I finally received a dSLR for graduation, which I've wanted for a long long time. I have the D40x, and the 18-55 kit lens, which for a $100 lens is fantastic, IMHO. I have a friend who has the 17-55 2.8, and he loves it. I've also been looking at a telephoto zoom for street photography. I've been idly considering the 70-300 4.5-5.6 VR, or the 55-200 4-5.6 VR. I'm not sure what kind of focal length I really need yet, hence my hesitation. I read a Thom Hogan review of the 70-200 2.8 VR, and it got me thinking. Should I aim to only buy prosumer/pro lenses? As much as I love my 18-55, the constant f2.8 of the 17-55 would be incredible, as well as the superior build quality. Also, should I drop $300-$500 on a consumer telephoto, or save up and buy a pro lens for 3 times the price, but get a constant 2.8 as well as superior build quality etc.? I'm not a pro photographer, and I may never be pro. But I love photography, and I don't mind spending money on equipment (haha, when I actually have money one day!). I know that the 17-55 and the pro 70-200 will run me $3500+ but I hate the thought of getting a plastic zoom and wanting to upgrade in a couple of years. What do you guys think?