DSLR lenses for my Nikon D40...so confused! ?

Congratulations on your new camera, it certainly is a good choice! 1) You are not paying the higher price only for the VR feature. The lenses utilizing it are of more quality in general. Also note that the VR is more critical as the magnification (zoom) gets higher. For a handheld shot with zoom over 100mm it will give you a good advantage. 2) Nikon lenses should be expected to have a better quality control (you don't have to be lucky to get a good example) and they also should last much longer without wearing. But you can get very good examples of many types of Sigma lenses. 3) You could ask the same about cars, four wheels and a steering wheel -- so what's the difference, you know. It is a matter of preference. and needs. The good (read expensive) lenses are sharp, deliver correct colors, have the same quality both in the center of the picture and at the edges and so on (for ever). What do you need and what can you afford? So, the last is the most difficult, is it sensible to advise a lens that is more expensive than the camera? Could be, as if you upgrade the camera the lens can live with the new camera if it is good enough. And also, if it was an overshot it is always easier to sell good stuff for decent money. My recommendation would be the the 18-200 mm VR lens, it is not a professional lens, but many professionals use it because it is quite good, especially for the money. I do have one (and also the better, more expensive models 70-200; 80-400 so I do have the comparison) and I like it a lot. You should take a look at Bjorn Rorslett's web, it has a very good review pages for Nikon lenses: http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2.html Good luck and happy photographing! Willy

1) VR is worth it for the amateur user based on their ability to hold the camera steady. VR's worth increases as you shoot at longer focal lengths (which magnifies any shake your hands may have). VR's worth also increases when you are attempt to hand hold long exposures. 2) Sigma is 3rd party. Generally 3rd party lenses have less quality control than the official company lenses. Some users will have great luck get great copies of the 3rd party lens and then tout that 3rd party has the same quality as the Nikon / Canon lenses. Because you have a Nikon D40, the Autofocus (AF) system is in the body of the camera, and requires special lenses to make use of it. This severely limits your choice of lenses to Nikon AF-S lenses. Make sure whatever lens you buy, still supports the AF system on your D40 (unless you are looking to do manual focus on each exposure). 3) Expensive lenses have more elements, are larger, heavier so that they can support larger apertures (smaller fstop numbers). Essentially this equates to the ability to take non blurry pictures with either fast moving subjects or in low light conditions which is often the case when professionals need to take pictures (weddings, sporting events, to name a few). 4) Biggest bang for your buck! (I would highly recommend the Nikon 18-200). It isn't pro quality, but it will give you the most range (wide angle 18mm to telephoto 200mm) all in one lens. It costs about 600-700 bucks, but is worth it if you are going to use the range. If you dont need the long range, your 18-55 is just fine. Hope this helps! Good Luck!

I own 3 Nikon lenses for my digital camera. A good all around lens is the 24-120 AF Nikkor. I don't what they cost now, but I paid about $500 for it. For my telephoto, I went VR and paid about $1700. It' worth it, I think, if you are going to do a lot hand hold photography. If you're going to use a tripod with the long lens, then you don't need it. I'm not surprised that you get crisp photos with the shorter focal length. The longer the lens, the more difficult it is to hand hold. The rule of thumb is you need a mimimum shutter speed of 1/focal length. So a 50mm lens should be clear at a 60th of a second, but for 200mm you're going to need about 1/250.

The excellent 55-200 mm VR at just around $200 is an good investment. You can expect Nikon lenses to last for decades. Nikon, Canon, Pentax and Sony lenses will always be better builds than any third-party lens. The range of the zoom has nothing to do with its quality. You may be surprised to hear that the prime 400 mm VR Nikon lens costs in excess of $7,000

I'm not so sure about lenses overall, but I own a Nikon D60, It came with an 18-55mm VR Lense, the VR is exceptional, it actually works!

I have the D40, among others. Here is my answer: 1) Yes, VR is totally worth the extra money! I own the 55-200mm lens without the VR, and when it's dark, or there's not a lot of light in the scene, the images are always blurry! Without Vibration reduction, you have to Use a minimum shutter speed reciprocal to the focal length of the length. So, at 200mm's, you have to use a shutter speed of 1/200th of a second. Which, in certain situations, is impossible. With Vibration reduction, you can use a shutter speed 3 to 4 times longer, which is much more convenient. So, yes, VR is definitely worth the extra money. You will really find it useful. The reason you don't notice to much blur with your 18-55mm lens is because you will rarely get a shutter speed under 1/18- 1/50 when shooting normally. With a 200mm lens, things are very different. 2) The difference is that Nikkor brand lenses are better in quality, and produce relatively better images when compared to third party lenses, like Sigma, and Tamron. This isn't to say that third party lenses aren't a good choice, it's just that if you have the extra money for Nikkor, you should spend it. But, a lens like your 18-55mm lens could not compare to a lens like the Sigma 10-20mm lens, which is four hundred and fifty dollars. 3) The main difference is that The lens is build more ' luxuriously ' for say. It's made of more durable materials, it has a proper manual focusing ring, it has a tripod mount, the lens is often much faster, and way sharper. With lenses, you definitely get what you pay for. A one hundred dollar lens really could not compared to a four thousand dollar lens. The more expensive lenses are just better in nature. The 18-55mm lens is only suitable for wide angle photography to normal photography. Anything Beyond 55mm's, is out of your range. So, the next lens you should consider is the 55-200mm VR lens, which is a Great lens, and the images are Great. Sure, it doesn't have the quality of 70-200mm lens, but trust me, it's still a Great lens: http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-200mm-4-5-6G-AF-S-Nikkor/dp/B000O161X0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1228961221&sr=1-1 I wouldn't suggest you get the version of this lens without the Vibration Reduction.