Out of the box, the craftsmanship is decent — not flawless, but good for the price. On foot, it's snug and supportive, yet the sole isn't super soft. Compared to premium Jordans, it's more accessible. Pros: classic design and affordable. Cons: lacks modern comfort tech. Perfect for casual wearers, but if you prioritize cushioning, consider other options. Thanks for watching! Yo, checking out this new "Air Jordan 1 Mid" SE with the altered materials – this one has some suede panels. Opening the box, the texture mix really makes it pop, giving a premium feel over the standard all-leather versions. Sliding my foot in, the fit is consistent: snug in the heel, roomy in the toe box. Wearing them, the SE details get you compliments – it stands out from the basic Mids. A huge pro is the unique look without a crazy price hike (around $125). A potential con? Suede can be harder to maintain than plain leather. In my opinion, if you already have a core "Jordan 1 Mid" colorway and want something with more character, this SE is a great pick. If you're rough on your shoes or live in a rainy area, maybe reconsider. 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. Conversely, the "air jordan 1 mid" might "not" be for you if you need premium materials or max cushioning. Hardcore Jordan 1 High collectors might skip it. Also, if you have wider feet, the break-in period can be a bit tough. Know what you're buying: a style icon, not a tech marvel.

  • Shown: White Oreo
  • Style: CT8529-012

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