Moving from LA to SF will definitely give you a sticker shock. I used to buy nice large burritos in DTLA for $10 flat as recently as 2024. That's with tax. Later that year in SF a nice sandwich in random bodegas would cost well over $20(with tax). SF is probably the most eye wateringly expensive city in all of US. It definitely beats NYC.
Food is so much cheaper (and better) in LA than SF.
SF has such mediocre food for what you pay compared to any other city I’ve lived in*. You either have to fork over a few hundred to experience some of the stellar fine dining options in the city, or end up at some brunch place that’s probably pretty decent but you’re not leaving without at least $100 between two people.
The good food in the Bay Area I’ve always found to be in a shopping center or random places sprinkled all round the south bay and peninsula. Which, may sound similar to how LA is too, but I’d argue LA has overall a healthier food scene and variety of amazing food all within central LA - and most importantly, more affordable.
I love Seattle and it’s food but yeah it’s really expensive by default - I haven’t spent enough time in the Bay recently to compare but it feels equally pricy.
There are still reasonable & very good places though you just have to know.
Seattle used to have good food at reasonable prices. The extreme increase in costs, much of which is self-inflicted, has killed any restaurant that didn't both dramatically increase prices and cut corners on quality. Almost all of my favorite restaurants in the city are no longer around.
Seattle had much better food 15 years ago. The average food quality has noticeably deteriorated at the same time as prices skyrocketed. It is a shame really.
Unique to us, we have anomalously high minimum wages and a specific driver fairness pay law that makes for eye-watering delivery costs. This is on top of all of SF's problems w/ density, zoning, pricing out cheap indie spaces and the artist class that would put things in them, etc.
I’ve lived in both and I can say confidently I spent more on groceries, dining out, and drinks overall for me in Seattle…despite not feeling like the care or quality was always there. The hardest thing about Seattle for me was the lack of food variety. I could only eat so much teriyaki and pho..I know these are fighting words..but I actually would rank Portland above Seattle strictly on food alone. Portland has a great food scene, and it’s not obscenely priced.
Locals would (passive aggressively) remind me though how amazing Seattle is, and I should be grateful for no income tax
LA's food scene is unbelievably good. There are individual categories of food that other places have it beat on (for example, if I want a deep dish pizza, I'm probably better off going to Zachary's, or being in Chicago), but on a scale of "I can walk into a random restaurant with no research and expect a good to extremely good meal, with plenty of variety in such restaurants to choose from" to "Evansville, IN", I haven't been anywhere in the world that has LA beat.
> I haven't been anywhere in the world that has LA beat.
I feel the same way about NYC and NOLA. Both have world class cuisine and the sheer diversity of NYC food scene can't be found anywhere in the US. And for whatever reason NYC style pizza is not as ubiquitous outside the NYC-NJ area.You can definitely find such pizza in Boston, but it cannot be found in every little corner in LA for example.
I'm sure plenty of it boils down to matter of priorities (I feel the same way about breakfast burritos as you do about NYC style pizza), but I'd rank cities on my "diverse selection of quality restaurants, weighted for rarely walking into a bad restaurant" scale with LA, NYC, Istanbul, and Edmonton in order at the "I do not need to look up restaurants, I will walk into the next restaurant I see and be pleased" tier.
SF / Bay Area is best for a few specialties such as Super burritos, specialty Thai, & shawarmas. But LA is far better for quality and taste, along with a broader range of options.
