As with every product category, for the cutting-edge and upper-crust of smartphone tech, you need to pay top dollar. If you include folding screens, that’s paying roughly $1,700, though a top-tier, non-folding iPhone or Galaxy Ultra is not far behind that price. 

However, most people do not need to spend that much. Only a tiny fraction of phone buyers should, or do, despite the outsized attention placed upon flagship phones by the tech press. 

For those who prioritize camera quality, Google’s Pixel line offers the best you can get at only $699. If you want a flip phone, Motorola’s Razr line starts at only $499, or $699 for one with a large cover display. For those looking for an exceptional, premium-feeling, great all-around phone, without a $1000+ price tag, my recommendation has been the Phone (2) from British start up Nothing. It’s currently on sale for $599. I wrote a glowing review of it for our digital pages last July, and to this day, use it as my work phone, despite having many more review devices sitting around from which to choose.

And so, I was excited when Nothing announced they would be entering the budget phone territory — the sub-$500 MSRP world — with their new Phone (2a). And having used a review sample for the last week, I personally would still pay the $250 extra for the full-blooded Phone (2), but for many, the compromises on the (2a) will be more than worth the savings. It has a far more premium look and feel than any similarly-priced competitor, and on first lick, is not that different from the Phone (2). In fact, I’m considering buying one for my mother. 

Much like Samsung’s previous efforts to separate the Galaxy S line from the Note, the Phone (2) and (2a) share very similar large, 120hz, bright 6.7″ AMOLED screens, but the (2a) has a more curved corner, compared to the smaller radius curve on the (2). On the rear, the camera has moved to the middle, their signature ‘glyph’ lighting has been reduced, and the wireless charging is gone. Still, Nothing’s signature use of transparent elements is as chic as always, particularly in white. Aside from not being cool to the touch, you can barely tell that the back is plastic instead of glass. I do prefer the feel of the Phone (2) in my hand — in part because of that phone’s subtly curved rear, compared with its almost flat surface — but this will be less likely to shatter from a drop, and it all feels premium. I thought the matte, grippy rails were a powder-coated aluminium on first impression; you would never know they’re plastic. Similarly, Nothing’s Android skin is just as stylish here as it was on the Phone (2), and they’ve not artificially limited any features for the budget version.

Rather, there are some new features to launch with this, such as the ability to generate wallpaper images using an AI image generator, and apply a glass effect to them, and a new camera shortcut widget.

The cameras are where the cost cutting is most evident, in the slow processing and occasional lag of the MediaTek Dimensity 7200 Pro chip, and in the very uninspiring photos it produces. Phone manufacturers often dial up the saturation and highlights of budget phone cameras, to make subpar photos look more appealing, and Nothing is no different, with the 50-megapixel f/1.8 main camera of the (2a) producing comically bright, oversaturated photos in bright lighting, and slightly unrealistic, tuned-looking photos in anything else. After the compression of Facebook or Instagram, this is only more pronounced; a friend said one of my test shots looked “like it was made by AI.” The (2a) shares the 50-megapixel f/2.2 ultrawide camera and 32-megapixel selfie camera of the Phone (2), but they seem to have dialled up saturation and highlights to match the look of their main camera, so the photos look noticeably worse. It is also worth noting that the shot you end up with often looks markedly different and better than the preview; one of the few downsides of the budget chip.

If you care about mobile photography then, you should not buy the Phone (2a). To get to this budget, manufacturers have to compromise somewhere, and for Nothing, that was the camera; and if mobile photography really matters to you, Google’s Pixel 7a is damn close to the mainline Pixel line — and therefore the best phone cameras on the market — for $499. It feels plastic-y and a bit boring, has mediocre battery life, an OK screen, and misses out on many of the best Pixel features; but it’s a great camera phone for a great price. 

But if you only open the camera app to scan a document or capture an important moment, the Phone (2a) will be completely fine for your purposes, and shouldn’t put you off from purchasing, if you’re in the market. Despite my complaints about the processor speed when opening the camera, this is otherwise a fast, responsive, chic, premium-feeling phone. The battery life is great, the screen is amazing, and it comes with features only recently reserved for flagship phones, like the under-screen fingerprint scanner and 45W fast charging. 

The ultimate compromise, though, is its release. It will be available online and in store in Britain and Europe, but American consumers will only be able to purchase the Phone (2a) through their ‘Developer Program,’ starting March 12^th, which is basically a beta-testing system for the brand. Customers will apply to buy a phone, and once their application is accepted, are encouraged to provide feedback on their phone; which will likely include “I wish 5G worked on Verizon and AT&T,” which it won’t. If you have T-Mobile, it will support T-Mobile’s mid-band 5G network, though.