5lbs.
That being said... I enjoy printing my landscape photography. It's worth it to lug out my heavy gear because I can get nice, large prints out of it. But if you're just posting on social media, your body will thank you later for leaving those 6lbs home.
I've owned 35mm full frame sensor cameras, Micro-four thirds, and the RX100vii. The iPhone with a tripod still seems to me like the most convenient way to travel. The only thing which would 1UP the iPhone would be a camera and viewfinder on the Apple Watch.
If you're taking a tripod and an iPhone tripod camera mount with you... why not just take a camera camera (struck: "real camera") without a space-constrained sensor/lens?
This test suite seems a little... silly to me.