' Unique color, for sure. The materials are standard, but the construction is neat. On feet, they're true to size with a break-in period for the ankle area. The biggest advantage of any Mid is the price and accessibility. The drawback? It doesn't have the same "hype" or legacy status as some Highs. But if you love the design and want to rock it daily, this is a no-brainer. Unboxing this 'Light Smoke Grey' "Air Jordan 1 Mid", and… wow, I'm impressed. The nubuck feels nice! The color is super subtle and premium. On foot, it’s the same familiar fit: snug, secure, a bit rigid. The "mid" cut is perfect for showing off your socks, too. For $125? I think this specific colorway is a winner. If you like muted tones, this is a great pick. Just know the comfort tech inside is, well, vintage. On-foot review time! Wearing these "air jordan 1 mid" 'Ghost Green' today. The fit is TTS for me, with good heel lockdown. The mid-top height is a sweet spot - more ankle presence than a low, less restrictive than a high. In natural light, the colors really shine. They're not the most comfortable "Jordan" ever, but for short outings? Totally fine. Worth the $125 USD? If you love the color, yes. If you're purely chasing comfort, maybe not. Great for style-focused folks. Unboxing this Air Jordan 1 Mid SE with the different materials... interesting! The suede/nubuck combo feels nice. First wear? The break-in is real, guys – give it a few wears. It's a bit clunky, but that's part of the charm. On foot, the Mid profile is actually more flattering for shorter fits than the High, IMO. Major pro: timeless design that goes with everything. Potential con: the ankle padding can feel rough at first. I'd say this is perfect for a style-focused wardrobe staple. Performance basketball players? Look at newer models.

  • Shown: Pine Green
  • Style: 555088-404

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