Hi, I'm traveling to Italy for my first time in May and staying in Venice for 3 nights to start the trip. From there I'm in between going to Florene or Lucca for 2 nights. I've heard great things about both cities with Florence obviously a lot more to do and see. I'm really not big on going to museums and would love a city that's not too touristy. From either Florence/Lucca I'll be headed to Cinque Torre for 2 nights and up to Milan. Questions is, Lucca or Florence for 2 nights? Thanks!
Posted by
San Francisco Bay Area (USA)
16238 posts
First timer?
Florence.
Posted by
Huntsville, AL, USA
8371 posts
Florence is a must see. You can also catch a train to La Spezia from there.
Lucca is nice, but a little quiet for me.
Posted by
Toledo, Ohio, US
11613 posts
From your stated preferences, I would suggest Lucca. It would be a break from the bigger cities. Florence is great, even without the museums, but it's a must-see for so many people that it can be quite congested.
Posted by
roswell, ga, usa
1501 posts
While I acknowledge Zoe's thought process on this, I just don't see how you should skip Florence on a first trip to Italy. Museums notwithstanding, there's just Florence in her beauty, the piazzas, the Ponte Vecchio, the Medici Palace, the fountains, the music, Santa Croce Church with the cripts of Michelangelo and DaVinci and others, the views of the Arno River. I could go on, but, with your first stop being Venice, and ending up in Cinque Terre, I'd hate to know you missed two beautiful nights in Florence.