3.5 meters aperture is 35 times larger than the 10 cm aperture need to get 1 arcsecond of angular resolution, so its diffraction-limited resolution is 1/35 arcsecond. Suppose the orbiter flew directly overhead at an altitude of 210,000 feet, or 70,000 yards. As rifle shooters know, 1 minute of arc is about 1" at 100 yards, and a second being 1/60 of a minute, would be an inch at 60 x 100 = 6000 yards. 1/35 of a second would be an inch at 35 x 6000 = 210,000 yards. Since the orbiter was three times closer, "only" 70,000 yards away, the picture should contain details to 1/3 inch scale.
In fact, the orbiter was not overhead and also not as low as 210,000 feet, so the distance was greater. Even three times greater, the resolution would still be on the 1" scale, assuming no atmospheric distortions. Typically, the best atmosphere limits resolution to about 0.1 arc seconds, 3.5 times worse than the 1/35 second just calculated. So the picture would then show details down to 3.5" size scale, which is smaller than the size of a single tile.
Now, just for grins, do it the other way. Suppose you have a roughly 3.5m aperture and an 80+ inch focal length, what would the resolution be from space to earth? Assume low earth orbit, polar trajectory... wink wink
Also, by combining several frames of video with mapped reference points, the resolution can be substantially improved and even smaller features can be displayed.