The claim you make in your first paragraph does not follow from the second paragraph. While indeed a professional / artist / skilled passionate amateur will be limited way less than a random snapshot taker, as they might overcome many limitations in many creative ways, it’s not true that the gear does not matter and it’s not limiting.

If it doesn’t, then why do professionals use gear that’s often worth tens or hundreds thousand dollars? Try to picture wildlife or soccer with a smartphone from 2010. Are you sure it’s not limiting you? ;)

In photography both things matter: skill AND tools.

Also not all photographers are alike and not all photography is art. Event / documentation photography is also professional photography. It requires repeatability and acceptable results, not great results once in a while. That’s why professionals use expensive, sophisticated gear with autofocus, eyetracking, high speed drive etc. They cannot afford getting only 1 shot out of 1000 great. They need all (most) shots good enough.

Btw: Many amateurs who do photography for fun are often way more artistically skilled than professionals so I would not look down on them. It applies not just to photography but probably any discipline. The original meaning of the word „amateur” is actually very positive. Being paid for something does not mean you’re good at it. I’ve seen plenty of terrible quality work from professionals (in photography, in computer programming, in electronics design/rework).

Funny, but professionals do it quite often. In all professions people do talk about their tools and exchange their experiences. Quite usual.

My father was a professional photographer. He was also a professional asshole so his response was always to respond with the shittiest worst lens he could think of and see if they bought it.

As an amateur (who did a bit of paid work in his youth) I still look at photos I like and wonder what lens was used.

I don’t really care about the brand or model but I like to know the settings. Ie aperture used, max aperture, focal length, etc.

Was very subtle flash used and if so what was the placement and mod, etc?

I just want to know how it was made.

Even with shots from people like Cartier-Bresson where he almost always used the same lens, film and settings. I still wonder if anything changed.

I don’t miss all the arse sniffing, snobbery and inverse snobbery involved in photography though.