Difference between 1.8, 1.2 and 2.8 on 50mm lenses

I'm sorry if I'm posting this in the wrong spot.  I'm new here, just signed up.  I have bought a used Nikon Z6.  It's only a body and I was told a good lens to start off with is a 50mm.  But when I search I see three different 50mm lenses.  Two of them have prices close to one another 1.8 which is $626  www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1431710-R...or_z_50mm_f_1_8.html    and 2.8 one is $646  www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1644172-R...or_z_micro_50mm.html

But then for the 1.2 one is super expensive at $2096  www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1594469-R...or_z_50mm_f_1_2.html

What is the difference between these?  Honestly budget wise the 1.8 or 2.8 are easier on the wallet.  But even those have prices close to each other  I'm confused.  

I should add that this is my first camera.  

So, when we're talking about lenses, one of the most important things to consider is the aperture, which is essentially the size of the opening that lets light into the lens. The aperture is measured in f-stops, which are represented by numbers like 1.8, 1.2, and 2.8.

Now, the lower the f-stop number, the wider the aperture, which means more light can get in. This is important because it allows you to shoot in low light conditions without having to use a flash or crank up your ISO too high, which can result in noisy images.

So, let's start with the 1.8 aperture. This is a fairly wide aperture, which means it's great for shooting in low light. It also gives you a really nice shallow depth of field, which means that the subject you're focusing on will be sharp, but the background will be blurry. This can be a really nice effect for portrait photography, for example.

Moving on to the 1.2 aperture, this is an even wider aperture, which means even more light can get in. This makes it even better for shooting in low light, and it also gives you an even shallower depth of field than the 1.8 aperture. This can be really nice for really isolating your subject and making them stand out from the background.

Finally, we have the 2.8 aperture. This is a narrower aperture than the other two, which means less light can get in. This can make it a bit trickier to shoot in low light, but it can still be done with a slower shutter speed or higher ISO. The advantage of the 2.8 aperture is that it gives you a wider depth of field, which means more of the image will be in focus. This can be really nice for landscape photography, for example, where you want everything from the foreground to the background to be in focus.

So, that's the basic difference between 1.8, 1.2, and 2.8 on 50mm lenses. It really comes down to the amount of light you can let in and the depth of field you can achieve. Depending on what you're shooting and the conditions you're shooting in, each of these apertures can be really useful in its own way!

What Kate said is spot-on. In your case I'd go for the 1.8, simply because it's cheaper. Since you're just starting out there's no need to go and blow a ton of cash. 1.8 will give you a great bokeh, if that's what you're after. I highly recommend Simon d'Entremont's youtube channel , it's a great source of information, especially if you're just starting out.

Here are two video's of special interest to you:
Camera Basics
Understanding Aperture

100%, go with the 1.8, it's going to be a great lens to get out there and get started with.  1.8 will offer you fast shutter speeds, and best of all, that lens is the most budget friendly.  

Thank you.  BTW, which is more used by photographers: 50mm or 35mm?