That lower cut makes it easier to style with different pants compared to the Highs. The outsole grip is good for everyday use. However, the insole is pretty basic – I'd recommend swapping it for something more supportive if you're planning on being on your feet all day. It's a trade-off for that classic, clean aesthetic. Alright, let's unbox these! First impressions - this "Air Jordan 1 Mid" in the 'Metallic Silver' colorway is clean. The leather feels decent for the $120 USD price point, not super premium, but it has a nice sheen. That classic silhouette is just "timeless" - you can't go wrong with it. Straight out of the box, it's a solid pickup for the collection. So, how does it look in real life? Honestly, better than in pictures. The proportions of the Air Jordan 1 Mid work really well. It's a bit shorter than the Highs, which some people actually prefer. This 'White Black' pair goes with literally everything -- jeans, joggers, shorts. It's a wardrobe staple. The design is just... simple and effective. No crazy gimmicks, just a solid shoe. What's up, everyone? Let's talk about this "Air Jordan 1 Mid" 'White Shadow Grey' I just got. Unboxing, the materials feel pretty good – nice, smooth leather on the white panels. On foot, they're comfortable right out of the box, but remember, it's that classic Jordan 1 feel: supportive, not super soft. The mid-top height is, for me, the sweet spot – easier to put on than Highs but with more presence than Lows. The biggest advantage here is the clean, wearable color scheme; it's super versatile for outfits. On the downside, the outsole traction on dusty courts might be just okay. So, who is this for? Someone building their first Jordan collection or wanting a crisp, white-based sneaker. Not for performance basketball players, obviously.

  • Shown: Pollen
  • Style: CT8527-700

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