5d Mark II vs 1ds Mark IV?

[FilmGeek]

Ok, so this is a dream question, and I'm sure it's been talked about here before (though doing a quick search I couldn't find a thread)...

If money wasn't an issue, which camera would you go for?

There are plenty of benefits for either... some that I've read or considered:

Regarding 5D
- Full frame
- Great high ISO noise
- Cheaper (ok, money is always an issue)
- Solid camera

Regarding 1D
- Better high ISO noise
- Even more solid camera
- Some very cool software features not available on 5D (such as setting a minimum shutter speed on auto modes)
- Though, not full frame
- Costs twice as much
- Probably way more than I need

[richardandrewsmedia]

1DSMk4 I wouldn't count on it.

[inkista]

Twice as much? That little?

The 5D Mark II body right now is about $2500. The 1Ds Mark III body is $6000. And it initially MSRPed at $8000.

I really wouldn't bet on a $5000 1Ds Mark IV.

And if money was truly no object, I'd probably go for a Leica M9, provided I could afford the lenses, too.

[FilmGeek]

Whoops. Now I'm not sure if I meant 1D Mark IV, or 1Ds Mark III.

Ok, I meant the 1D Mark IV.

[ElCapitan]

I'd go with the 1D MkIV no questions asked. I love FF, but if money isn't a worry, then I could never pass up the ability to shoot at super high ISO and 10fps.

Not that I don't love my 5D MkII to death, but I could still shoot just about everything my 5D does with a 1D MkIV and so much more.