Yes! Especially when faced with draconian password complexity requirements, users frequently choose passwords like the first one: keyboard progressions, keyboard walks, keyboard patterns, or whatever you like to call them. And attackers are well aware of this.
Whether conducting an online (brute forcing) or offline (hash cracking) attack, an attacker knows that the most profitable method is usually some variant of a dictionary attack: using a collection of common passwords and trying them. Pretty much every dictionary built using passwords collected from real data breaches contains at least a few variants on the keyboard-pattern method, most commonly "1qaz2wsx" and friends.
Beyond the static dictionary method, the mental algorithms people use to create these passwords are quite simple, and there are lots of programs that generate these passwords rapidly in order to try them all.
From an information-theoretic standpoint, the second password has more entropy, since each character is a random choice from a set of 16 characters. Knowing that they come from a small grouping reduces the entropy somewhat, but it still remains fairly good. The first password, on the other hand, is much simpler. You can think of entropy as "how hard would it be to explain how to type my password?" Here's how I might try to explain your first one:
On a US-standard keyboard, start at "5":
- Type 4 keys to the right, then return to your starting position.
- Hold "shift" and repeat step 1. Release "shift."
- Move down a row and repeat steps 1 and 2.
Compare that to your second password, which would have to have a procedural step for each character of input. There's no good way to compress it, so it has lots of entropy. Even if I know which 8 keys you've chosen, and that each of them is pressed once with shift and once without, that still leaves (assuming totally random choosing)
16! ~= 2^44 choices, meaning about 44 bits of entropy, which strangely enough is the same amount claimed by the "correct horse battery staple" method.