I have a 645 AFD and a 16.7MP square back (9 micron pixels like your DM22, just 25% narrower in sensor size).
I mostly shoot my lenses at or close to wide open. So I'm particularly sensitive to aberrations and such.
I also use the 55-110AF zoom. It's the only AF lens that really appeals to me. The 55mm end is surprisingly prime-like in quality. The 110mm end is softer wide open but sharpens up quickly a stop or two down. Bokeh seems good throughout the range.
Other than that, I use the manual focus primes - they're sometimes faster than their AF counterparts, and they do double-duty on my 5DII (which you can't do with the AF lenses).
* 24mm fisheye - one runs out of superlatives! Super sharp, across the whole image, even wide open (beware of colour moire with those fat pixels!).
* 35mm N - mine is a good copy. Central sharpness is excellent at all apertures, but the design (from the mid 1970s) fundamentally has off-axis astigmatism and field curvature; nothing you can do about it, except stop well down if it bothers you. I suspect that some of the people who complain of getting a poor sample are just misinterpreting this off-axis performance. If it is symmetrically
poor in your testing, it's probably just the way it is. [I tested my lens on a bank of young trees parallel to my house, about 70 feet away. Wide open, the trees in the centre were sharp and aliasing. At the sides of the frame, the trees were noticeably oof....but things in my garden about 15 feet away were sharp! That's field curvature. In some situations it can be exploited to good effect.]
* 45mm C - I used have an original 70's 45mm C lens long before my MFDB days, and it behaved like the 35mm: very sharp centrally even wide open, noticeably astigmatic in the 645 film corners.
* 55mm N - extremely crisp lens across the whole image plane from f5.6 down (or from f4 down on my 5DII's crop). But spherical aberration at f2.8 - I don't know if that's sample variation or a design fallout. The symmetry and stop-down behaviour makes me suspect that it's in the design. This and the 45mm were optically reformulated in the mid-80s, but the 35mm was not. This leads me to believe that the 1980s reformulations led to a systematic rebalancing of the wideangles' performance: losing the excellent wide open centre, gaining better edges. Someday I'll pick up a 45mm N, and maybe a 55mm C, to test this theory further.
* 80/1.9 C - unique lens. One of the main reasons I got a Mamiya in the first place, 20 years ago. Excellent performer too: what the 55mm does going from f2.8->f4->f5.6, the 80mm does going from f1.9->f2.8->f4.
* 110/2.8 N - great little portrait lens. Doesn't have the extra stop of the 80/1.9, but pretty much matches it in performance otherwise (at f2.8, the 80/1.9 has a slight edge, but at f4 there's nowt between them). Nice bokeh. Can sometimes be found as incredible bargains - mine was $55. People don't seem to buy this lens, and for the life of me I can't figure out why.
[BTW, other adaptable lenses to consider in this range are the Pentax67 105/2.4 and Hasselblad 110/2.]
* 150/3.5 C and 210/4 N - used these (mainly the 150) in my film days; can't comment about them on a DB. I got some great shots with them (the 150mm on full 645 is like the 110mm on a cropped DB). Both exhibit very even sharpness across the image plane. The 210/4 had a mild illumination "hot spot" in the centre (i.e. it didn't have a simple roll-off to the corners). This mattered in astrophotography, but probably wouldn't matter anywhere else.
* 200/2.8 APO - best lens I've ever used. So good, I also use it as a high magnification telescope.
[I used to say that you'd have to pry this lens from my cold, dead hands. That was until 3 weeks ago, departing on our holidays to France, when my warm, slippery hands and an inadequately locked Canon adapter let it drop 20 feet, from the 10th to the 8th deck of a car ferry!
Luckily, no-one was hurt, and amazingly, the optics were not broken - the huge metal 2nd lens hood took the worst of the blow and dented massively as it bounced off a metal railing. Mechanically it needs quite a bit of work, and optically it needs realignment, but I think it'll be ok. Any suggestions on where to send it (preferably UK/Europe) would be appreciated!]
* 300mm: I use an adapted CZJ MC Sonnar 300/4, which is a fine lens - great bokeh, no sharpness variation from centre to corner, but naturally for a 3 inch wide lens made of traditional glasses, there is chromatic aberration wide open. I aim to replace it in time with the 300/2.8 APO, which should share the exalted characteristics of the 200/2.8. The 300/5.6 N is said to be very good (better than the 210/4 N), but f5.6 is too slow for me in a tele lens.
* 2x N teleconverter: superbly matched to the 200/2.8 APO. This actually improves its performance as a telescope. Cannot be used on lenses shorter than the 140mm however, as its front group protrudes into the lens it is coupled to. If you want a 2x TC for say the 80mm or 110mm lenses, get a Vivitar one.
Hope there's some food for thought in there.