I havnt messed with the D-3000, but im sure if Nikon stuck to what they normally do, its basically and updated D40 and thats a great thing! Although most reviews ive read are good on the 3000 Ken Rockwell (whose opinion is not the most highly regarded on most camera forums) clearly wasnt a fan of the 3000.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3000.htm
They only thing you should think about adding right off the bat is probably a second lens. The kit lense is that 18-55 which is in my opinion a little crappy. My girlfriend uses it with her D40 and it drives me up the wall when I use it. Something about it just feels cheap, while the pictures turn out well, it just doesnt feel very well made. Im sure youve read a lot of articles but heres some time saver if you havnt read Thom Hogan's review of the lens
http://www.bythom.com/1855lens.htm
For just an all around lens thats not gonna set you back tons, look for a white boxed, 18-105. I think they are around $300-350 last i looked Thats the lens that comes with all the D-90s so theres tons of them out there. Other than being a little soft at the end has worked out well for a great walk around lens with plenty of range. That would be just my suggestion. But it really depends on what your shooting. For me the 18-55mm is limiting in the longer length so thats where the 105 helped me. If your curious for more 18-105 shots by an amatuer ive got about 30 on my flickr acct that will give you examples of what someone who has no clue what they are doing can give you. So i give all credit to the hardware.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/calexan/
Ive also heard that the 35mm DX prime is a really great lens that makes you use the dreaded foot focus to get your shots.
I threw a couple of examples in at the bottom. While nothing to write home to mom about picture quality is great with both lenses. Just remember neither of us really know what we are doing.
Shot with a 18-105 on a D90
Shot with the 18-55 on a D40 (by the gf)
