Is there a significant difference in lens quality between the Nikon d3000 and Nikon d3100?

Ok so for my birthday i'm hoping to get at least the Nikon d3000, because i can't afford the d3100.

i was just wondering, is the lens in the d3100 any better the the one in the d3000? Are you able to tell the difference for instance if you took the same picture on the same setting for both cameras?

i don't care that the d3100 takes video, i'm only looking for pictures.

Both tend to be sold with the 18-55 VR which is a nice lens. Sensor wise there's a difference, that becomes clear when you shoot in lowlight situations, the d3100 kicks the d3000 rear!

I would say not. The lenses are probably exactly the same. Seldom will you see a difference from one to another of the same type and size as in the 18-55.

This, if it's anything like mine, is and okay lens, not great. If you're serious at all you'll buy a much better lens for your camera. They aren't cheap but they make a real difference in photo quality.

The D3100 and the D3000 both have the same 18-55mm lens. The D3100 is newer than the D3000 so the pictures are better.
I have the D3100 and am extremely pleased with the sharpness of the photos and the different settings. I recommend the 3100 and even if you can't afford it, I suggest you save up a little bit more because it's worth getting.

Nope, the kit lens included with both the D3000 and D3100 is identical, no differences at all. I highly doubt you'll see any difference between the two cameras when it comes to pictures.

The lens are the same but lenses don't determine picture quality. The d3000 is way inferior to the d3100
a cheaper alternative to the d3100 is the nikon d5000 which is still an amazing camera