I got my D50 today and ran into backyard to take a couple photos, these are pictures number 4 and 5 , set to auto , just to try it out. Is the reason the horizon is tilted just my poor composition?
1

Yup. Here it is corrected...Keep your eyes on the background

Thanks.
Just to confirm my ineptitude ... if I put the camera on a tripod and zeroed the level bubble and took a picture of the ocean, I should see the horizon running off the left and right sides of the frame equally, is that correct?

Um. yes. That would be correct.

If this was April 1st I'd kinda understand the question better, but yeah, keep an eye on the horizon a bit better!

Yea I realize the answer is kinda obvious, not having much experience, I thought this might be a good test to make sure optically everything is OK

Please do not feel alone.
I have these mystery issues myself. An I have leveled the best
I could or so I thought.

I did better with the Canon 20D than with the D70.
I could snap the camera to my eve and fire before I tilted
the camera. Some problem I had with my inner ear, and still
have.

The better test would be to put the camera on tripod, level the ocean horizon in the viewfinder, and check to see if your tripod bubble is correct.

Just remember that the horizon is not always level! Sure, the horizon at sea is (usually), but not in mountain terrain. And the shorelines of lakes and other bodies of water can really throw you a loop.

If you don't, as carpenters say, have "a bubble in your butt" (you don't), use a level when possible. Then when those guys over at the Landscape board give you guff about unlevel horizons, you can shoot them out of the water.

Great point that the "horizon" is not always level. I've had photos criticized about the horizon when I wasn't perpendicular to the straight object be it a bridge (which trails into the distance) or at a 30 degree angle to the ocean and a cliff coming to the sea. The horizon can appear to run away from you in such instances.

I realize the exposure isn't perfect in this picture but in the discussion of horizons, it gave me fits. I'm not sure if it's level or not but you can not use the bridge or shore line as an indicator. The bridge tails away (and you can't get perpendicular without being in the middle of Sydney harbour) and the sea appears unlevel because the water is blacked out behind the bridge. I've seen other's photos of the Sydney Bridge and I've seen some where the bridge was rotated to be level (IMHO) and others like mine.

opinions?

I think it has everything to do with the DX sized sensor. If you had FF it would automatically have leveled it for you.

good answer!

Prime example, Jeff. The shoreline isn't level in the frame because it isn't a horizon--something that seems to lead to confusion on a regular basis.

I like your choice of orientations in this image, but it is a tough one. The water really does look wrong, but if you correct that, the bridge plunges to the right.

I agree with Milkman--when's Nikon gonna get it together so we can be as cool as the real photographers with those white lenses? Shoot, I couldn't even get a press pass to the last Olympics because I didn't have FF!

I like the original (uncorrected) photo better. The dog appears level, which makes the whole perspective look fine -- but a lot more interesting. The leveled photo looks very ordinary.

Right, it must be that FF thing But seriously, who cares if the horizon is level. If the shot works, the horizon line is what it is.

I get this every now and then. I don't use a tripod but I handhold and use the gridlines on the camera. Would making them straight to something that should be straight and level in an image be the right thing to do?