Question on these 2 Canon EF Lens

[OceanView]

I have an opportunity to purchase either or both of these lens for a Canon EOS DSLR at a reduced price.

EF 28-135mm, F/3.5-5.6 IS USM
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=7337

AND/OR

EF 75-300mm, F/4-5.6 IS USM
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=150&modelid=7342

besides the greater zoom capability of the 75-300mm, is there a hugh difference in these two lens in the real world?

I am leaning on buying the 75-300mm lens but not sure if I should buy the second one as well. On a limited budget.

Thanks in Advance.

 

[Unimaxium]

Both sound like great lenses to me. The IS feature sounds nice. I suppose it really depends on if you'll want to do more wide angle or telephoto shots. The 28mm end will let you get good shots over wide areas, like landscapes, and will also be useful when you're close to your subject and can't back up. And the 300mm end will be great for zooming in on more specific objects, instead of taking wide landscape shots. So it pretty much depends on what you want to do with the lens.

 

[usayit]

I would recommend the 28-135mm. Most of your shooting ( I'm assuming general all around photography ) will be done at that range. 75-300mm is a bit long especially on a DSLR. Remember, most lenses work best in the middle of their range rather than at the edges of their most wide and narrow focal lengths ( aperatures too ). On the 28-135mm zoom, I'd pass up on spending on the IS and go for something with faster glass. Again... based on personal preference as I generally travel with a tripod. My most used lens is a Tamron 35-105mm f2.8. When I need to travel very light, I carry that Tamron lens plus a 2x converter.

On the other hand, I absolutely love the IS on my 100-400mm lens. If I were considering a zoom out to the 300mm range, I would consider IS more seriously.

Good luck.