It seems to me, however, that to say something evaporates into a mist of anything leaves out a vitally important step in the water cycle: condensation. So the metaphor doesn't work for me personally on a scientific level

Condensation happens 'after' evaporation. So, where are we leaving out this part of the cycle. The statement only refers to the 'first' step in the hydrology cycle; how then an omission? Assume I am standing on a hill top with a steaming kettle. The swirling mists surround me and my kettle. I perceive now, the boiling water in my kettle gushing out in puffs of steamy vapour from the spout and slowly but surely, evaporating and disappearing into the mist. Why is this scientifically or realistically implausible?