Originally Posted by
D1andonlyDman
Many, yes, certainly but not all. I got a quite good 28-200mm AF-D lens for $150, and an even better 18-35mm 18-35mm AF-D lens for $250 used. I would contend that these two lenses combined outperform the 18-135mm and 18-200mm current lenses, in particular, at the wide end the 18-35mm is FAR superior in terms of distortion, than any of the newer wide range AF-S zooms lenses are. And an un-sung SUPERB cheapo Nikkor zoom is the 28-70mm f3.5~4.5 AF-D lens, a tiny, sharp, contrasty, low distortion, completely flare free lens that can easily be gotten for under $100. And one can get an older 80-200mm f2.8 Nikkor Zoom for under $600 that is optically the equal of the 70-200 f2.8 AF-S VR lens that sells for $1700. VR and AF-S is nice, but they are not worth spending 3X as much for basically the same optics. This also ignores a whole lot of nice lenses from Tokina and Tamron that don't have AF-S support. Like the great Tokina 12-24 and 11-16mm superwides, and Tamron's great Macro lenses.
most slr buyers (film or digital) only buy one lens, maybe two lenses, total. they get the kit lens and possibly a second kit lens and that's it.
the d40/d60 are targeted at such a user. they are not targeted at the more advanced user who already has or expects to buy various lenses, particularly used ones. plus, the d40/d60 lack a number of features that an advanced user would probably want. they're entry level cameras.