It's an interesting discussion and the math going into it is extensive.
However, and keeping in tune with the camera-analogy, this is only about the lens.
The eyes do not "see" anything - the brain does. It's a trained behavior based on the brain's interpretation of electrical signals. No actual visuals are passed to the brain - only electricity.
The eyes are analog instruments, not digital, and only in a very abstract sense does it make sense to talk about resolution.
But sticking with the analogy, visual resolution should then be defined as the brain's ability to make a distinction between two almost similar electrical signals. The resolution is: how much of a difference can exist before the brain picks it up.
And that doesn't even begin to tap into the discussion about the brain's ability to "fill in the blanks". Every eye has a blind spot, but we don't see it, because the brain perform a photoshop-like "clone stamp" function without us even noticing.
In truth, I think there are way too many variables to come to a full and meaningful conclusion, since we don't understand the brain nearly well enough yet.
....of course that shouldn't stop us from trying