Yes, I understand that the bump exists because the cameras can't get smaller, but what I'm saying is they could bump the entire phone out to the same thickness as the camera bump, but people wouldn't be happy about how thick their phone is, especially since adding a case would make it even THICKER.
As it is right now, when you put a case on an iPhone that has a camera bump, the bump protrudes through the case and the entire phone becomes just about the same thickness as the iPhone would have been without a case if they got rid of the bump.
See what I'm saying?
If they delete the bump by pushing increasing the thickness of the entire phone, caseless people would be happy, but case-people wouldn't.
I agree that this is a very reasonable speculation as to Apple's design motives. It's a set of justifications that I've used as well over the years.
It's likely that there are additional design considerations at play. Regardless of which received the most weight in the design process, these are probably receiving a fair amount of that weight.
Yes, the focal length of the camera lenses is a limiting factor in maximizing thinness, however, the second-gen SE, which has one rear lens (28mm-equivalent) is .29 inches/7.4 mm thick, while the 12 Pro Max with its 65mm-equivalent "telephoto" (old-time photographers would not call it that) is the same .29/7.4, and both models have bumps. The dimensions of the internal components (height of chip packaging, practical thinness of battery, ,etc.), display module, rear case materials, and the practical dimensions of the side buttons and switches probably have a bigger say in things.
There is a case (no pun intended) to be made that one reason for the camera bump is to highlight the presence of those cameras. Considering how big a selling point the cameras have become, there's something to be said for drawing focus to their presence, both while displayed in the store (where the phones are always naked) and afterwards.
But absolutely, the designers have to account for the experience of protective-case users. I've felt for a long time that the drive to thinness was propelled more by the thickness of protective cases than by the sexiness of having a fashion model-thin naked iPhone. A smartphone with Otterbox-style protection can be downright fat, no matter how thin the phone is.
Whether the cutout for the camera is larger or smaller matters less, but by raising the lens/flash assembly and providing a raised "buffer zone" around the lenses there's assurance that the case won't impinge on the lens' area of view, which could result in vignetting.
Unless there's a fundamental change in the way smartphones are built, I'll likely always use a protective case (I don't use a screen protector, however - a topic for another discussion). This goes back to my iPhone 4, which I originally used naked. However, when Apple gave out free bumper cases (remember "antennagate"?) I took advantage of the offer and was quickly sold on the benefits of protection.
The bumper case was the perfect advertisement for why a protective case is a good idea - its raised edges meant the display could not hit the ground "flush,"lifting a face-down display off the surface and thus avoiding most grit that might cause scratches. Plus, its resilience delivered obvious shock absorption. Sure, protruding objects can still break the glass, but in all the times I've dropped my iPhones over the years, I've never broken or deeply scratched a display (despite not using a screen protector). While to my mind that minimalist bumper would also have been fine for any subsequent aluminum-backed models (not sure why Apple discontinued them), a case with full rear coverage seems essential for the glass-backed models.
I've long preferred the look and feel of the leather cases to silicone and other plastics. Sure, there's still plastic under the thin leather veneer, but that also means the protection lives on even after the leather wears off (which it can, typically in the corners). The choice is all about aesthetics and not at all about longevity. However, the protection has been more than adequate for the way I handle my phones (others mileage most certainly varies).