One topic I would mention is room.
Motorcycle travel does not lend itself well to carrying large DSLRs and a suitcase full of lenses. I like and use large DSLRs and a suitcase of lenses myself, and that is one reason that I don't ride near as much as I did years ago. When I was riding I found that for me, one smaller DSLR - like a Canon 70D or 80D, and one travel zoom lens that zooms from a fairly wide to pretty long ( 18mm to 300mm on a crop body ) was ideal as it allowed me to shoot landscapes and wildlife with reasonable success.
Are Full Frame cameras "better" - absolutely and I own several, but they're not better for every task. Within the confines of motorcycle travel - size, fragillity, cost - large DSLRs were not the ideal tool for me. I carried my smaller 70D in a tank bag on top of a 2 in thick foam pad to better shield the camera and lens from the dust and vibration inherent in motorcycle travel, especially when one leaves the paved roads for the more interesting back country roads and paths and trails.
Today I would also look at micro4/3s systems as they are small, light and able. Another camera that many travelers seem to love is the Sony RX10 Mk IV which is a non interchangeable lens camera with a zoom from 24-600mm ( 35mm equivalent ). Non-interchangeable lens cameras MAY handle dust better, may....
The limitations of motorcycle travel - size, vibration,security, dust etc require one to consider what tool is best for their needs.
I always ask folks which is better a sledge hammer or a tack hammer? The answer, obviously, depends on the task you want to perform.
Modern m4/3 and crop bodies will make very credible images for web sites that are indistiguishable from full frame bodies. If you desire 30 v 40 inch prints, then look into full frame system, or full frame mirrorless systems. I do think DSLRs will be slightly better in the dusty enviroments than large mirrorless systems, but not everyone may agree with me.
Like rtw said, learn to shoot and process RAW files for the best quality from your camera - having said that most cameras will shoot simultaneous RAW and jpg, ( memory chips are cheap these days ) and see how the jpgs compare to your best efforts with an image editor you are comfortable with. Like rtwPaul, I use LightRoom and occaisionally a trip to Photoshop for some images, but I do have friends who are very happy with modern camera renderings of jpgs. If you choose not to process your RAW files, be aware you are delegating that editing to the processor and algorithms within your camera body. Some are better than others....
I agree with the recommendation to shoot in Manual or Av, that was standard advice for serious photographers for years - but what I frequently do today with first rate modern DSLRs is shoot in Manual Mode with the camera body set to Auto ISO, which means I get to choose the aperture and shutter speed of MY preference, and the camera sets the ISO ( within limits I set ) to get the proper exposure. If I find settings and and ISO that gives me good results, AND THE LIGHTING DOESN'T CHANGE, I can then shoot in total manual mode until the lighting changes.
Learning all the ins and outs of a modern camera and all the capapbilities of modern image editing software is a big undertaking, that can take many years. I am still learning after more than 50 years of shooting - the software seems to change more than annually
Oh - keep the rubber side of your motorcycle down, it is better for your camera when you do that....😎
One can have the finest tools - chisels, scalpels, camera systems, race cars, whatever - it is the artisan who has mastered them with long use and practice - that really determines the quality of their product.