Lens better than 28-135mm IS lens

I wanted to upgrade my Sigma 28-70mm lens to specificly the Canon 28-135mm IS lens. I'm just woundering if there is a better lens than this one for around the same price.

For the same price? Probably not. The 28-135 is a handy focal length range on and 35mm film format camera and the lens delivers solid mid-grade performance.

One other lens in the range is the EF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 which lacks IS but is a bit cheaper (usually) than the 28-135. OTOH Canon shipped a bazillion 28-135's kitted with the 40D, and since most 1.6X shooters find it a wonky focal length range as a walkabout the 28-135 is easy to find used for quite cheap.

nah, I was planning to get the 28-135mm any way, but I just wanted to make sure I wouldnt be overlooking something else. I really want that Image Stabilizer. thanks for your help.

kjclockplay wrote in post #6438952
nah, I was planning to get the 28-135mm any way, but I just wanted to make sure I wouldnt be overlooking something else. I really want that Image Stabilizer. thanks for your help.

24-105L will give you IS, and go slightly wider but you are a bit shorter on the tele end. It is more expensive though...From what I have heard, you'll get better IQ as well.
The IS on the 28-135 is first generation and not as effective as the newer lenses have.

What camera do you have? 28mm is not that wide on a crop body.

Depending on your buget of course, I think I'd skip the 28-135 and save your pennies for the 24-105L. Yes, it's twice the price, but you'll get many, many years of quality photos from this excellent lens.

I loved the 28-135 when I got it years ago, I already had the 28-105 and I liked that too. But the 28-135 even with the IS is not very good indoors or very fast, unfortunately. You can still get nice shots with it. Just know that any lens with wide apertures are going to be faster and more expensive, but sharper.

I had the 28-135mm for awhile....sold it off and bought the 24-105, best thing I've ever done