> Remarkably, Jiang et al. gave themselves a huge handicap with regard to beating the resolution record. For any given microscope lens, the best resolution is achieved by using the shortest possible wavelength of the radiation or electron beams concerned. However, the authors used relatively low-energy electrons, which have twice the wavelength of those used in the highest-resolution lens-based microscopes9,10. Using low-energy electrons for microscopy is good because it greatly reduces the damage inflicted on the specimen by the electrons. But in this case, it also meant that the resolution of the lens used by Jiang and colleagues was reduced by a factor of two. To beat the resolution record, the authors had to process a particular subset of the ptychographic diffraction data (the high-angle data), thereby obtaining an image with a resolution 2.5 times better than would otherwise have been possible.<p>Nice. It looks like this is a fresh gateway breakthrough with low hanging fruit on the other side. It's always exciting when it's not just eeking out a small increment gains blown up by University Press.