Interesting discussion...
I got a simple message out of the article... When it boils down to it, all else being equal, it is the photographer - with no vision to drive it, the camera sits on the table like the inanimate object it is. But, a photographer without a camera is a spectator. Both are required. Different levels of equipment can accomplish different results, with varying amounts of tolerance, depending on the equipment, the subject, and the photographer's skill and creativity. Better gear is generally better at producing "better" images - or, put another way, higher quality equipment is generally more capable of realizing the photographer's vision.
So, it is the photographer... but its also the gear, and many other factors...
I had a discussion recently w/ a friend re: potentially switching platforms, and he asked me "Will having 'x' piece of equipment make you a better photographer?" My answer was no - but having 'x' piece of equipment opens up possibilities that my existing gear cannot currently attain. And that's what its all about, right? Having the right piece of gear to allow you to achieve the vision you have at that particular moment... What seems to separate the "men" from the "boys" is how they deal with imperfect gear and still achieve amazing images...
What do I know, though
Dave