Photons are different from other particles because photons are massless and hence have no meaningful non-relativistic limit as they always move at $c$. I will not rehash the various approaches to actually pinning down what a photon "is" - that's what the linked question is for - but merely give several arguments for why you shouldn't actually expect the photon to be "a particle" like all the other particles.
The only known rigorous construction of "free particle states" in quantum field theory (Haag-Ruelle scattering theory) requires a mass gap - the lowest lying excitation of the interacting Hamiltonian needs to have a distinct mass. The presence of massless photons destroys this notion, and it becomes essentially impossible to distinguish between "single massive particle" and "single massive particle surrounded by a cloud of low-energy massless particles".
The lesson here is that the notion of "a particle" as something that has a definite position or can be localized to arbitrary degrees is inherently non-relativistic. It is well-known that there are no good relativistic position operators, the closest being the Newton-Wigner operators, so the picture of some little object that has a "position" that can be measured to arbitrary precision simply only makes sense in a non-relativistic viewpoint.
"Photons" are inherently relativistic - you cannot construct a proper position wavefunction for them because there is no position operator - and so their nature is very different from the other massive particles. They are not "localized disturbances in a field" because, as vague as that notion may be already for massive particles, the notion of "localized" simply is impossible for a relativistic particle. There exists a general notion that relativistic quantum states can never be localized in the sense we desire called Malament's theorem.
More specifically for the photon, note that a classical electromagnetic wave - a state with definite electric and magnetic fields - is a coherent state where the number of photons is indeterminate. Hence it is not particularly useful to conceive of any electromagnetic radiation as being "composed of photons" - thinking in terms of definite photons uses a different eigenbasis, and you would have to consider the EM wave as a superposition of the states of definite photon numbers, which certainly destroys any intuition you might have (just think of the non-intuitive behaviours other QM superpositions show).