Lenses - Pros and Cons
While I can't tell you the right lenses to buy for your particualr needs... I can give you some feedback/impressions about the particular lenses I am using or have used in the past.
Nikkor 10.5mm f2.8 Fisheye: I never thought such a specialized lens could provide me with so much use. For more information, I've written a short article about how to use a fisheye lens in your nature photography at http://www.naturestocklibrary.com/gallery/2472892
Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom - This lens is all right. I bought it as a kit lens a long time ago and it's served well for the wider range. I wish I had saved pennies and purchased a 2.8 that offered a wider range (like a 12mm to 25mm).
Tamron 17-35mm f2.8: This is a great lens but, alas, I purchased it for a film camera and the magnification on my digital body means that it isn't that useful in my photography right now. I'm planning on selling it (along with my other wide angle) and buying a 2.8 that has a wider range so I can do more with landscape photography.
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D AF - This is the same lens I discussed earlier. It's small, has a low price tag, allows you to shoot in really dark situations and it's an 80mm on a digital camera. You really can't go wrong.
Nikkor Nikon 80-200mm f2.8D ED AF Zoom - This is a fantastic lens that stays at 2.8 no matter if you are shooting at 80 or 200mm. Again, magnification means it's actually a 300mm zoom. Zooms are great because you can adjust your focus distance depending on where your subject is located. Not so great with subjects that are always far away (like the macaws seen here), but really awesome for docile wildlife like deer. It also has a macro function that works beautifully.
Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D AF Micro, or 105 Micro for short - This is probably Nikon's most used macro lens, probably because the lens can serve triple duty. First of all, it is a macro photography lens and it allows you to take photographs at a 1:1 reproduction ratio (on a 35mm body), which means that a 24 by 36 mm subject will fill the entire frame. Second, it makes a very good general purpose short telephoto lens. Third, it is also at least a very reasonable portrait lens (although, with magnification it may be too much of a telephoto on a digital SLR). I really love this lens for macro photography.
Nikkor 300mm f4 manual focus - While a "prime" lens doesn't offer the flexibilty of a zoom... it's still an ideal choice for getting the best results in your work. This is the same lens I discussed earlier and, considering it cost only $350, it's light & the focusing is so smooth, it's one of my favorite lenses. I never leave home without it.
Nikkor 600mm f5.6 manual focus ED Glass - Again, I paid a lot less for this lens (which is actually a hefty 900mm on a digital body and also has the famous Nikon ED glass!!) because it's an older model and it's manual focus. I spent $1,599 USD - but consider that a newer model would go for at least $5,000 to $25,000, depending on the f stop. Some may argue that 5.6 is a bit too narrow of an f stop but I find the compression with telephoto lenses means that I wouldn't want to shoot a 900mm subject with anything wider than 5.6 (2.8 would make the focus far too shallow on such a far away subject). Although... for closer subjects 2.8 is magic!
In the past, I have also used the Sigma 70-300mm 3.5-5.6 and the Tamron 200-400mm 3.5-5.6 and both served well as affordable zooms while I was learning about photography. I have since sold them to pay for the lenses I currently use.