35mm or 40mm macro or 50mm which is sharper

I'm pretty new to photography, I picked up my D 5100 a couple months back. With only the kit 18-55mm lens. Now I am planning to upgrade this one..

I've heard great things about the Nikkor 35 mm f/1.8G DX including, fantastic performance in low-light, a great first prime lens, and generally being a great lens for newbies and pros alike.

Now, the new Nikkor 40 mm f/2.8G DX micro lens caught my attention, the versatility and range of different shots it can take that are on sample on the official nikon site has got me thinking that this lens could also meets my needs. Although Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8G FX lens is on my consideration.

I take my camera with me pretty much everywhere. Therefore, I'm looking for a lens that can do some general photography work. The price won't be an issue. I'm leaning towards the 35 mm and 50 mm because I do have some difficulty with low light conditions, however the 40 mm looks great for food shots or landscape shots. My primary need is to get the sharpest portraiture. I’ve heard that the prime lenses having macro abilities do this job well. I don’t know whether thing is true or not.

However my question:- which one would you recommend as a first lens for sharpest portraiture photo with decent bokeh?

35 mm f/1.8G or 40 mm f/2.8 micro or 50 mm f/1.8G ????

All these will be sharp, but with portraits do we want critical sharpness? It may be that out subjects will prefer a gentler look to their potraits rather than biting sharpness that reveals every flaw....

Macro lenses will give you biting sharpness, but a soft focus filter may be the answer if you want gentler portraits. For everthing else, if you want the sharpness then at least it will be there for you.

John