When it comes to the portrayal of Clark Kent, do you prefer the nerdy farmboy (Christopher Reeve) or the big city reporter (George Reeves)?

The Schwartz Superman was a mixture of both, and worked well.

George, but only when played by George.
Dean Cain didn't have anywhere near the gravitas that Mr. Reeves displayed.
Goofy Chris (the nicest Clark ever) and Brenden served their movies well,
and Welling is a good farmboy.
So, my bottom line answer is: It depends.

Uh, what about the nerdy reporter like Siegal and Shuster created?

Who are these "Siegal and Shuster" people you keep blathering about?

Are they pen names for Mario Puzo and Richard Donner, or what?

You didn't score well on multiple choice tests in school, I take it.

Trouble ordering from menus in restaurants?

"Would you prefer some coffee or water?"

"What about Coca-Cola? That is also a beverage you could have offered me."

Both.

Why are you being so difficult?

I prefer a less nerdy than Reeve "Clark" but not the superstar he was after Byrne and the TV show. Of course, that would be an act, just like Superman. The real Clark would only be known to Lois and the Kents who, if dead, they should at least provide Clark with a shoulder to lean on in the form of their dessicated corpses in the Fortress of Solitude.

But if he leaned too hard he'd fall through them.