I am in Rome have 3-4 days until I need to be in Milan for a flight the next morning. Would love to see both, I know there is not enough time and people seem evenly split on which city is better - some say Venice too many tourists, others say Florence dirty and have heard the opposite. Any all all ideas, itineraries nd sights to not miss welcome. Thank you!
Posted by
10495 posts
They are both great cities to visit, but if you are going to Milan, Venice would be more out of the way.
Florence has two wonderful art museums and Venice has the charm of the canals making it a very unique place.
Posted by
167 posts
Hi Krosen07,
With such a short amount of time, Florence might be your best choice. It's under 2 hours by train from Rome, and Milan is under 2 hours from Florence.
Much to see and do, Uffizzi, San Lorenzo, Duomo, Pitti Palace, etc. Even if Renaissance art isn't your thing, with only a couple of days you could climb up the Campanile( if you're up to it), go over to Piazza Michelangelo for the views, wander Olt'rArno, etc. Go see David at the Academia, tour Palazzo Signoria.
When you get to Milan, visit the Duomo, and walk the rooftop terraces, and maybe fit in LaScala, which is nearby, wander the Galleria, have a specialty coffee at the Lavazza coffee place.
Posted by
186 posts
Because of travel time, definitely Florence. You might even be able to visit another Tuscan town close by, especially if you actually have 3-4 full days.
Posted by
Philadelphia
257 posts
I suppose the other posters are right about Florence. However, I was underwhelmed with Florence for some reason. I don't even remember anything about it.
I recently went to Venice and spent 5 nights there. Yes, crowded, but a unique, beautiful city.
Posted by
Calgary
2251 posts
Agree with daisy. Florence was my least favourite place that I visited in Italy (although I do know others who say it was their favourite). I found the sites there more crowded than those in Venice (visited both in November, so not peak season). However, Florence does make more sense in terms of location, and you can always get away from Florence by taking a day trip to Siena.
Posted by
167 posts
It's true, the crowds in Florence have ballooned. Having been going there since the 1970's, when it was so much more manageable, I agree it's overly crowded. But on the other hand, people who might not have had the opportunity to see these wonderful places in years past, now are able to visit, and returnees, like me, contribute to the chaos.
Siena is indeed wonderful, and worth the trip. The Cathedral complex is extraordinary, and the OP would not be disappointed.
Posted by
72 posts
Sorry. If you have never visited either place, Venice is hands down the bucket list place to go. No contest.
Posted by
Arctophilia (x-27), Northamptonshire, England
37304 posts
so which did you choose and how was it?