http://www.jessops.com/online.store/...3580/Show.html

and

http://www.jessops.com/online.store/...3578/Show.html

As far as I know, they are the same lens. However the camera is two different prices?
I know that Nikon released a VR version of the 18-55mm kit lens, but when I've Googled the lens and not included "VR" in the search, it comes up on every review/website as VR anyway.

Is the more expensive camera the one with the VR lens?
Or both, and it is just a mistake on the website?

If the former is true, is it a massive advantage getting the Nikon D60 with the VR lens? How will it affect my image quality?

Thanks :)

One package includes Nikon's DX 18-55mm VR lens and the other package includes Nikon's DX 18-55mm lens without VR.

VR (Vibration Reduction) can help to get sharper photos at shutter speeds slower than you'd normally be able to shoot at without using a tripod to prevent blur from camera shake.

For example, if you were taking photos at shutter speeds slower than around 1/80 second towards the longer end of that lens, it could help reduce blur caused by camera shake.

Note that VR will not help with blur from subject movement.

For only £40.00 more, I'd probably get the VR version of the lens if I were buying one of those D60 kits.

In addition to the fact that the non-VR kit lens is cheaper, it's optically superior. While neither of them is particularly good, the VR version has less chromatic aberration, but has significant vignetting wide open, and isn't as sharp as the non-VR version.

Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX VR Nikkor

... vs. ...

Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED AF-S DX Nikkor

If I wanted a kit lens, I'd have to think hard about whether I wanted the VR or not.

Hmm, so if the VR lens helps sharpen images, but the non-VR lens is a sharper lens anyway, logically it would make more sense to get the cheaper non-VR lens.
I'll get that one.

Thanks so much for your help, and quick replies :)

Highlights wrote:
Actually, this statement isn't strictly true. Vibration reduction/anti-shake only helps when the problem is camera shake. It doesn't help sharpen images in general - it only comes into play when the shutter speeds are too slow for the photographer to hand-hold without it. So if you are using a lens in bright light, with a shutter speed of 1/500 sec. it won't do a thing. On the other hand, if you are trying to take a picture at 50mm and using a shutter speed of 1/10 sec. then the VR would help get a picture that would otherwise be blurry because of the camera slightly moving in the photographer's hands.

I find it interesting that Nikon doesn't use the same optics in both lenses. For most people the non-VR lens does sound like the better buy, though those who want to take mostly interiors without flash (i.e., museums etc.) would perhaps regret it.

mtngal wrote: You can't just drop a VR module into an existing lens.

TCav wrote: Yep..Vr will make the lens larger, likely requiring a different optical set up to account for the larger housing.