Is The Nikkor AF-S DX VR 18-55mm f/ 3.5 5.6 G lens good enough for the Nikon D300?
Or sould I spend the money and buy a "GOOD" lens? What is concidered a "good" lens?
Do Sigma or Tameron make decent lenses or sould they be avoided?:confused:

What lenses do you have, what do you want to shoot, and what's your budget?

I just got a new Nikon D330 and the 18-55 f/ 3.5 5.6 AF-S DX VR. I shoot Nature, Portret, Close-up, Architecture, Artsy-fartsy kinda things. (I have work on "photoshop express(beta), gallery is under "asterix2sf") My last camera is a Olympus N20 that takes good pics but is slower than Snail on pot.I'm looking to see a big jump in resolution.
I'm also looking to print them in 17x23 and have them look good.

My budget is $600-$1200 unless I can get away with the 18-55 3.5. If there is a big diferance I'll spend the money

I'm not the best expert but I think your 18-55 will be a pretty good walk around lens.
There are a lot of opinions on portrait lenses and what works for one may not work for another but I got turned on to the 50mm f/1.8 lens in these forums and its one sweet little lens and you can't beat the price for a prime. Really good for natural and low light situations. $150 or probably less.
Nature is a big category and if you are talking birds and wildlife you'll want one of the super zooms with which I have no experience. If you are talking landscape a moderate zoom such as the 18-200 vr($700) and/or a wide angle should do for most situations.
I just picked up a tokina 12-24 and think its very good and may have dropped in price since the introduced the 11-18. I got mine a little less than 500,
Good lenses cost more especially when labeled pro, except for the 50mm. They are built to last, have little or no distortion,
Here's a thread showing what the 50 mm is capable of..

etc.http://forums.photographyreview.com/showthread.php?t=37880

and here is something I posted a while ago about what makes a pro lens
http://forums.photographyreview.com/showthread.php?t=40867

Sigma and Tamron and Tokina make good lenses and they make not so good lenses. But that's the same with Nikon and Canon, too. When you start considering a lens, check our reviews and ask here for opinions.

If you want some outside opinions, here's one for you:

http://www.bythom.com/rationallenses.htm

Some may be out of your price range, still, the article could be useful for reference purposes.

Quick question, I know the f/1.8 50mm lens won't autofocus on a D60, but will the f/1.4?

Quick question, I know the f/1.8 50mm lens won't autofocus on a D60, but will the f/1.4?

No! Don't know if or when they are going to bring it out in AFS

Ah, AFS, I knew that was the denotation for having its own motor - I guess I was thrown by an image of the f/1.4 that showed the window to the internal focusing guide - bleh.

Thanks :)

Thanks Frog, and Thanks Aging Eyes for your input, every little bit helps.

Asterix -

I say the kit lens will get ya by for a while - but you will want to upgrade to "good glass". It does make a difference. When I upgraded it was night and day. Sigma and Tamron make good glass but do your research before just buying.

Like my Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 - reviews stated it ranks right up with the nikon 17-55. Only thing the Tamron doesn't have is VR. Which you will see in the price difference. I have been very happy with the Tamron and its quality.

The Tamron 90mm macro - Great lens - awesome detail and sharpness. Another lens that gets rave reviews!

The Nikon 50mm (nifty-fifty) can't go wrong there. Best lens for around $100.

Spend the money on good glass you won't regret it. Will last a lifetime.

I researched sigma's version of the 17-50 too - I think theirs is 16-50 and it didn't fare as well as the Tamron did vs the nikon.

I will add that the kit lens, aka 18-55 vr does have some pretty darn good reviews, so use it for a while and you'll soon know what you need.
If you want to do close up or macro a good way to save money is to use the kenko extension tubes.