In my personal experience I found the 200/4 AIS to balance not equally well on a medium heavy camera as did the 200/4 Q. The focus travel is longer on the Q. The AI version has a nicer outline however foucsing is stiffer (I have tried several copies). The 200/4 AIS focuses smoother, perhaps too smooth, and has shorter travel. In terms of optical performance, the AI & AIS models outperform the Q Nikkors largely due to better image contrast, but perhaps their bokeh is a little less adorable.
Among the AIS lenses the 200/4 is unusual in that the focus throw is the same as the AI version at 205° (AIS lenses usually have a shorter focus throw). The K, AI and AIS versions all share the same 5-element optical design and the coatings are similar so there won't be any significant difference in optical performance. All have 9 aperture blades but the K and AI versions have "sawtooth" aperture openings at f/5.6 because the aperture blade tips don't fully overlap. The AIS version does not have this issue, giving a nice 9-sided polygon at all aperture settings without any spikes around the edge. The AIS version is marginally lighter and has a slimmer, and in my opinion, more attractive profile. For these reasons the AIS version is my first choice.
Among the earlier models, the last version is the Nikkor-Q.C, where the ".C" indicates the lenses are multicoated. This will give better colours and contrast compared to earlier versions, so if you like the appearance of the older lens this is the best choice unless you want an old-school low contrast look to your images. The slide-out hood is not as wobbly like the later versions and has a click-stop when fully extended so you are less likely to push it in by accident. The focus throw from infinity to 2m is 210°, so virtually the same as the later versions.
The early chrome barrel versions only focus to 3m which is rather limiting for this focal length.
