Considering that cats are descended from big cats like lions

Because lions live in savannah...

If they lived in the artic they'd be white.

If they lived where there was shadows they'd be black.

If they had multiple colorations in the same breeding population, they'd have calicos on occasion.

Anything except savannah color is a disadvantage, so that's all there is.

Also, modern domestic cats are the result of breeding. Wild cats mostly reflect their environment in their coat.

There’s a common trend among domesticated animals—they tend to develop more variegated coloring than their wild ancestors.

One theory is that domestication affects traits that involve early embryonic development, and that have a lot of associated changes beyond what was actually selected for (i.e. tameness).

Another possibility is that, in the absence of selection, animals naturally produce more variation in coloration than is seen in the wild—but natural selection is continually weeding out those that are disadvantageous in their current environment.

Little cats didn't evolve from big cats.

Little mice chasers started coming to human habitations when humans started building silos to hold grain. The humans saw the cats were useful and kept them around.

https://www.animalwised.com/cat-history-and-evolution-3277.html

Makes sense.

You don't know when the next deforestation or forced migration will come. What was great camouflage for the last generation might be a huge disadvantage this time around.

If they lived in the artic they'd be white.

To expand on this, if they lived in the arctic, there would be "selection pressure" in the form of either reduced hunting success for predators or increased predation for prey species. That selection pressure is really all that evolution is: being more likely to succeed and pass on your genes.

I think Darwin might be on to something...

It might, but exceedingly rarely. Albinism and melanism occurs in many taxa including species in the genus Panthera (which include lions and tigers). These are rare traits in general because they are selected against for one reason or another and don't proliferate in the wild.

Another possibility is that these phenotypes are linked to genes that have other downstream developmental effects that lead to non-viable fetuses.

Another fun one (possibly) is that some of these coat traits are controlled partially by the environment/the animal's spatial relationship with the environment. Siamese cats have the characteristic darker coat colors on their extremities (ears, paws, tails, snout, this is called acromelanism) because the melanism is controlled by lower temperature. If an animal never experiences a low temperature, that phenotype might never be expressed.

These are all possibilities. I'm a biologist but I don't study felids (cats and big cats).

Wolves also have less natural colours than dogs. We like pets that stand out, while in the wild it's just bad camoflage.

Although, the small wildcats tend to have more uniform fur colour, as well.

I'll assume you're talking about the one you see in nature photography.

If the coloring is detrimental to survival, those oddly colored ones probably don't survive long enough to reproduce.

Not an expert.

Bobcats are as small as they get where I live, and they're hella reclusive. So yes, pictures.

They all have to hunt and be stealthy, the main difference is how big they are. Cheetahs even meow rather than roar.

A quick search reveals that there are wildcats that are smaller than domestic ones.

TIL!