Any thoughts on the differences between the two from those who have been to both?

What type of vacation does each island group offer?

Which destination do you like better and why?

French Polynesia ("FP")has about the same number of visitors per year as Hawaii has per week. The result is that FP is MUCH less commercial, with limited choices for accommodations, dining, and activities. On the other hand, FP has a much more intimate, exotic feel.

The islands of FP are smaller and less populous than Hawaii (the roads around Moorea and Bora Bora are about 38 and 17 miles, respectively). They're breathtakingly beautiful, but you can sightsee the largest in a half day or so. That's not true of Hawaii. A common thread amongst Hawaii posts on this forum is a concern that four days on _______ (pick an island) will be enough time to see everything. In FP, I can spend the whole day on the deck of an overwater bungalow (or snorkeling around it), and not once question that I'm getting my money's worth.

My obvious preference is FP. Almost everything about it is magical for me: the friendliness of its people, the culture, the stunning beauty, the pace of life.....my first visit there was a life-changing experience.

Like beachbum, my visit to French Polynesia changed my life (a common theme). I think the islands are much more beautiful than Hawaii (and that's saying a lot). Quite frankly, Bora Bora is simply the most beautiful place I have ever seen, period - only Yosemite Valley impressed me anywhere near as much.

Having said that, I do feel that the islands of the South Pacific (in general) are not for everyone. Because these islands are far older than Hawaii, they've had time to develop extensive lagoons and reef systems - resulting in very different marine environments from those found in Hawaii. Hawaii is famous for its' huge breakers and the water activities that go with that (surfing etc). French Polynesia is known for lanquid lagoons, where there is often hardly a ripple on the water - excellent for snorkeling, but poor for surfing and the like.

In addition, because the islands are so very small, there is a lot less choices in regards to things like "where to eat", what kinds of "touristy" activities are available to participate in, nightlife choices etc. Of nightlife in particular, there is in fact, practically none outside of the city of Papeete. One couple we met while on Bora Bora were simply bored to tears because they were expecting clubs and discos and instead found themselves on islands that "roll up the sidewalks" after dark. You must keep in mind that this is NOT the Carribean, these are the quiet, nearly empty islands of the South Pacific. These are not the islands to visit if you need to party.

Also, French Polynesia tends to be much more expensive than Hawaii. It's not that you can't find places just as expensive in Hawaii, it's just that there is not much in the way of mid-range places in French Polynesia. All the big resorts tend to cater to those with big budgets. This applies to the majority of the restaurants (at least in the tourist areas) as well, so plan accordingly.

If that does not bother you (and you can deal with the limited structured activities and places to eat), then French Polynesia may indeed suit you fine.

If the laid-back pace of things does not scare you off, but the big pricetags do, then consider Fiji, Samoa, Tonga, or the Cook Islands. I know from personal experience that the Cooks are nearly as beautiful, but cost a WHOLE lot less.

Ken

Photos of several tropical locations (including Bora Bora, Tahiti, Hawaii, Puerto Vallarta, and the Cook Islands):

http://community.webshots.com/user/lordbalfor

PS: If you do choose to go to French Polynesia, you should know that most people only pass through Tahiti on their way to Bora Bora, Moorea, and the other nearby islands as the beaches in Tahiti are consider inferior.

We did a South Pacific/Hawaii cruise a few years back. The simple answer to this question is whether you want a completely laid back vacation vs. a potentially commercialized one. We visited Tahiti, Moorea and Bora Bora, along with Christmas Island and Kauai, Maui and the Big Island. Personally, I don't go for the completely laid back vacation. We took several tours on the FP islands and they were all the same--this is the school, this is the fire department, etc., after the first one we had had enough. However, the settings are beautiful, serene and tropical. Hawaii, on the other hand, we found to be paradise-like in a different way, more Americanized and commercialized nonetheless, but much more enjoyable and to our tastes. If you decide to stay in FP, I would skip Tahiti and choose another island--it is somewhat polluted, dirty and traffic-ridden, not at all what my idea of paradise was.

What great advice from all who posted! Thanks!
I heard from a friend who has been to both that FP was hauntingly quiet - too eerie for his taste.
I enjoy natural beauty so I figured FP would be ideal, however, this friend told me that you get everything in Hawaii - natural beauty and lots of activities.
I appreciate the responses.

This question is interesting to me, because I'm working on a 20th anniversary trip for me and my husband next January.

If we go to Hawaii, I think we wil have to take the kids (they will be 14 and 11 then) because they've been begging us to go for about 7 years now. We take trips without them, but Hawaii is the one destination for which we can't leave them at home, even for an anniversary trip.

I'd like French Polynesia, Hawaii, or a Panama Canal cruise; my husband wants New Zealand, and the kids will just want a beach. I was thinking of something for my husband and me in the $4000-$5000 range, but we can't do much with that for 4 people. It's sad to hear that French Polynesia is so expensive.

You'll probably be reading Hawaii questions from me soon, but I promise to do my homework first.