Pros? "Timeless" design, relatively affordable (~$120-135 USD), and "tons" of colorways to choose from. Cons? That "stiff" leather and basic insole won't win any comfort awards. "Ultimately", I'd recommend it to someone who "loves" the Jordan 1 look but wants a more "low-key", everyday option than the High. Comparing these to other Jordans? The Air Jordan Mid 1 sits perfectly between the High & the Low. You lose some of the High's "legendary" ankle coverage & styling options, but you gain a bit more everyday flexibility. Versus a modern Jordan like the 36? It's a completely different world — this is about heritage, not performance tech. For $135 USD, it's a style piece. How do they look on camera? Honestly, the Mid cut is super versatile. Sometimes Highs can look a bit bulky, but the "Air Jordan Mid 1" sits just right. This "Neutral Grey" pair I'm wearing is "clean". It works with jeans, joggers—you name it. The design is timeless; it’s why this model stays relevant. Compared to a Dunk, the toe box is slightly roomier, which I prefer. A definite "pro" is its effortless style. A "con"? The flat, non-supportive insole might not be for everyone with foot issues. Comparing it to other models – if you own an AJ1 High, the "air jordan mid 1" feels... slightly less iconic, but also less bulky around the ankle. It's a more casual, accessible vibe. Versus a Low? The Mid offers more ankle structure. For the price point? It's a compelling option in the "Jordan" lineup, bridging that gap between Highs and Lows perfectly.
