are you off your soapbox now?
It just seemed odd that the 18-55 would go from having an ED element to losing it then VR was added. I completely understand that an ED element isn't needed but one would think that removing one from an already low-quality and cheap lens wouldn't make it
better, if you catch my drift.
I'm mostly interested in this lens for one reason.. it's a cheap normal zoom that has had acceptable optics so far.. and the addition of VR will give me the ability to shoot from a boat or a car at slower shutter speeds where smaller apertures are usually okay. So if I bought the lens I'd only use it for that reason.
I don't understand why people praise VR/IS/OS/whatever lenses with smaller maximum apertures myself, unless they're super cheap like the new 18-55 and the recent 55-200. Otherwise I'd much rather have an f/2.8 lens.. the shutter speed will be much the same as a typical f/3.5 - 5.6 consumer VR zoom. Granted you lose the larger DOF that VR affords you but you gain optical quality and overall flexibility. To me.. VR is something I'd rather have on top of an f/2.8 lens than a lens with smaller maximum apertures.
Maybe I'm really weird, but I just don't see the point of using VR in same way that it seems everyone else uses it.