Please sign in to post.

Germany or Italy Summer 2017

I am planning a trip to Europe in summer 2017. My partner wants to go to Berlin. I am leaning toward Italy. I would like to go to Rome, Florence and maybe Venice. It will be a short trip around seven days. My partner will not want to be gone long.

  1. Italy or Germany?
  2. If I do Germany, should I combine Berlin with another destination if so which one?
  3. Is Venice a must see or a crowded tourist destination?

We are mostly sight-see, shop and city folks.

Thanks.

3/22/2017. Thanks for all the feedback. I think I have decide on Berlin and then hopping the train (ICE) to Amsterdam.
All your comments were very helpful. I will save Italy for October of some year.

Posted by
487 posts

For only seven days I would pick two cities. To satisfy both of you, I would suggest choosing Berlin & one Italian city, making sure to fly into one city and home from the other so you do not spend precious time back tracking to catch a flight. Rome, Florence and Venice are all worthwhile but a little bit different from each other, so which location you choose will depend on your interests, what you mention above (sight-see, shop and city folks) is applicable almost anywhere. To me Venice is definitely a must see, but yes, it is also a crowded tourist destination. However, all of these places are crowded tourist destinations.

Posted by
2487 posts

Venice is one of the most popular destinations in Italy and summer is the peak season. You won't see many city folks in Venice. You'll mainly see tourist folks.
Berlin is a good destination for a few days. Enough to see and enough shopping opportunities. You could combine it with Leipzig, Dresden or Hamburg, all within two hours from Berlin by frequent trains.

Posted by
16895 posts

I consider Venice a must-see and it's easy enough to avoid the crowds when you need a break - just walk away from the top attractions.

Berlin has enough city sightseeing and daytrip options (not listed there) to fill a week. Too include another major city, Prague is a logical choice, 5 hours by train, with a possibility to stop in Dresden en-route.

In either of these examples, 3 cities in 7 days is moving quite fast and choosing just 1 or 2 would be more comfortable.

Posted by
27695 posts

If you are flying back to the US or Canada, be very, very cautious about an itinerary that ends in Venice. Many others have found that means an extraordinarily early flight, requiring waking up at an ungodly hour and costly transportation to the airport, perhaps by private water taxi.

For a trip of about seven days, the very last thing I'd want to do is include a flight or long train ride in the middle of my vacation. I would not want to split my time between Berlin (which has more than enough museums and historic sights for seven days if you are interested in such things) and Italy (which of course needs years to see).

Posted by
4156 posts

Berlin is beautiful in the summer. The weather is cool, not stifling like Italy.

Posted by
5498 posts

Trying to fit 3 or even 2 cities in a week is pointless considering flying takes out at least a day when you factor in transportation, time required at airport and travelling to the hotel. I understand the desire to see as much as you can but you cannot experience a city in day or two. To consider doing Rome, Florence and Venice in a week is ridiculous, you won't see anything you'll merely be ticking off a bucket list saying you've been there.

There's enough to do in Berlin for a week. You could opt for Munich and travel to the lakes or Salzburg. Contrary to what a previous poster claimed, summer is not cool in Germany, I was in Munich two years ago July and it was averaging 35°c, Berlin was high 20's to low 30's. WIth those temperatures the lakes around Munich are fantastic for swimming in followed by a few cold beers in the surrounding waterfront bars.

Posted by
27695 posts

"Berlin is beautiful in the summer. The weather is cool, not stifling like Italy." Not necessarily, at least not these days. Maybe before Global Warming. I was in Berlin for six days in early August 2015, and it was hot--somewhere in the 80s. I definitely needed the air conditioning in my hotel. I still needed it when I moved on to Dresden, where it was broken, making for a miserable four days.

You have to go farther north than Berlin to be sure of cool weather in the summer. I certainly wouldn't guarantee it in Schwerin, though it was pleasant on the days I happened to be there.

Posted by
11613 posts

Three nights in Roma or Venezia, four nights in Berlin. Assuming you have seven nights and not six?

Posted by
1932 posts

"'Berlin is beautiful in the summer. The weather is cool, not stifling like Italy.' Not necessarily, at least not these days. Maybe before Global Warming. I was in Berlin for six days in early August 2015, and it was hot--somewhere in the 80s."

Sure, but this is relative. We were in the Alsace the same summer, and while Northern Germany was in the low to mid 80's, Alsace hit 100+ every day. Our friends who choose Rome faced 107 at the height of the afternoon, cooling to the mid 90's by midnight. We eventual ate the sunk cost of our paid reservations and audibled to Northern Germany, where the 80's felt like delightful high-summer compared to the Death Valley heat farther south. Best $500 I've ever thrown away!

And that was a historic (literal unfortunately) killer heatwave. I wouldn't worry for a second about Berlin being too hot in August - it almost certainly won't be, and if it does heat up the city gets interesting - the clothes come off and the parks and massive swimming complexes come alive - culturally delightful experience to sit in the moderate heat at a shady beer garden near a riverbank full of Germans in uncharacteristic weather induced spreeish countenance.

I'd leave Italy for the delightful off-season and do Germany this time. When people say two cities is a lot for a week I feel the sentiment. But it can be done well. Here are a few guidelines:

Minimize transit times. From the US fly into a city you want to be in and fly out of a city you want to be in. If the two cities you want to visit are far apart fly between them. Fly or take a train very early in the morning or at night. Nothing wastes a day in a worse way than an 11am flight or non-scenic train ride. You wake up in the morning, wait around to leave, get in late enough that you drop your stuff and get some dinner and that's about it. Instead bite the bullet and make that 5am train or flight, or leave after 6pm. You could likely do 3 full days in Berlin and 3 full days in Copenhagen for instance by flying at efficient times.

Stick to one region and do some smaller places along with the large city. The biggest mistake first time Europe travelers make is ticking huge capitals off their list. That might make sense in the US, but Europe is so old and densely populated that the smaller cities are still quite sophisticated, not flavorless backwaters. They are relaxed and manageable. And villages even more so. For instance you could do Berlin, then Dresden or Leipzig, then Erfurt or some other little place. Renting a car for the "road trip" part of your regional trip gives you greater control over your schedule and you can be really efficient with your travel time.