A simple black-and-white 'Air Jordan 1 Low' is a wardrobe staple – timeless. But some of the crazy collabs? That's where the hype is. On foot, the low-cut design shows off your socks, which is a fun styling opportunity. Just know, the ankle collar can rub a bit at first. Nothing major, but worth mentioning for a full, honest review. Let's look at this "Air Jordan 1 Low" 'Starfish' – that orange is wild! Unboxing it, you can see the color is super consistent. On foot, they feel just like every other AJ1 Low: flat, firm, and light. The design is the star here; it's a fun twist on a classic. If you compare it to a more basic Jordan series colorway, this has way more personality. Pro: unique color. Con: same old ride. Priced at $115, it's for the sneakerhead who loves color. Not for someone wanting a comfort-first daily driver. Checking out this collab on the "Air Jordan 1 Low" platform. The materials are insane - but that's reflected in the $200+ price. The in-hand quality is next level. On feet, they're special, no doubt. However, the "core experience" is the same: same fit, same firm ride. The pros are all in the design and exclusivity. The con is the value proposition vs. a general release. This is for collectors and fans of the collaborator. For most people, a GR "Air Jordan 1 Low" at half the price makes more sense. Got the 'Black Cement Grey' Air Jordan 1 Low in today. The materials feel sturdy, and the colorway is super wearable. On foot, they’re lightweight & easy to move in. I appreciate how the low-cut design makes them more of an everyday shoe than their high-top siblings. Is the cushioning revolutionary? Nope—it's firm. But for walking around town, running errands? They’re more than fine. A great pick if you want that AJ1 look without the bulk / higher price tag.

  • Shown: Lucky Green
  • Style: DH6927-061

Available

Product reviews

Rating 4.5 out of 5. 8,008 reviews.

Characteristics assessment

Cost-benefit

Rating 4.5 out of 10 5

Comfortable

Rating 4.3 out of 5

It's light

Rating 4.3 out of 5

Quality of materials

Rating 4.1 of 5

popular

Assessment 4 of 5