Hey Mitch, for what it's worth my suggestion to you would be the 24-105mm, which is what I normally use as my walk around lens. There will be times when the 24mm wide end really won't be wide enough but if your using a crop camera the 105mm makes a nice telephoto. The IQ upgrade you get with the 24-105 I think would be worth it, you really will notice the difference. People have always liked the 28-135 lens, which I would imagine, would give you similar IQ to the 17-85 that your using but the 28mm end would definately be much more narrower than what your accustomed to and may not be worth the 135 end of it.


As Peety noted, the 17-55 2.8 is a great lens that has IQ that can rival the L series zooms but if your looking for more reach than your existing 17-85, than that isn't going to cut it for you.


If your willing to change lenses, the 70-200 f4 non-IS version is a relatively inexpensive way to get more reach with great IQ...but you'll have to carry another lens.


There's a reason Canon came out with the 18-200mm lens--there's a market for it. Tamaron, Sigma, Nikon all have there equivalents because people want a do-it-all lens. If your never going to be making large prints or aren't a pixel peeper like many are, than the 18-200 may be the solution for you. I can't imagine Canon coming out with a replacement for that lens in a long time.


Good luck!