Upload & Sell: On
The 1DsIII and the 1DIV are complementary cameras. Each was designed to meet different needs. Both are pro bodies with all the advantages of such and the only real disadvantage being form factor (not a negative for many people) and weight. Both are incredibly durable. Having said that you can use either camera as a cross over if necessary though with limitations each way.
As a sports and general reporter, I couldn't live without the 1DIV. I suppose the 1Dx is an improvement that I can't afford. I am constantly trying to stop motion in bad, little, poor light. Stopping action is greatly enhanced by the 1DIV's 10 fps rating.
You seem to be interested in static things though you don't mention what sort of light you expect to shoot in. Up to probably ISO 3200 the FF 1DsIII creates as fine a RAW image as anything. (Some will argue about this, but it's a splitting a gnat's ass to say others are better.) Beyond ISO 1600 and certainly beyond ISO 3200 a newer camera (say 5DIII or 1Dx) will serve you better.
Your other options are a 5DII and the new 5DIII. The 5DII is a perfectly competent camera within the same ISO ranges as the 1DsIII. Its negatives are less than stellar AF, slow throughput, it doesn't have the durability of a pro body. (It is also smaller and lighter.) I've not handled a 5DIII, but for it's premium price it appears to get very good AF, several steeps higher ISO, and a nice LCD. You do pay the "Canon Tax" for a new camera, however.
If capital is a problem and you do NOT shoot by examining the rear LCD to determine focus, the 1DsII is currently an extraordinary bargain. Absolutely superb IQ up to maybe ISO 1600 (800 is best). I recently sold one off for about $1300 to help fund the 1DIV and do miss it. Yes it is older technology, but within its design parameters it makes superb images.
Unless you have the $$ for the latest, greatest I'd suggest considering a 1DsII or a 5DII.
(Who is desperately saving his nickels to get a full frame camera.)