Compared to a DSLR, a prosumer is lighter. Most prosumers have in-body image stabilization systems. This eliminates camera shake - so most pictures from prosumers look sharp. Prosumer in-camera processing is configured to produce vibrant colors with good contrast - another reason why the pictures look good. But upon closer scrutiny, do the pictures contain the details as can be captured by a DSLR or does it accurately reflect the scene that one is photographing ? Most likely not.
In the hands of an inexperienced photographer, who most likely do not understand the DSLR tool he is holding, of course you are not going to replicate the results of a prosumer. To make the most out of a DSLR, one must be equipped with the right knowledge. Go beyond the basic ISO, shutter speed, DOF etc and getting to the nitty gritty of knowing the characteristics of the camera body and lens - like what is the camera's default settings when it leaves the factory or where is the sweet spot of the lens that one is using - knowing all these and using the knowledge to your advantage makes a world of difference to producing that good photo. Knowledge is power !
Why do almost all pros and semi pros and serious amateurs use DSLR and not prosumers ? Are they misguided ? Are they wrong in their choice of tool for photography. Surely not. There must be logic and valid reasons to support these statistics.
Dont be like the person who drives an automatic transmissioned toyota corolla (which does everything well) and when he strikes the lottery, goes out and buys a Gallardo but drives it in ONE gear only (cause he is not used to changing gears so continues to engage FIRST gear and step on the accelerator only ) To realize the potential of the Gallardo, one must understand the car, what it was built for, what are its limits and and learn how best to extract the performance of the car. If you are going to buy the car and not learn to drive it to its potential, you shouldn't blame the car for lack of performance !