I think NikoDoby, at least in part, may have been referring to me. Thanks for starting this thread . . .
I also bought a D70 with the 18-70mm "kit" lens, only because it was so darned cheap--but I NEVER use it. Now, with my D90, my fixed-focal length, AF Nikkor 18mm f/2.8D does 100% of the wide work. My 50mm f/1.4 or 85mm f/1.8 does all the "regular" stuff, and my 80-400mm VR does all the "far stuff." I also have an 80-200mm f/2.8 (non-VR), but it's too heavy, so I never take it anywhere. In addition to those, I have a pile of other Nikkors, but the ones mentioned above are those I use the most. Next on my list: AF DC-Nikkor 105mm f/2.0D.
My main issue with kit lenses, isn't that they aren't "good," they're just too slow to do anything "fun." Beginners are often sold kit lens packages, and for perhaps for years to come (because, since they have both a short zoom and a long zoom, they think, "they're covered"), they'll never know the beauty of an available-light shot, or some really cool-looking, night-exterior, street-scene shot. They'll just shoot everything in focus, everything during the daytime, or shoot with their on-camera flash. Those same images would have been equally as well-served with a decent point-and shoot.
Beginners are often so obsessed with megapixel counts, and countless other, near-meaningless, micro-technical issues, that they often overlook investing any time or effort into learning any of the basic photographic principles and techniques. When the 35mm SLR was all we had, we were sold the 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 as the standard "kit" lens. People got a pretty speedy lens that allowed them to shoot at night, in available-light, and also experiment with shallow-focus technique. Now, beginners are met at the sales counter with a barrage of exotic-sounding technology, "AFS," "VR II," etc., none of which will make that tiny-irised, f/5.6 kit lens any faster.
