Yep, I agree, this question has to be one of the greatest philosophical photography questions posed or posted by anyone here at Canon Rumors.
Just in case anyone changes the title of this thread, I'm going to repeat it here: "Do you feel your photos have improved proportionally to the cost of your gear?"
I would have to say, "Yes." But not at first, the moment of ownership. It takes awhile.
For instance, using my 1D X for the first time at a sport that I have long experience with was almost like being a beginner again. I was very frustrated. I had forgotten how much of photography is a fine art like playing the violin or hitting a baseball. Timing and handling and not half-pressing the shutter at the wrong time.
But once I get acclimated to the new level of equipment, I have to say that it's worth it.
Perhaps even more so.
It's not the expense that matters, but the fact that some expensive features really do matter to enabling creative vision.
You can have a great idea for a volleyball setter superimposed on the school's logo... but if the camera won't focus fast enough, or its noise is too high, then it's just impossible to accomplish your vision.
And the same truth is valid for landscapes, portraits, and probably any time of photography, just with different parameters (i.e., focusing speed isn't necessarily the limiting factor in a landscape photo).
But the photographer has to learn his expensive instrument well enough to "play" it like a violin.
As far as vision goes, though, I would have to say, "No," except that the capabilities of an expensive camera can often stimulate our vision... like telephotos w/ shallow DOF, etc.... to go beyond its initial conception.