I've been thinking about this since I saw the post earlier today. I've been shooting portraits for a long time, going back to the old film bodies, and honestly the gear we have now is just incredible. Back in the day, I used to swear by the heaviest f/1.2 glass I could find, but as I've gotten older, I've started prioritizing balance and price-to-performance more. Since you're looking in that 1k to 1.5k range, you've actually got a hidden gem available. I'd really recommend checking out the Canon RF 100mm f/2.8 L Macro IS USM. I know it says macro on the box, but it is one of the best portrait lenses I've ever used. The spherical aberration (SA) control ring is a total trip—it lets you change how the bokeh looks, giving you a soft-focus look or a more contrasty one. It usually runs about $1,100 to $1,300 depending on sales. Another solid move if you want versatility is the Canon RF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM. It's super compact and fits your budget perfectly. I used to be a prime-only snob, but having that zoom range for headshots vs full body is such a luxury when you're working fast. You wont regret either of those on an R6 II.

Congrats on the R6 II! Honestly, the eye-tracking on this body is a total game-changer for portraits. When I first got my setup, I was really torn between sticking with my old glass via an adapter or going native. I ended up getting a fast prime that was right in your budget range because I wanted that shallow depth of field, but what I actually learned was that the technical sharpness on these newer sensors is so high that sometimes the bokeh can feel a bit *too* clinical compared to older glass. I spent a lot of time testing the AF speed and basically found that even with adapted options, the hit rate is way higher than it ever was on my old DSLR. The compression you get at the longer end of a decent zoom is also worth considering tbh, especially if youre doing full-body shots versus tight headshots. Idk if youve looked into the weight distribution, but that was a huge factor for me—some of these newer lenses are *massive* and can make a long shoot pretty tiring. Just something to think about before you drop the cash

I am in the exact same boat as you right now!! I just picked up the R6 II and I am totally paralyzed by choice because I need something that is absolutely reliable for my professional work. It is such a massive investment and I want to make sure I am being safe and getting it right the first time! My methodical approach to choosing glass usually focuses on these reliability factors:

• Stick to the native Canon brand for the best system communication and focus accuracy.
• Focus on the professional series to ensure the build quality is amazing and can handle daily use.
• Always prioritize weather sealing to ensure the lens is safe in all conditions. Honestly you really cant go wrong if you just stay with the Canon native glass! Their high-end primes are just fantastic and give me such peace of mind. I am still trying to narrow down which one to get for my own setup tho... it is just so hard to decide!

Just wanted to say thanks for everyone chiming in. Super helpful discussion.

Just jumping in here, I totally agree about the eye tracking—it is basically like playing a video game on easy mode now. The way it sticks to the pupil even if the subject is moving is just wild. From a technical side, the reason you want to go native RF for portraits is the communication speed. That 12-pin connection allows for way more data exchange between the lens and the R6 II processor. It means the lens elements move faster and more accurately, which is huge when you are shooting wide open and have a paper-thin depth of field. In your budget, I would seriously look at the Canon RF 100mm f2.8L Macro IS USM. Dont let the macro tag fool you; its a phenomenal portrait lens. The big selling point is the SA Control ring. It lets you adjust the character of the bokeh, making it softer or more dreamy, which is great for skin tones. If you prefer a zoom, the Canon RF 70-200mm f4L IS USM is also right in that $1500 range. Its incredibly sharp and way more portable than the old EF versions. Even at f4, when you are at the 200mm end, the compression gives you plenty of background separation for professional looking headshots.

ngl I am in the exact same boat and it is driving me crazy. I have been staring at MTF charts and diffraction data for the R6 II sensor for like three months now and nothing in that $1000-$1500 range actually hits the mark for me. It is honestly so disappointing because the specs look great on paper but the actual output feels... sterile?

• Chromatic aberration is still way too high on the native glass
• Edge-to-edge sharpness just isnt there compared to the high-end primes
• The bokeh transition is kinda harsh tbh I ended up falling down a rabbit hole reading about the history of rare earth elements in glass manufacturing instead. Spent the whole weekend looking at how supply chains for lanthanum have changed since the 90s and how it affects refractive indices. It is fascinating how the industry shifted away from certain leaded glass types. Anyway, I still havent found a lens either, but yeah, the struggle is real.