I'm not a professional, just an amateur of over 60 years playing with cameras.
Dream lenses tend to be good at one specific task or skill or purpose. Pros frequently need tools that are "good enough to get the job done" but not necessarily dreamy.
Very large aperture lenses are great fun, I love them and own several - because their very large aperture lets them gather light very quickly, and lets them blur the backgrounds very effectively, and create a very shallow depth of field. I love playing with an f2.0 135 or an f 1.2 85mm or my Sigma f1.4 105 mm lens. I store them in a closet at home, not on a travelling motorcycle.
But the very thing, that huge frontal element, that make them so dreamy, so appealing, also makes them very large, very heavy, and 3-4x as expensive.
You can buy a very nice 85mm f1.8 lens for 1/4 the price of an 85mm f1.2 lens, and it will be smaller, lighter, and easier to carry. UNLESS you plan to shoot with the aperture wide open for that shallow DOF all the time. you won't see that much difference in your images.
Yes, the more expensive lenses MAY be a bit sharper, but a standard 24-105 f4.0 IS L will probably provide very nice images in their place, but without that very shallow DOF.
SO do you really, really want that shallow DOF all the time. That is a question that comes down to what you want to photograph and why, like I said in my first post. For the few occasions that I really want that very shallow DOF I CAN just use my iPhone X in portait mode these days.........
IF I COULD ONLY HAVE THREE LENSES, I would go with a mechanical ( neither autofocus nor auto iris ) very wide lens, like the Lawo Venus 15mm f2.0 mount for an EOS R or a Sony body. It is Chinese, inexpensive ( no AF , no auto iris - Mechanical only ), small, FAST, and very sharp lens with extensive depth of field. Auto focus not needed very much at all. It will shoot stars with aplomb in the dark.
I would buy a 24-105 or so f4.0 IS L lens - sharp, fast enough for out of doors work with modern bodies, good AF, and a nice breadth of focal lengths for shooting people, portraits, and groups of people or landscapes. Some would prefer the faster f2.8 but shorter focal length 24-70 f2.8 lens. A big heavier, more expensive, and larger, with less reach.
For the EOS R mirroless body, I would then add the RF 24-240mm f4.0-6.6 lens. Long enough for some sports, or limited wildlife shooting, some car or motocycle racing, and small enough and inexpensive enough to be useful. Not perfect optically, but with the builit in software profiles pretty darn good images. Shoots good video too.
If I wanted a crop body instead of an R mirrorless full frame, I might pick up the current Tamron 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD MACRO Lens. At a 24-420 mm equivalent zoom range in FF, this is a pretty useful lens on a crop body. Wide enough to be good for landscapes, and long enough to really work for some careful wildlife shooting. Is it as sharp as seperate Canon prime lenses? Absolutely not! BUT, it is sharp enough after len profiles and a run through LightRoom - yes, once through LightRoom the minimal chromatic aberration all disappears, and the lens is remarkable useful. And it costs less than 1/12 the price of a EOS 600 f4.0
Before I got my R body, a Canon crop body was my walk around tool, and the current 90D from Canon is pretty good both at stills and video. It is small for a crop body, really no bigger than my Sony RX10 Mk iV
I have watched folks kind of sneer when I show up with a Canon crop body and a Tamron travel zoom, so I have a gallery here of a few representative shots shot with a crop body - either a 7DMK II or a 70D or an 80D - and the current Tamron 16-300 listed above. I like it better than Tamron's 28-300 for FF bodies. Take a look and feel free to offer criticisms of the lenses optical performance or my compositional choices. I have over 10,000 frames shot with mine, so it has held up pretty well.
I suggest you don't just take my advice here, but listen to the reasons for my advice, then you can adapt my advice for the camera body of your choice - whether Sony, Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Olympus, etc.
In lieu of the 24-105 f4.0 IS L - some might opt instead for a nice 50mm f1.4 Sigma ART lens on their body of choice - It is a great lens, not too expensive, VERY sharp, and you can zoom with your feet instead of your lens. This works better for zooming with peple, than it does with landscape shooting.
I always say that real pros in any occupation, know way more than just one way to skin a cat. Same is true for photography I think.