I agree with @A.Schulz: List all four. You must get letters from both your thesis advisor and your postdoc advisor.
If you have to choose only one of your superstar coauthors to write a letter for you, consider the purpose of the letter: to help the committee make an informed judgement of your long-term potential for high-quality, high-impact research and intellectual leadership, or to put it more bluntly, your likelihood of getting tenure. The best recommendation letters draw direct comparisons between your research ability/quality/reputation and that of other people in your subfield at similar career stages. For that reason, the most useful letters are from people who have a broad perspective on the field, with direct experience with many other people at the same career stage as you. For example, someone who has served on lots of recent program committees can offer a good perspective on your current competitors. Someone who has worked in a strong department for many years can offer a good perspective on people who had records comparable to yours in the past, and how their careers progressed. The research reputation of your letter-writers is secondary to their credibility in judging your potential.
Also, in the interests of objectivity, each of your letter-writers should focus as much as possible on the work that they were not involved in. In particular, what you do not want is a letter from a superstar coauthor that talks about the fantastic paper that the two of you wrote together; such a letter will not be taken seriously, because of course they think their own paper is good. So ideally, you should only ask a superstar coauthor for a letter if they are willing to write a strong letter about your other work.