My cousin gets fantastic pics that make me say, "I wish I'd shot that." I'm shooting with a DSLR, she's shooting with an aging digital point and shoot, and sometimes, her cellphone. She just has an eye for composition that I envy.
I completely agree, it is largely about the photographer, and also about the moment.
I recently saw a blog post of the "10 Most Influential Photos in History." There were a few from Vietnam, a famine shot from Ethopia, etc. Really moving stuff that actually did change the world through awareness. Only one or two of those images were what I'd consider in focus, clear and crisp. The power of those images were in what they captured, not necessarily how well they were captured. Would they have been less influential if the photographer had used better equipment? No. But if the photographer had been fretting over his/her tech and missed the shot, the world would be a worse place today.
I have a friend who is a pro photographer who covers up all the branding on his equipment with black tape. He says the reason is people always want to talk about gear with him. He'll have clients who assume if they buy the same stuff he has, they won't need to hire a photographer. When he's shooting an event with other photographers, they want to know what gear he's using rather than how he's using it. To him, the branding on his cameras detract from his role as the photographer.
And yet, he still has the top-of-the-line, newest gear (albeit Canon). So, it must be a little bit about the tech, even if it's only worthwhile in the hands of a photographer who frames and captures the moment.
Better equipment has a role, and that is to make it easier to get the perfect shot. I'm really excited about what improved high ISO performance means, not because I'm a tech nerd in an arms race (though I am), but because I remember shooting at a friend's wedding when she (the bride) decided at the last minute to make the service candlelit. My camera could not cope. A D4 might have saved the situation (for that matter, maybe a D3s would have, I'm not a pro so I can't commit that much money to my hobby).
For my uses, investing in a D4 wouldn't be financially responsible. And I'm guessing the vast majority of people are in the same boat. But for many professional photographers, the math will work out for them and they'll be upgrading, even if the feature bump was incremental rather than revolutionary, because getting the best shot of the right moment will pay for the gear.
