I'm facing a similar question myself...
I'm heading to Peru this summer, and looking at a similar setup. I am a mere amateur, and I've not owned an SLR for years (not by choice, mind you). Price is not such an issue for me, though, as I plan to sell all of the gear when I get back home.
First of all, in answer to your question: " Is there another good option for like 100-200$?"
Nope. Lenses are expensive. Very, very expensive. You can try the 18-55 VR which will be released shortly, but that's about all you'll get in that price range. However, I have heard some high praise for the Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G Autofocus Lens - available for less than $110 at BH Photo.
Ask yourself - what exactly will I use this lens for? Snapshots? Travel? Hobby photography use?
For most snapshots, the 18-55 or 18-135 will do just fine. If you plan on shooting in low-light areas, you'll want VR - I'll get into that for travel photography.
For hobby photographers, there is no question - the 50mm, in either 1.8 or 1.4, depending on how serious your hobby is. No lens will give you better photos while making you a better photographer. Then pick up another lens in wide angle or telephoto for
For those who primarily take photos while traveling, a 50mm should also be in your bag. But the rest of the setup is different.
First of all, consider where you are traveling. If you are going to Europe, for example, be prepared for many museums and cathedrals where you won't be able to use your flash. Be prepared for large, open spaces that you'll want to have a wide angle shot of, as well as narrow alleys. On the other hand, if you're going on safari, a good telephoto may well be more important to you. You will probably want to limit your bag to 2 large lenses and a 50mm to keep size and weight down, and you simply don't have
Here's what I'm planning on for six weeks in Peru (4 of which will be work, of course)
1) Assuming reviews are acceptably good, I'll get the 16-85 as my primary lens. Having previously used the 18-55, I would like something a bit wider. Also, VR is a necessity for the travel photographer unlike others - you will not want to carry around a tripod (and many places will not let you use one anyways), many locations are poorly lit, you're limited in the amount of time you have to take the shot and move on, and this may well be your only chance to get this shot - you may never be there again. The 16-85 range, on top of the VR, is excellent for those who want greater versatility in their main lens - if you're traveling, you won't want to swap lenses too often.
2) I'll be getting the 70-300 VR lens as well. Once again, I consider VR a necessity for me while traveling. In past experience, I also have found that having a real telephoto lens is invaluable for travel photography if you intend to shoot architectural details and candid photos of people.
So that's a few thoughts. If you're getting your gear for a trip, do consider spending a bit more on it and selling it when you get home. Lenses hold on to their value quite well - better than you'd imagine. Just make sure you buy insurance, of course.
If you're looking for in-depth reviews on lenses, check out
http://www.photozone.de I warn you in advance that going there can make you a bit snobbish, and increase your lens budget ;-) But just keep in mind that you are without doubt the most important part of the equation when it comes to good photos, and no lens will make up for bad technique. Also remember that even the lowly kit lenses have given many people, myself included, fantastic results. Some of my favorite photos have actually been from an old Canon Powershot A95, even. Don't skimp on your gear, but don't overspend either.
