Connery the classic best for me... I like Craig best since. He actually looks credible as a 007... more raw and cold blooded than his predecessors... Brosnan was too prissy for a Bond... unwatchable...
Roger Moore. I sometimes wonder if the other James Bond actors could have returned/continued into their mid 50s at least, or even if Timothy Dalton had got the role in his early 20s.
Having read the Bond books, I can say that for me Daniel Craig is the nearest one to the cold hearted secret agent described in Fleming's books. However, I remember reading that Fleming actually thought Roger Moore was the closest to the person he was trying to describe in the books. So something of a dichotamy I think. Anyway, for me it's been Craig first, then Connery, then Moore, then Brosnan, and last (and least!) Dalton. One of the problems I think is that as times have changed so have social mores, and as such, things that Connery did back in the 60s seem out of place now. In particular the bit in Dr No with Ursula Andress having superstitious fears of the fire breathing monster, when it's clearly an old tank with a flame thrower and rather dodgy paint job. They might have been able to get away with such suspension of disbelief then, but not nowadays. If Ursula Andress started getting frightened by an obsolete army surplus tank nowadays I think Bond would be inclined to ask her if she's blind or just stupid, rather than taking her seriously. In his debut Bond movie, Timothy Dalton had the misfortune to have to explain to a woman who the Mujahideen were as though they were heroes, but later information in the real world has shown that they weren't the good guys portrayed in the film, and as a secret agent you'd expect him to know that. So it seems stupid now to hear those lines as spoken back then.