Hi Heath,
My recommendation for a general purpose, all fixed focal length setup would be:
First priority (cheap and highly useful lenses):
35mm - all are good, You could buy a F=1.8, but a 2.8 usually does the job, too. Besides the MC 1.8/35 is a big and heavy monster. You won't carry 6 of those lenses around. The MD 1.8/35 is smaller, but expensive, too. I bet You don't need the speed, so stay with the slower ones. That are much cheaper anyway.
50mm - I'd avoid everything with 49mm filter thread. A lot of people think, the MC Rokkor-PG 1.4/50 is the best one (stopped down to 5.6). It is a little bit prone to flare. In difficult backlight situations I prefer the MD Rokkor 1.7/50 with the 55mm filter thread. It is much less flare prone. At F=2 the F1.7 is sharper than the F1.4, but the F1.4 does show less vignetting - so I got both and decide on day which one to take with me. You could also replace the MC 1.4/50 by the MC 1.2/58 - but this increases cost more than usefullness. And I recommend to get that MD 1.7/50 as second normal prime for difficult light (often it sells for less than 5€ here in Germany - I have to recommend it). If You are on a really thight budget, select the MD Rokkor 1.7/50 as Your only normal lens. And learn to live with some vignetting when using it wide open.
135mm - the late MC 2.8/135 with the diamond mark at the aperture ring (i.e. the 4 lens version) is a great lens (maybe even a little bit better than the MD 2/135!) and it can be found very cheap. But one doesn't need to be picky here, since all 2.8/135 are good lenses. The old MC Rokkor-PF 2.8/135 is renowend for it nice Bokeh. It is pretty cheap, too. So get one - I got one of these for portrait work.
200mm - there is a good 4/200 either as MC Rokkor or MD (Rokkor). You could also get a Rokkor Zoom 4.5/75-200, which is nearly as good as the 200mm prime lens. The older MC 3.5 is a good one, too. So is the 2.8/200, but this is horrifying expensive, and thus not a number 1 tip.
There is a good 28mm (the MD W.Rokkor 2.8/28 with 55mm filter thread, the later ones with the 49mm filter thread have a bad reputation, so does the Tokinas), but it won't fit into the setup stage 2. So I recomment, not to buy a 28mm. Rather save this money to start phase 2 (i.e. the expensive lenses).
Second priority:
24mm - all the Minolta 24mm have a very good reputation. Those are more expensive (100..200€, the VFC even above that), but You could find a MC Rokkor-SI 2.8/24 for a little bit less than that. (in fact at the moment I am offering one on Ebay in Germay - but I doubt, that doing buisness around the world would be a convenient buisness). The step between 24mm and 35mm is a good one. And 24mm is OK to be Your widest lens.
You then got a 24-35-50-135-200 line up, with only a small gap between 50 and 135mm. You could finally buy a MD 2/85 to fill this, but the 2/85 is even more expensive than the 24mm lens. An alternative would be the 2.5/100 (I got the two late MC versions of it). I don't know, whether they got the outstanding resolution of the 2/85, but I think, at least they nearly do. And they are considerably cheaper (say 75€ for MC and 100€ for MD). The later MC got a smaller minimum focus distance, so it might be preferrable. Usually You get a good lens shade with the 100mm lens.
You could also add the mentioned MC Rokkor-PG 1.2/58, which is offering an outstanding bokeh especially between F=2 and F=2.8. This is highly attractive for all kind of limited depth of view photography, both nature and portraiture.
Another idea would be to fill the 50-135mm gap with a 100mm macro. There are two good options from Minolta (there is a very detailed review on rokkorfiles.com). I prefer the Tokina AT-X 2.5/90 Macro. A fine lens, yet a little bit prone to flare (use a lens shade!) and can have a bad bokeh if there are very harsh highlights (I can give You sample photos for both situation). There are third party macro lenses from Vivitar, Sigma and Tamron, and all those got a good reputation. I found even the macro capability of the Kiron made Vivitar S1 3.5/70-210 zoom to be a very usable one. But I can't recomment this heavy beast either. It is not good enough in its normal operation mode.
And don't forget to buy a polarizing filter. You could also add a 2x teleconverter (e.g. if You just want to carry the 2.8/135 plus TC in Your bag, rather than the 200mm lens). If You want to investigate wildlife shooting, buy a Tokina 8/500 mirror lens (as I did, but I hate it, and I'll sell that one, too). It is less costy than the Minolta one, and it got a very good minimum focus distance of about 2m.
All other lenses are chiefly bought to feed the lens envy (believe me, I am heavily suffer from this). Usually You don't need that Varisoft, Shift, 24mm VFC, 20 or even shorter wide angle, fisheye, 2/135mm super fast telephoto, APO Tele Rokkor and all those really expensive toys. It will just cost You lots of money, and multiply the time You waste decide which lenses to carry...
Go for the Phase 1 lenses plus maybe the 24mm plus one short telephoto or macro lens as outlined above, and You got an analog high end SLR system for little over 250€. And then spend Your money on a good tripod. Otherwise You won't see the performance of these great lenses.
Have fun!
P
PS:
here's a website, one might read prior to building a lens setup:
medfmt.8k.com/bronlensenvy.htmlIn that light, it might seem odd, that I recommend 5 lens setup for the first stage, and another 2 for the more comprehensive one. But those first 5 lenses are all pretty cheap ones, ranging from 5 to 25€. (plus shipment, of course).
PS2: a zoom setup could be build around the great 3.5/35-70 Minolta zoom (any version is OK, the ones with the (mild) macro option are handy, though more expensive). The best buy is the oldest one, with the two rubber rings, as it is usually cheaper but not worse than the later ones. Then the Vivitar S1 70-210 or a Minolta tele zoom would make the setup complete. But a lot of people that started to work with primes, don't want to use zooms any more...