All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.7cm,clip]{H4729F1.EPS}\end{figure}$ Figure 1: The spatial distribution of the targets. The northern limit of $\delta = +20\hbox {$^\circ $ }$ by far exceeds that of the DENIS sky survey ( $\delta = +2\hbox {$^\circ $ }$ ). Although the galactic plane is somewhat pronounced, there is a uniform distribution, which makes the sample well suitable as calibrators. Due to the limited observational period, we were unable to cover the range $0^{\rm h}...~~6^{\rm h}$ .
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{H4729F2.EPS}\end{figure}$ Figure 2: The magnitude distribution of the stars in the final catalogue. Only a few stars above the magnitude limits ( $K_{\rm s} \approx 0\hbox{$.\!\!^{\rm m}$ }5$ , $J \approx 2\hbox{$.\!\!^{\rm m}$ }5$ ) were observed and calibrated by fitting the PSF.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{H4729F3.EPS}\end{figure}$ Figure 3: Distribution of spectral types for those sample stars having an MK classification in the SIMBAD data base.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{H4729F4.EPS}\end{figure}$ Figure 4: The normalized frequency distribution of (J- $K_{\rm s}$ ) for those stars with a spectral classification a) and without b). Most of the sources without spectral classification have to be of late type.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{H4729F5.EPS}\end{figure}$ Figure 5: The frequency distribution of the flatfield variation of twoconsecutive nights.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{H4729F6.EPS}\end{figure}$ Figure 6: The upper panel shows the variation of the individual measurements for each of the 5 position subsets in $K_{\rm s}$ . The zero point offset between the measurements represent the local changes of the attenuation factor of the grey filter surface. The lower panel shows the sources after correction. The J filter does not show this effect.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{H4729F7.EPS}\end{figure}$ Figure 7: The instrumental zero points derived from the individual standard measurements during the whole survey. The cleaning of the telescope main mirror gave the only major change of this parameter.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{H4729F8.EPS}\end{figure}$ Figure 8: The frequency distribution of the variations of the individual detections on each 10 s exposure during one pointing (100 s).
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{H4729F9.EPS}\end{figure}$ Figure 9: The deviations of the repeated target observations. Clearly visible is the dependency of the absolute errors near the overexposure limit and at the faint end of the observations. The figure is not cleaned from possible variable targets. Thus the errors given here are upper boundaries.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{H4729F10.EPS}\end{figure}$ Figure 10: The comparison of our photometry (sources with $\rm var < 3$ ) with 2MASS (final release). The line marks the overexposure limits of 2MASS. These values are well pronounced by the increasing scatter. At the faint end the scatter originates from the limits of our photometry.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{H4729F11.EPS}\end{figure}$ Figure 11: Comparing TMSS survey targets in our sample to our photometry (upper panel) and to the 2MASS photometry (lower panel). The different accuracies are clearly visible.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{H4729F2.EPS}\end{figure}$	Figure 2: The magnitude distribution of the stars in the final catalogue. Only a few stars above the magnitude limits ( $K_{\rm s} \approx 0\hbox{$.\!\!^{\rm m}$ }5$ , $J \approx 2\hbox{$.\!\!^{\rm m}$ }5$ ) were observed and calibrated by fitting the PSF.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{H4729F3.EPS}\end{figure}$	Figure 3: Distribution of spectral types for those sample stars having an MK classification in the SIMBAD data base.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{H4729F4.EPS}\end{figure}$	Figure 4: The normalized frequency distribution of (J- $K_{\rm s}$ ) for those stars with a spectral classification a) and without b). Most of the sources without spectral classification have to be of late type.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7cm,clip]{H4729F5.EPS}\end{figure}$	Figure 5: The frequency distribution of the flatfield variation of twoconsecutive nights.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8cm,clip]{H4729F6.EPS}\end{figure}$	Figure 6: The upper panel shows the variation of the individual measurements for each of the 5 position subsets in $K_{\rm s}$ . The zero point offset between the measurements represent the local changes of the attenuation factor of the grey filter surface. The lower panel shows the sources after correction. The J filter does not show this effect.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=8.8cm,clip]{H4729F7.EPS}\end{figure}$	Figure 7: The instrumental zero points derived from the individual standard measurements during the whole survey. The cleaning of the telescope main mirror gave the only major change of this parameter.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{H4729F8.EPS}\end{figure}$	Figure 8: The frequency distribution of the variations of the individual detections on each 10 s exposure during one pointing (100 s).
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{H4729F9.EPS}\end{figure}$	Figure 9: The deviations of the repeated target observations. Clearly visible is the dependency of the absolute errors near the overexposure limit and at the faint end of the observations. The figure is not cleaned from possible variable targets. Thus the errors given here are upper boundaries.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{H4729F10.EPS}\end{figure}$	Figure 10: The comparison of our photometry (sources with $\rm var < 3$ ) with 2MASS (final release). The line marks the overexposure limits of 2MASS. These values are well pronounced by the increasing scatter. At the faint end the scatter originates from the limits of our photometry.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,clip]{H4729F11.EPS}\end{figure}$	Figure 11: Comparing TMSS survey targets in our sample to our photometry (upper panel) and to the 2MASS photometry (lower panel). The different accuracies are clearly visible.
Open with DEXTER