I faced the same dillema you do and bought the Marlin 1894C. Advantages: Short, easy to point (same as the .44 though), NO recoil on .38s and light recoil on .357s Disadvantages: .357 and .38 are harder to load in the loading gate than .44.
I find that the biggest advantage of the 1894C in .357 is the light recoil and low noise. Seriously, it is one of the lightest recoiling rifles I have ever fired. And ammo is cheaper than .44
BUT .44 is more fun! You can't deny it. It is probably worth it in the end. Plus .44 is so much easier to load and I can't emphasize this enough.
So it depends what you're using it for. If you want a rifle that fires cheap ammo and has a lot of commonality with typical calibres, get the 1894C. If you want more power, more fun (and more cost and more recoil) in a package of almost the same size, get a .44. If I had to do it again, I might get a .44 (except that recoil can be allegedly unpleasant in some loads.)
Marlin is a good choice. Easy to field strip and clean. But you'll have to smooth it out. Buckhorn sights suck as well. And the 1894C is a bit to short for me - just like the SKS. I like full-sized rifles like the Garand much better.
Really, though, consider a used Timberwolf. They are allegedly better. As are Browning B92s. Or the new set of 1866 and 1873 replica rifles - they are much faster. Or even the Taurus Thunderbolt. If it's just for fun, those cowboy replicas will shoot faster and feel more authentic. The Marlin is a slower, clunkier, more reliable and more durable workhorse that is also much easier to clean. The best term I've ever heard to describe it is a "can opener."