I am usually unsure how we define "personal style" (some days I'm more confident than others). Vision and Style get thrown around a lot in artistic discussions, and I'm rarely confident I actually know what they mean. That isn't to say I don't believe it exists, or that I can't see it in others' collected works.
Part of it for me is that 'style' and 'technique' are so easily confused (both by the photographer and the viewer).
Examples of what I mean:
Yousef Karsh definitely had a personal style and vision. He was very good at conveying a sense of the person. He used techniques such as dramatic lighting mixed with relaxed posing and low-ish angles that usually conveyed a sense of dignity or strength, but for every image that uses those techinques I'm sure there are plenty of images he published that didn't fit any of that.
Gregory Heisler likes to use complicated lighting setups, often mixing colours of light. He doesn't rest on a single style, instead chosing from a big bag of techniques for each shoot. None the less, when you looks at his work, it feels coherent.
Fred Herzog's work has a consistency because he always used the same camera, the same film, used available light, and mostly shot in the same city (Vancouver). But that is technique and circumstance. His style, the reason we still look at his photos 50 years later, is his focus on colours and people, and how he conveys something with those.
This is a very topical subject for me, as I'm now at the point where I consider myself technically capable (I can operate fully manual, understand all controls available to me, and understand their various effects on the final image) but artistically lacking. I'm finally at the point where I am no longer interested in learning how better to operate equipment (with the execption of lighting, always more to learn there), but actively working to learn as much as I can about style, vision, and communication in photography.
To directly answer your question, I've been shooting seriously since 2007 (althought not in a professional capacity). I only now have a sense of the distinction between style and technique. In my last few projects I've started to see and understand what it is I like best in my favourite images, and how to go about reproducing that without relying on technique.
I'm actually not certain I would want my natural instinct and personal interactions to be better suited to the task. I like to fly by the seat of my pants, and I'm lousy at interacting with people - but my best images required substantial amounts of planing and interaction. I think that, because it doesn't (yet) come naturally, when I do put in the focused effort on those things, it really shows, and makes the images that much better. Some day it may be nice to have those things just flow, but for now, I like that my best images take effort; it makes me feel I did something. The images that I've taken, and love, but didn't require that effory feel like flukes and luck. I prefer feeling like I earned them and have the confidence that I can repeat that quality of work.
