Yes, yes really. When real resolution is being substituted with the best guess of a completely closed source image processor, the court should be made aware of it.
It's a huge potential problem, and getting worse by the day.
Capture time processing is also verifiable with regards to what stack a particular device uses with the use of metadata, and as such has little in the way of extra problems over other potential doctored evidence which have been possible for years without smart phone devices.
Do we question what color film would portray an image for example? Is a particular lensing affecting the truth of an image? A specific crop? There's no such thing as a perfectly true photo or video.
Defending the suitability of evidence is the duty of re council who introduced it.
The prosecution couldn't explain how the iPhone zooms and it was on them to do so.
Btw, the prosecution later on were caught tampering with evidence.