First of all, when dealing with the three large pipits, I can't recommend this web article highly enough.
in the first set, I agree the first bird is Paddyfield.
The second is more difficult as it appears to have pale lores. In the first image, the bird reminds me a little of Blyth's, but as this is a vagrant to Thailand, we 'd better rule that out. In any case, in the second image, we can see the crown is only faintly streaked, and there's an apparent contrast between the warm buff of the breast and the paler belly. The bill looks relatively thin and weak and it's not like Richard's to perch on a bush.
In the second set, if you're sure the first three images show the same bird, the bird has to be a Paddyfield - distinct loral stripe, long thin bill, flat crown, gingery flanks. This looks like an an immature bird as it seems to be retaining some juvenile plumage features - there are some images of this on the web page.
The second bird is more difficult, as the bill is stronger and even looks slightly curved in 5390. The lores look pale, although there's a hint of a faint stripe. The underparts are a cold white in tone, apparently lacking the gingery wash on the flanks. However, the cheek looks solid and warmly-coloured and the crown isn't well-streaked. Richard's also favours longer grass or vegetation and doesn't normally strut around on a lawn like this. So I think I would go for Paddyfield again.
As Dave Bakewell points out, call is the best way to distinguish these pipits.