I was visually checking the sequence for the V348 Sgr field. Something is clear: the PEP(V) magnitudes from Heck,et al. match exactly with what I saw. As a conclussion, I think every other sequence not from PEP(V) must be used with care. Some stars look in better agreement with UCAC1 than with Tycho 2; some look better in Tycho 2 than in UCAC1 and some even look better in Tycho than in Tycho 2. So, although in general UCAC1 and Tycho 2 have better magnitudes, they shouldn't be used if PEP(V) magnitudes are available. I have added some stars to the sequence and I'd appreciate if Bruce could complete the data. Thanks. This is the table: GSC(6858-..)--OBS. v -- PEP(V) -- UCAC1 -- Tycho2 --B-V 02674 100 -- --?--- -- ---?-- -- 1003 -- 0.59 * 02162 103 -- --?--- -- ---?-- -- 1037 -- 0.16 02724 104 -- --?--- -- ---?-- -- 1053 -- 1.09 # 01673 104 -- --?--- -- ---?-- -- 1037 -- 1.90 02278 105 -- ------- -- 1036 -- 1052 -- 1.26 02136 106 -- --?--- -- ---?-- -- 1091 -- 2.13 02176 106 -- ------- -- 1100 -- 1175-- -0.32 02252 108 -- 1075 -- 1077 -- 1049 -- 0.93 * 01964 110 -- 1105 -- 1119 -- 1087 -- 0.62 01727 111 -- 1106 -- 1076 -- ------ -- "red" 01487 114 -- --?--- -- --?--- -- 1077 -- 1.67 02438 115 -- 1148 -- 1172 -- 1141 -- 0.41 * 01715 115 -- --?--- -- --?--- -- 1153 -- 2.07 02920 115 -- 1154 -- 1173 -- 1123 -- 0.57 02962 117 -- --?--- -- --?--- -- 1170 -- 0.41 01425 118 -- ------- -- 1180 -- 1142 -- 0.54 # = Tycho 1 gives 10.38 and B-V 1.37 ? = Data needed. * = These three stars were taken as reference stars for the estimates. The two red stars GSC 6858-02136 (1091T2) and GSC 6858-01487 (1077T2) look the opposite as in Tycho 2. The latter is 0.6 magnitudes fainter. Maybe one of them (or both) are variable. I think this experiment has proven something we already knew: PEP(V) is the best source for sequences. Best regards, Sebasti睹 Otero.