Different animal? Yes and no. The Ottoman Turks were Oghuz Turks and they took over the collapsed Seljuk Khanate. The only reason they were in Anatolia in the first place was that the Seljuk Turks won (or at least Byzantine infighting lost) the Battle of Manzikert.
The Ottomans tried to expand into Europe and failed, then turned their attention towards Egypt and Syria. They conquered the Mamlukes in Egypt and conquered Syria and points East, defeating the Persians. But they never conquered Persia or Afghanistan and India, all of which were part of a separate empire ruled by the Mogol/Seljuk/Sunni Persian kings, until the British came at them in 1757. The Ottomans were the Turkic speakers that the Seljuks settled into Anatolia, and who evolved into the genocidal mother-f@#$ers who tried to eradicate the Armenians and Greeks in Anatolia, oppressed and overtaxed the Muslim peasants, and made the Middle East into the s@#$-pile in which Napoleon found it.
The Mogol empire to the east, by contrast, was usually much more tolerant and less serious about Sharia. They were even sometimes fair and just to Hindus, and one of the first Mogol rulers of Northern India was known to be a heavy drinker, forbidden under Sharia. These were the people who built the Taj Mahal (not the one in Atlantic City), wrote lots of Urdu and Pharsi poetry about romantic love. Twilight in Delhi by Ahmad Ali captures the culture, and it is not at all like that of the Turks of Turkey.