Not sure that "per pixel" is the most meaningful metric, because in astronomy, resolution is typically limited by telescope optics and atmospheric conditions, r

Not sure that "per pixel" is the most meaningful metric, because in astronomy, resolution is typically limited by telescope optics and atmospheric conditions, rather than pixel count. But if I'm reading the paper correctly ([1], table 2) the observed angular resolution -- the FWHM, i.e. the "blurriness" of an assumed point source -- was on the order of 0.05 arcseconds. Given the distance from the Earth to the Moon (about 384,000 km), that would correspond to a resolution of about a hundred meters. [1]: https://www.eso.org/public/archives/releases/sciencepapers/eso2011/eso2011a.pdf https://www.eso.org/public/archives/releases/sciencepapers/e...