are DX lenses worth it?

[big baldo]

Hey all, I recently went to a local chain camera store and left there more confused than ever.I was looking into some of the VR lenses for my new D80. the camera guy found a VR 70-300 but it wasnt DX, it was made for 35mm.Is there a big difference? He made me think that there was not much difference at all. The cost was much more reasonable (500-600$).
I would appreciate any help, Thanks in advance John

[Franglais]

Hey all, I recently went to a local chain camera store and left there more confused than ever.I was looking into some of the VR lenses for my new D80. the camera guy found a VR 70-300 but it wasnt DX, it was made for 35mm.Is there a big difference? He made me think that there was not much difference at all. The cost was much more reasonable (500-600$).
I would appreciate any help, Thanks in advance John

Digital sensors like the 10Mpix one on the D80 are very demanding on lenses. An excellent film lens (example : pro f2.8 constant zoom) or a designed-for-digital DX lens work fine. Consumer lenses sometimes don't have the resolution (especially the older ones, and this goes for primes as well).

I never heard of the 70-300 VR you mention so I checked it out and it's a new lens designed for both film and digital so you should have no problems with it.

Charles

[dhyravy]

One advantage in using lenses designed for 35mm is the "sweet spot" effect. This is particularly nice with lower cost/optical quality lenses. What the term refers to is the fact that since DSLRs have sensors that are physically smaller than 35mm they tend to only "see" the center most part of the lense. This often greatly reduces the chromatic abberations and distortions that are common on the edges with this type of glass when used on a digital body. It is worth noting here that this also means that the field of view is also slightly less than what may be specified for a 35mm body.