First trip to Europe? Focus on these 5 great cities rather than cheap ones
Planning your first trip to Europe can be challenging because we hear so many great things about so many different places, it’s tough to know which to see first. There are interesting cities like Copenhagen and cheap cities like Krakow and even some cities that are interesting and cheap at the same time such as Cesky Krumlov. Still, I’m here to recommend starting with the classic and famous cities first and then exploring other places starting on your second trip (and there WILL be a second trip).
The list of 5 cities below can make for a perfect first-time to Europe itinerary all by itself if you have two weeks or so to spend, and I even tell you exactly how to do that at the end. Traveling can seem competitive in certain circles and it’s hard to brag about having visited Belgrade or Riga if you haven’t been to London, Paris, and Rome before. We keep an updated list of European cities from cheapest to most expensive and most of the cities I mention in this article are on the expensive end of the list, and they are still worth it.
This article was last updated in August, 2022.
Start with Europe's greatest cities, and work out a budget from there
If you are planning your first trip to Europe, hopefully it will be the first of many. Once you get a taste of the place and the crazy variety you’ll experience there, you’ll be ready to start planning your second trip before you even get home from your first.
While it might be tempting to start by visiting some of Europe’s cheapest cities, it’s actually much better to start with the classics to see what all the fuss is about before you branch off into more obscure destinations. And good news for Americans in 2022 who are planning a trip because the Euro and British Pound are both very weak right now so even the top cities such as London and Paris will be relatively cheap, even compared to visiting, say, Chicago, this year.
Suggestions for your first trip to Europe
Due to the unexpected popularity of this article and the many questions in comments about first-time itineraries, I’ve created a new and detailed article with all of my best suggestions.
>>>11 Best itinerary ideas for your first trip to Europe
Once you at least scan that article you’ll have some itinerary ideas for your own trip and I’ll be happy to answer questions at the bottom of that one. If you want to choose just one country to visit on your first trip to Europe, your best choices are England, France, or Italy.
Europe's 5 Great Cities for visitors
1 – London
The only town that can compete with New York City for the title of ‘Capital of the World,’ London is where everything comes together. And obviously as an English-speaking city (mostly), it’s among the easiest to begin adapting to the culture and style of Europe. The first time you see Parliament and Big Ben just around the corner from the London Eye, you’ll know you are somewhere important and unforgettable.
London also used to be famously expensive and it still can be if you are holding money in Euros or British pounds or some other currency that is low at the moment. But if you are from the US or Canada, London has come down in price quite a bit in the last few years due to a currency drop. It’s true that there is inflation as well and some prices have gone up for visitors, but generally London is relatively cheap for most people in 2022.
This is also a perfect place to start your first Europe trip because there won’t be a language barrier (although some accents are harder to understand than others) and you can get the feel for Europe and the time zone without also having to worry about being understood by the people you meet.
- 2022 Backpacker Index: US$92.67 per day
2 – Paris
Definitely more intimidating than London, and also far more beautiful, Paris is a city that so many people gush over that you might assume there’s no way it could live up to the praise. Then you go to Paris for yourself and you start gushing yourself. Walk for thirty minutes from anywhere near the city center and you’ll keep seeing buildings and bridges and public art that will make you want to start checking apartment prices.
Every city has problems, even Paris, but it’s hard to imagine anyone being sorry they visited. While Paris is an expensive city, it’s actually a bit easier to keep costs down, mainly because the extensive Metro system means that you can still have a great and convenient time if you stay in a cheaper hotel outside of the main tourist center.
Another thing to mention is the food. Somehow, the French people care a lot more about food than any other nationality and they are amazing at it. Seriously, it’s almost impossible to find a meal that isn’t unusually great. You can even order the Plat Du Jour (plate of the day) at the closest neighborhood restaurant to your hotel and it is almost guaranteed to be amazing and also reasonably priced.
- 2022 Backpacker Index: US$85.11 per day
3 – Rome
Unlike London and Paris, the city of Rome does actually seem to have a group who’ll tell you to avoid it. Rome is frustrating in many ways, with crazy traffic and a sense of disorganization that is hard to adapt to, but there’s also no denying that it’s one of the world’s greatest and most important cities.
It’s easy to tell people to avoid a city once you’ve been there yourself, but no one gives points to those who would brag about never visiting a city because they heard it was too crazy. With Ancient Rome, the Coliseum, and the Vatican just for starters, Italy’s capital is worth the hassle to see it at least once, and many people love it so much that they keep returning. Hotels in Rome are weirdly expensive, but other costs are reasonable, and it’s totally worth it at least once in your life.
In 2022 all of Italy is relatively inexpensive because of the low Euro, so it’s a good time to visit some of the normally expensive cities like Rome. There are probably 10 famous attractions in this city that are each more amazing and interesting than any attraction in most other European cities such as Berlin or Brussels.
- 2022 Backpacker Index: US$71.49 per day
4 – Venice
Some cities are really beautiful from certain vantage points or certain angles, but Venice is beautiful from all of them. As a touristy city for several hundred years now, the biggest problem with Venice is the crowds it attracts. Even in winter, the main pedestrian routes can be so packed that it frustrates nearly everyone. And in summer, they are worse, of course.
Even though hotels in Venice tend to be quite expensive, the best way to visit is to spend at least one or two nights on the main island. You’ll find that early mornings and evenings are far less crowded, as most groups head to the mainland to sleep. Venice is also small enough that 36 hours is plenty of time to see the best bits, so it’s worth a one-night splurge for a good location.
Try to visit Venice when there are no cruise ships parked nearby, although that can be tricky in summer. You’ll enjoy how empty the island feels in the early morning hours and also late into the evening. The restaurants tend to close early and there isn’t much raucous nightlife, so after 10 PM or so the walkways are mostly empty and it’s another great time to enjoy Venice.
- 2022 Backpacker Index: US$90.97 per day
5 – Amsterdam
Some people might not put Amsterdam on this short list of great European cities, but plenty of people agree with me that it’s another of the world’s most beautiful and interesting places. Most of the city center is perfectly preserved from its beginnings in the 17th Century, and it’s been quite wealthy ever since.
Many cities around the world boast that they have more canals than Amsterdam, but except for Venice, none are nearly as stunning. Add in the way bicycles dominate the landscape, the weirdness of the Red Light District, and its pleasant overall nature, and Amsterdam is worth a visit in spite of its relative high prices for most things.
Hotel prices in Amsterdam have gotten somewhat out of hand so it’s a good thing the Euro is lower if you are coming from outside the region. Still, as good as the public transportation system in Amsterdam is, you’ll have a better time if you pay a bit more to stay in a hotel or hostel in the compact city center, roughly from the Princengracht canal ring to Centraal Station and anywhere in between.
- 2022 Backpacker Index: US$93.69 per day
The most efficient way to visit all of them on one trip
If you are planning your first trip to Europe and you’ve got about two weeks to spend there, it’s quite easy to visit all 5 of the above cities on one efficient trip. You can even sneak in another amazing city for a day or two if you’ve got it to spare.
You can do the following itinerary in either order, but I do think starting in London is better than starting in Rome on your first trip.
- Fly into London and spend 3 or 4 days there
- Take the Eurostar train (90 minutes) to Paris and spend 3 or 4 days there
- Take the high speed train from Paris to Amsterdam (3 hours 20 minutes) and spend 3 nights there
- Fly from Amsterdam to Venice (or nearby Treviso) and spend 1 or 2 days there
- Take the train from Venice through Florence (2 hours) to Rome (another 90 minutes) and spend 3 or 4 days there
- If you have one or two days to spare, stop in Florence in between Venice and Rome
- Fly home from Rome or back to London to board your flight home
Include the above cities as part of bigger trips
The 5 cities mentioned above are the ones that I think are the best and most dramatic introduction to Europe, and the most likely to inspire more trips, but I wouldn’t recommend just trying to see these 5 and then heading home. Depending on budget, season, and trip duration, you could add or subtract many other worthwhile cities to make the perfect itinerary.
If you’ve traveled all over Europe yourself, do you agree or disagree with the cities selected above? I can’t think of another that deserves to be in this top tier, but I’d imagine that other people might have other ideas.
Thanks Roger!
The reply button isn’t working so I am replying through comments section. I appreciate your advice and am planning to schedule the trip in a way that I spent 3 nights in a country.
Earlier I was planning Melbourne to London return but I am open to fly from Melbourne to London and return Paris to Melbourne if that fits the itinerary best.
I have shortlisted the cities as London, Paris, Amsterdam, Prague, Vienna and Interlaken. Can you please advice the sequence in which its best to visit these cities.
I am planning the trip in August this year.
Regards,
Anshul
Anshul,
If you can start in London and fly home from Paris, I’d do London then the Eurostar to Brussels and then to Amsterdam by train. Flying might actually be cheaper, although far less enjoyable and obviously less scenic. And flying isn’t really any faster either. From Amsterdam to Prague the fastest trains take 10.5 hours, and it’s mostly a dull and flat ride, so I’d fly instead.
Take the train from Prague to Vienna in a bit under 4 hours. Unfortunately, the train from Vienna to Interlaken takes almost 10 hours. It’s very scenic, especially the second half, but that’s a long trip. You might instead fly from Vienna to Zurich and then take the train to Interlaken. From Interlaken to Paris it takes 5 hours and 18 minutes by train, and the first half of it is very scenic.
If you look at the map I’m sure you notice that you’ve selected cities that are mostly quite a distance from each other. If you don’t want to fly so much you might consider doing Berlin instead of Prague. Then you could do Berlin to Vienna in a bit over 9 hours by train, or you could get from Berlin to Salzburg in a bit over 8 hours. I hope this helps. -Roger
Dear Roger,
The reply button wasn’t working, so I’m replying through the comment section. First, Thank you for answering my questions and its nice knowing you’re in Kerrville. It’s a lovely town. I was wondering if there are trains to places like Monet’s garden in Giverny, the various Chateaux’s in the Loire Valley, the Alhambra in Grenada? Also, what does one do with one’s luggage if stopping to see one of these places before checking into the hotel and you’re arriving by train? Also, the dates that we’ll be arriving in Paris is September 17th and the departing on October 11th. Will most of the tourists be gone during this time? Also, should the weather be pretty nice, even in the higher elevations during this time period in France, Switzerland, Italy, Spain and Portugal? Thanks again,
-Jeffrey Harris
Hi Roger,
I have seen some great advice on the comments section. I would seek your advise for planning my eurotrip with my wife and my 2 year old for about 15 days (but I am flexible to add few more days).
I would love to go to London, Switzerland, Amsterdam, Paris and Berlin….Would like to add an Italian city if it fits the itinerary.
I am presently based in Melbourne, Australia.
Anshul,
I highly recommend planning 3 nights in each of those larger cities on your list. So you could do 3 days in London then 3 days in Paris then 3 days in Amsterdam and 3 days in Berlin. You could then take a train to Interlaken for 3 days in Switzerland. If you wanted to go to Italy from there you could fly or take the train to Rome for 3 days, which would be the shortest visit to Italy that I would recommend. If you want to add Prague you could do it after Berlin. I mention in many other comments why I think 3 nights is really the best length for these big cities. The short version is that your travel days will only leave you with a bit of sightseeing time. So if you change cities every other day, you are basically spending half of your trip traveling rather than seeing the sights.
Hopefully this helps you figure out whether you want to add more days or cut out some cities. I’m happy to help more if you need it. -Roger
Hi Roger,
I am travelling to Europe from New Zealand with my husband and two teenage sons, and would really appreciate any suggestions you can give in regards to our itinerary. I’m not sure what would be the most efficient way or order to see the places we have on our list! We are planning to be away for a month.
We would like to go to London (3 days), the Cotswolds/Bath (3 days),
Paris (5 days), Loire Valley (2/3 days), Amsterdam, Bruges, Prague, Vienna or Salzburg, Lucerne or Interlaken, and Italy. (Venice, Florence, Rome). Are there any of these places that would be better left out to make the itinerary more efficient?
Many thanks, Anne
Anne,
I’d say you’d need about 38 days in order to have a good and quick visit to all of the places on your list. Since you are shooting more for 30 days, you should probably trim away a few. It’s tempting to suggest you save the Cotswolds and Loire Valley for a future trip, but if you do that then you are pretty much only going to large cities for most of your month.
My standard advice is to plan 3 nights in almost every city you visit. Larger and more famous cities like London and Paris can be better in 4 nights, while smaller cities such as Venice or Bruges can be done in 1 or 2 nights. In other words, if you have 30 nights then it’s best to choose 10 to maybe 12 total stops.
Unless you have family there or another special reason to visit, I still think the Cotswolds and Bath might be better for a future trip when you can explore Britain more fully. But the Loire Valley has some really amazing castles and big sights, so that might be a good break from the cities early in your trip.
Bruges is really nice, but it will remind you of a much smaller and more mellow version of Amsterdam. Saving it for another trip might be better. Prague is pretty amazing and many people go there after a stop in Berlin, but it’s still worthwhile if you skip Berlin. Vienna and Salzburg are nothing alike to choosing between them is difficult. You might want to visit both of them, and you could do Salzburg in only 2 nights if you had to. Vienna is a large and formal capital filled with great architecture, while Salzburg is a charming old town up against the Alps with a big castle above and gorgeous scenery all around.
If you only have a few days to spend in Switzerland I’d recommend Interlaken. I was asked so often that I wrote an article on where to go in Switzerland, and you may find it helpful.
You can get from Interlaken to Venice in 6 hours on one of the most scenic train rides in the world, changing in Milan. I’d do Venice in 2 nights or you could even do it in 24 hours and then move on to Florence on a 2-hour train ride. Stay in Florence for 2 or 3 nights, and then save 3 nights for Rome because it’s big and so full of top sights that 3 nights is really the minimum.
Those are my general thoughts and hopefully they will help you figure out which places you want to keep and which you might save for later. I’ll be happy to help more as you are putting this together, so feel free to ask again. -Roger
Hi Roger!
My 17 year old daughter is graduating from High School at the end of May and as promised, I’m taking her to see Paris, which she has always wanted to see. I’m rather excited to see it myself. We are flying into Paris from San Antonio, Texas and will have 23 days before we have to fly back. My question to you is that we would both like to see some sights outside Paris (kind of a “tour of Europe” if you will). I definitely planned on spending at least 3-4 days in Paris since that was her main wish but then I planned to rent a car and drive towards Italy, stopping in Geneva for one night along the way (anything worth seeing there?). Then, heading towards Milan for a day, then Venice for perhaps 2 days, then Florence for 2 days, Rome for 2-3 days, Nice/Monaco area for 1 night, then over to Barcelona for 2 days, then down the coast to Grenada for 1 night, Seville for 1 night, then on to Lisbon, Portugal for 1-2 nights (I’ve heard great things about Lisbon and Portugal. Can you advise on this?). Then over to Madrid for 1-2 nights and then start making our way back to Paris with an overnight stay somewhere around Toulouse or Bordeaux. That’s a grand total of 21 nights, so it leaves 2 extra nights to play with. My daughter (and myself) look forward to seeing all the major “tourist” sights like Eiffel Tower, Palace of Versailles, State of David, Coliseum, Sistine Chapel, etc. I would also like to see a few famous gardens along the way, including Monet’s gardens at Giverny, while my daughter would like to attend a few plays while on our trip. We both look forward to visiting museums. Also, I’m assuming that having my American Driving license and car insurance is enough to rent a car in Paris and drive it to all of these places? Please advise? So, what is your overall opinion of this trip? doable? Any suggestions for eliminating certain cities/adding other ones, using different modes of transportation? Also, sounding very selfish here, but I’ve already been to London, Brugges and Amsterdam, so I’m choosing to not go to those cities (she can go with her special someone when she’s out of college?). I’m basically trying to get a good Western Europe Tour here for the both of us (always taking the attitude of “I may never be back”). Not sure if that’s the right approach but its worked for me so far on all my other trips. I kind of get a taste of each city and then decide if its a “come back to city” or not. Thanks for any advise/suggestions. It’s much appreciated.
-Jeffrey
Jeffrey,
I’ll be happy to try to help, and I’ll answer the questions in the order they came up. By the way, I’ve spent about 6 of the last 11 years traveling and living outside of the United States, but at the moment I’m actually based in Kerrville, so we are neighbors.
Your trip sounds wonderful and I’m sure neither you or your daughter will ever forget it. First off though, I highly recommend against renting a car for a trip like this. As you remember from your London, Amsterdam, and Bruges trip, parking in European cities is challenging and very expensive. Honestly, they make it that way on purpose, to discourage precisely this sort of thing. If you drove your options would be to spend maybe €30 per night to park and deal with traffic headaches every time you come and go, or stay in hotels outside of the city, and spend a couple hours each day going back and forth. The good news is that train service in the areas you are going to is exceptional, comfortable, and reasonably priced. It’s also far more enjoyable than driving.
Another thing to consider, and this is true whether you are driving or taking trains (or flying, actually) is that each time you change cities it will take up most of the middle of that day. This means that a travel day is not really a sightseeing day. If you check out of one hotel after breakfast at 9am and check into your next hotel at 2pm, you’ll only have a couple hours before things start closing for the day. In other words, it’s best to stay 3 nights in most larger cities, and 2 nights is enough for some smaller ones. That translates into 2 full sightseeing days in bigger cities and 1 full sightseeing day in smaller ones. So if you stay 2 nights in each city, you literally spend every other day mainly focusing on transit.
One way to do this would be to head to Nice after Paris for 2 or 3 days and then take a train to Milan or Venice. Milan isn’t a great tourist city compared to Venice, Florence, and Rome, but it does have a few interesting things to see. The fastest tour of Italy that I recommend is 1 night in Venice (it’s small and crowded, so if you stay on the main island you can do some sightseeing in the evening and morning, when it’s less crowded, and then leave), then 2 nights in Florence followed by 3 nights in Rome. Adding a night to Venice and/or Florence is even better.
From Rome it might be best to fly to Spain or Portugal, as the flights will be cheaper than trains and obviously much faster. You could, for example, fly from Rome to Lisbon (a great city, by the way) and after 3 nights you could fly to Madrid or take the overnight train. Then take the 2.5-hour train to Barcelona for 3 nights or so. After that you could take a train back into France to visit a stop or two before heading to Paris again.
As an American myself, I love a road trip, but really the trains in Europe are so much nicer of an experience that I highly encourage you to base your itinerary on them. Also, the earlier you buy your train tickets (up to 3 months or so in advance), the cheaper they will be. The advanced tickets in Italy are particularly cheap. I’m happy to help more, so let me know if you have any other questions. -Roger
Hi Roger!
Im so glad that I crossed path with ur blog while researching for my euro trip I find your blog is full with bits of interesting facts & routes of the EU countries! Ill be goin for my trip in coming Dec 2017. I hope you can shed some lights on how to arrange my routes *fingerscrossed*.
My rough plans is to travel for 20-25days. Kickin it off from Amsterdam and final destination to be in the UK. Cities that I have in mind but yet to be finalised :
– Amsterdam
– Vienna
– Budapest
– Venice , Rome, Milan
– Lucerne, Interlaken
– Paris
Please let know of your thoughts if these are reasonable & doable within the timeframe?
Hope to hearing from you soon and many thanks in advance for your inputs & ideas Roger!
Kay, Malaysia.
Kay,
Thank you for the nice words, and I’m a big Malaysia fan so I’m happy you found this website.
My first bit of advice is that you really should spend 3 nights in almost any city you visit, except for the smallest ones such as Venice. As I say so often, that gives you two full sightseeing days, which is just about perfect to be able to visit all of the best sights there and sample the cuisine and such. If you try to visit in two nights that only leaves one full sightseeing day, and you’ll have to rush around in order to just see the top things on your list. A day traveling between cities also means checking in and out of hotels and getting to the airport or train station, and all of that eats up most of the day.
I’d recommend 3 nights in Amsterdam and 3 or 4 in Paris, and 3 in Rome. Venice can be done in about 24 hours, although 2 nights is better unless you are already in Italy. Milan isn’t much of a tourist city, especially compared to Florence, so unless there is something specific you want to see in Milan you might consider skipping it or switching to Florence.
Budapest is quite nice, and interesting, and affordable, but it’s also quite remote from the others on your list.
It seems like you may have already read my article on where to go in Switzerland, and in that case you know that 3 nights in Interlaken is ideal, and 2 nights in Lucerne is a nice bonus on top of that.
Hopefully with all of that in mind you can decide which 7 or 8 cities will work best for you, and be able to put together a basic itinerary. I’m happy to help as you get further into the process. -Roger
Thank you for the list and your reasoning. We have been to Rome and Venice and loved both, and the three cities we have under consideration are your other three: London, Paris, and Amsterdam! You make me feel like we’re on the right track. We are considering keeping our “must see/do” list minimal, and mostly just walking around, taking it all in. What are your thoughts on seeing the sights vs letting serendipity be our guide?
Laurel,
I think sightseeing strategies are a personal choice. Personally, I love travel planning (which is why I started this website) and knowing my best options before I arrive. I rarely make a hourly schedule for my trips, but I do like to plan on which of the top sights I want to visit on each day.
As for those 3 cities you’ll be visiting, I know them all very well and actually lived in London for 6 months last year. In my opinion, London is better with a plan because it’s so spread out that you’ll miss most all of it if you just walk around near the Thames or your hotel area. As long as you plan a bit you can still walk around aimlessly once you are in the right spots. I lived in Notting Hill, and I never got tired of walking around the Portobello Road area, even though it was packed with tourists. The same is true for the Camden Market area, which is another real gem. Once you get off the Tube you can walk around for hours and enjoy whatever you stumble upon. But I think it’s important to go to those neighborhoods rather than just walking wherever you happen to be.
Paris and Amsterdam are a bit different in that I think you can really just walk and enjoy whatever you find. They are both really beautiful cities with great architecture throughout the whole center. In Paris I highly recommend a visit to the Montmartre area in the evening. Take the funicular up to the Sacré-Coeur cathedral and then walk the windy streets back down for an unforgettable evening. Amsterdam is quite a bit smaller so it’s even easier to enjoy on foot. Make sure you visit the Leidseplein and Rembrandtplein areas in the evening for the most dining and nightlife options. Even if you don’t want nightlife, the clubs and lights are something to see. Aside from those, the closer you are to the main train station (Centraal Station), the older and more interesting the city is. Have a great trip. -Roger
Hi Roger! I really appreciate that you take time to respond to everyone. I was hoping you could give me some suggestions.
My husband and I are taking a long overdue honeymoon in August. We will be arriving and departing from London. We will have 15 days.
My husband wants to see Prague and Budapest and I want to go anywhere in France (I have a minor in French and no good reason to use it in the US,). We would like to spend some time at the beach and are interested in architecture and history.
We will have our 7 month old son with us and our budget is quite small.
Thank you for your time!
Emerald,
Congratulations on being able to do the honeymoon. Especially if you need to keep this on a smaller budget, I’d skip trying to spend time on a beach on this trip. Half of Europe’s office workers are on holiday in August, and they all flock to any beach that is even half decent. Hotels will be very expensive and everything will be packed. Europe’s beaches are mostly disappointing in general.
I’d recommend 4 nights in London and then the Eurostar train to Paris for 4 nights. You mention wanting to go somewhere in France, and Paris is definitely your best bet. It’s actually half empty in August since the workers are all at the beaches, and hotel prices are modest as well because there is almost zero business travel going on. Some restaurants will be closed, but most are open and it’s easy to get tables. I was just in Paris this last August, by the way.
From Paris you should fly to Prague or Budapest for 3 nights and then take the 6 hour 40 minute train ride from one to the other for 3 more days. From there it’ll be best to fly back to London for your flight home. The only tricky thing about that is your flight home will probably leave from Heathrow and the cheaper flights from Budapest or Prague will probably land at Gatwick, Standsted, or Luton airport. So you’ll either have to allow time to get from one airport to another, or fly into Heathrow for a higher price.
This will be an amazing trip and you’ll see amazing architecture and history and scenery. Let me know if you have any other questions. -Roger
Hi Roger , We are planning our first trip to Europe. We are landing in London on 6th May and flying back home from Paris on May 19th.
The initial plan was to stay in London for 7 nights and head to Paris on 13th May. This kind of long stay in just 2 cities was planned to ensure that my kid is not drained in travel . He is just 6 years old.However, now we are seeing if we can include 3 days in lucrene as , we also wanted to see something very scenic.
May 6 – Arrival
May 7 to 12 London
May 11 -13 Lucrene
May 14 – 18 Paris
May 19 Heading back to India
Is it doable and does it sound reasonable plan?
Thanks in advance,
Uma
Uma,
Your dates are a bit confusing. I assume you mean May 7 to 11 in London and then to Lucerne for 3 nights and then to Paris for the remainder? If so I think it will work very well. Four nights in London will be plenty to see all of the top sights on your list, and the same is true for Paris. The best way to go is to fly from London to Zurich and then take a train directly from Zurich Airport to Lucerne. You can take a very scenic train journey from Lucerne to Paris in about 5 hours, which is faster than taking a train back to Zurich and then flying to Paris.
The one last comment I’ll make is that Lucerne is really wonderful, but it’s not as scenic or dramatic as the Interlaken area, which isn’t far away. Have a look at my article on where to go in Switzerland and you’ll quickly see what I mean. Interlaken is also extremely popular with Indian visitors, and there are quite a few Indian and vegetarian restaurants there. Lucerne has a few of them as well, but Interlaken has more. Let me know if you have any other questions. -Roger
Thank you so much Roger for your valuable inputs. Yes, there was typo w.r.t dates.
I thought Interlaken is considered like a transit area to go to mountain tops and May month may not be very idle to travel to those places. Please correct me if I’m wrong. I’m gald to hear about Indian restaurants around that place as that has been one of the key criteria to choose our accommodation.
Also would you suggest going to Amsterdam instead of Swizz considering the weather or is it manageable.
Uma,
The weather in Switzerland will be very nice in May, as it will be in Amsterdam. There can be rain in the warmer months in the mountains of Switzerland, but it’s still spectacular and usually doesn’t last too long. Amsterdam is easier to reach from London than Switzerland is, and it would also be a good choice, but Amsterdam is obviously another large city, while Switzerland is all about the amazing scenery.
The town of Interlaken is quite nice, but if you can manage it I’d recommend staying up in Gimmelwald or Murren, as described in that article I linked to above. Let me know if you have any other questions. -Roger
Thanks heaps Roger. Will look for accommodation around the area you suggested.I have one last question. My uncle is also travelling with us. He has back pain issues. Would the slopes be so steep that will make it difficult for him to travel around? If not which other place you would suggest for accommodation in such a way that he need not walk around too much but at the same time enjoy the scenery ?
My next concern may sound very stupid.Pardon me for it. We have never been exposed to temperatures less than 20°C. So bit worried about how my kid will cope up. Hope it is not a major issue.
Uma,
Gimmelwald does require walking a bit up and down hill, but the slope is gentle for the most part. If you can book at Esther’s Guesthouse, it’s only maybe 100 meters from the cable car station. The slope is a little steep when you first get off the cable car, but at least it’s a very short walk and then most of the town is on a very gentle slope. The town of Murren is mostly flat, so it could be a better choice. Have a great trip. -Roger
Hi Roger,
I’m planning a trip to Europe in January 2018. I would love to see a snow covered pretty European city or village as well as a castle.
We are flying into and out of London. (Coming from Australia)
I would love to see Madrid (where I was born 40 years ago in Jan), and Munich, where my husbands family are from.
I plan to spend the most time in London as I have family there.
I will have 12 days. Could you suggest any pretty snow capped city or towns to visit that we could visit? And also a possible itinerary?
(I have been to Paris so don’t plan to go there)
Many Thanks in advance for your suggestions & ideas.
Brighid.
Brighid,
First off, my standard recommendation is to spend 3 nights in pretty much every city you visit. You can spend 2 nights in some smaller towns, especially if they are close together and you don’t spend all day traveling to get there. The 3 destinations on your list so far are all quite far apart, so you’ll really need to fly between them. Fortunately, there are cheap flights all over Europe and you can get very good fares if you book early.
As for a photogenic European city or village that will be covered in snow and also has a castle, you can’t do better than Salzburg, Austria. Fortunately it’s about 90 minutes by train from Munich, so spending 2 nights there would be okay.
My itinerary suggestion would be to fly into London and spend 3 or 4 nights there. Then fly to Madrid for 3 nights. Then fly to Munich for 3 nights, or at least 2 nights. Then take that train to Salzburg for 2 nights. You could then fly back to London for 1 last night, or if you stayed for nights when you first got there, you could try to fly back into London shortly before your flight home. The tricky part of that is most cheaper flights from Europe into London will land at one of the smaller airports, while your flight back to Oz probably uses Heathrow. So you have to leave enough time to get from one airport to Heathrow, or stay one last night in London and fly home the next day.
As I mentioned, London, Munich, and Madrid are all great cities, but they are all spread apart. I would normally suggest trying to include cities that are closer together and saving at least one of these for a future trip. But if you want to do these cities now, at least Salzburg is close to Munich, so it’s not too bad. Let me know if you have any other questions. -Roger