I use the NKJV for reasons A,B,C,F,&G. As a preacher starting in ministry 30 years ago half the people had the KJV with them and the others had NASB or (then fairly new) NIV. A reason I chose to go from the KJV to the NKJV was it "bridged" with those other translations best. Plus the KJV/NKJV are very good literal translations.
One contributor above cites the Textus Receptus as a significant reason for using the KJV. This is a contrarian though fairly TRUE view. (Contrary to the standard view taught in Bible Schools and seminaries which rely on "Egyptian texts"). The problem with the TR-only view is that the TR is a fairly poor representative of the text of the majority of the manuscripts which is what we want. About 30 years ago Thomas Nelson Co. published "The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text". Wilbur Pickering of Wickliffe Bible Translators wrote a book entitled "The Identity of the New Testament Text" (I think the title's right) that gives the thinking behind that 5 year project. The reason I point this out is that the NKJV has in it's marginal notes the "M" (majority text) plus the (NU text - Egyptian text). This aids the Bible student in knowing what the majority of the manuscripts read versus the TR plus what the other translations (Nasb, NIV and everything else) read.
The NIV is too much of a paraphrase to me. One preacher friend of mine insisted it was the only way to go and then a year later switched to the NKJV because he "got tired of having to correct the text in his sermons".
Final point - read the Bible you have.
