Originally Posted by vachss
My preference is usually to go for more range rather than total overlap. In other words I'd rather have the 85-135mm range and lose the 22-28mm than vise-versa. As far as quality is concerned the 17-85 and 28-135 are similar (though the IS system in the 17-85 is newer and more effective). I shot with a 28-135 for about a year and found it to be quite sharp from 28 to around 100-110 or so, but the last few mm on the tele end weren't all that impressive. Still, as a not too expensive walkaround lens I'd give the 28-135 my recommendation. I gave mine to my wife after I shifted over to primes and she's still quite happy with it.
Just to confuse the issue, for not much more money I've heard very good things about the 70-300 (and am now hearing pretty good things about the 55-250), but both of these will leave you with a much larger focal length gap.
Thanks for the thought,
I went out and bought the 28-135 for $200 what a steal! Came with a Tiffen UV Filter too
, I also purchased a Lens hood at Adorama for $16